Certification: pinpointing good wood.

Would you pay more for wood product if you knew they came from a sustainably managed forest? Enter the certifiers, who may be a major force in the forest of the future.

EVERY DAY MILLIONS go to their local stores and help to determine the future of forests. They do it in their selection of 2x4s, doors, and furniture. Does the wood they select come from "sustainably managed" sources? If such environmentally responsible claimes are made, do they originate from the manufacturer or from an impartial independent certifier?

If you haven't faced many choices like this yet, you will.

Throughout the world, the question of what constitutes a sustainable forest has become a major debate. At its core is an evolving new approach to and perspective on natural resources and how to manage them without lessening their worth to future generations. In many ways, this movement is driven by millions of concerned citizens who over the last decade have been bombarded by stories of forest degradation, endangered species, and a general loss of biodiversity. Their concerns have reached the forest industry and many environmental organizations, but they have also reached into the marketplace, where an increasing number of individuals and businesses want to be assured that their wood-product purchases are not contributing to deforestation. (See accompanying story, "The Wal-Mart Connection.")

In response, a variety of "environmentally friendly" marketing claims began to surface. Often these claims were put out by manufacturers, and many were found to be unsubstantiated--like those made to give some other products an unfair entry into the evolving "green" market. Out of concern for integrity and a desire to keep the public's confidence high on certified wood products, there arose a need for independent certifiers that could verify or reject environmental claims.

Today a small but growing cadre of certifiers evaluate timber-management plans, harvest procedures, and impacts on the harvest site. Based on the criteria established and the results of the evaluation, the timber will or will not be certified as coming from a "sustainably managed" or "well managed" source.

Some groups also certify lumber retailers and other wood-product processors and outlets. This requires a special "chain of custody" audit that tracks wood from the forest all the way through its processing, guaranteeing that specific certified wood is being used in product lines that are marketed as certified. In some cases, mostly involving veneers, the chain of custody is tracked by bar codes put on the logs. More often, the ends of logs are painted and the paper trail is carefully tracked.

Globally, efforts to organize certification programs are gaining importance and momentum, and can be loosely categorized into two general approaches. The first, as promoted by the International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO), primarily looks at sustainability in terms of the harvesting of forest products and its impact on the harvest site, with some consideration given to indigenous people and local circumstances. ITTO members are the governments of tropical countries that handle the buying and selling of over 90 percent of the world's trade in tropical timber. ITTO recently established its Year 2000 Objective, whose goal is sustainable production of all tropical timber exported by ITTO members by the year 2000.

Within ITTO, the issue of independent certification is beset with concerns over sovereign nation rights, differing north/south perspectives, and difficulties in agreeing upon a workable definition of sustainability.

The other global approach to certification, taken by a variety of U.S. and international groups, has a wider perspective that incorporates the issues of habitat conversion, impact on local economic conditions, and a variety of other factors.

As different groups evolved, it became clear that public confusion over differing certification procedures was a major hurdle, and that what was needed was an independent, internationally accepted set of operating rules and criteria.

In 1993, the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) was formed to be the "certifier of certifiers" and has since established the rules and criteria used by almost all certification organizations. All FSC-approved organizations must accept its general principles but are free to adapt them to specific local conditions. The FSC's mission is to ensure that forests of all types are managed in an environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable manner. The FSC evaluates, accredits, and monitors certification organizations, which inspect forest operations and grant marketing labels. The FSC itself does not certify products or sources of sustainable wood. The Forest Stewardship Council is currently the primary global umbrella organization for all forestry related certification issues.

Though most of the initial debate over sustainability has taken place in tropical forests, attention is increasingly being focused on the United States, in both its importing of tropical timber and its management of its own temperate forests. Examples of U.S. issues involving sustainable resource management include:

* Controversy over the spotted owl, red cockaded woodpecker, and other threatened and endangered species.

* Adoption of a Sustainable Forestry Initiative by a leading industry group, the American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA).

* Creation of the Forest Management Certification Report by the Society of American Foresters.

* The recent change in U.S. Forest Service policy from a timber-oriented, multiple-use mandate to a broader ecosystem-management approach.

* The signing by the U.S. government in dune 1993 of the Helsinki Commitment, which commits us to sustained management of U.S. forests by the year 2000.

* The signing last February of the "Santiago Declaration," a statement on criteria and indicators for the sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests. Co-signers were the governments of Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and the United States.

Here are some examples of certification groups and how they operate:

The Scientific Certification System's (SCS) Forest Conservation Program has three program elements:

Sustainability of the timber resource, which uses an index to compare the rate of harvest to the rate of replanting and new growth.

Health of the ecosystem, which measures the impact of forest-management practices on critical ecosystem elements such as wildlife habitat and watersheds.

Financial and socio-economic considerations, which evaluate the economic stability of a forest operation and the social and economic benefits realized by the local community.

An interdisciplinary team conducts onsite inspections, reviews the forest management plan and other project records, and conducts interviews with local people.

Each approved project earns the right to carry a "Green Cross" label specifying that the wood is certified. The label can stand alone or be used in conjunction with a more comprehensive Environmental Report Card, which reflects the complete environmental profile of a piece of wood from its harvest and milling through its distribution, use, and disposal.

The Forest Conservation Program is also developing a Certification of Foresters and Loggers Program for smaller landowners. In certain pilot project areas, a forest operation can be certified if both the local forester and the logger have become certified by SCS.

The oldest and largest forest certification program is the Rainforest Alliance's Smart Wood Program. Says Director Richard Donovan, "It is not enough to just recognize existing good forestry. Certification should be a means to raise the level of discussion about forest management and lower the conflict."

Smart Wood awards its seal of approval to forest products that come from "sustainable" or "well managed" operations. These "sources" could include a natural forest, a plantation, a large commercial operation, or a small-scale job. Smart Wood also certifies companies that process, manufacture, or sell products made from certified wood. All certified sources and businesses are subject to periodic field audits in order to maintain certification.

In general, all Smart Wood-certified operations must meet the following broad principles:

* There must exist long-term security for the forest (i.e., it will not be converted to non-forest use in the foreseeable future).

* The operation must maintain environmental functions, including watershed stability and biological conservation.

* Sustained-yield forestry production must be maintained.

* The operation must have a positive impact on local communities.

* Suitable forest-management plans must exist and be followed.

Smart Wood does not support the conversion of standing forests to plantations, but will certify plantations that have developed on previously deforested lands. The organization looks at such plantations as a means to restore tree cover, protect soils and watersheds, and reduce pressures on natural forests.

After several years of working in the tropics, the group has established the global Smart Wood Network, a certification initiative that works with regional organizations worldwide. As part of this network, the Canada United States Association (CUSA) was formed in 1994 by eight nonprofit environmental organizations.

By sharing skills, developing regional advisory boards, and working closely together, CUSA hopes to avoid duplication of efforts and acquire some "economy of scale" benefits. It is also felt that the cooperative effort will prevent a confusing proliferation of labels and standards that would dilute the impact of certification and confuse consumers. Certification in itself will never bring about the sustainable management of the world's forests. It can, though, broaden the dialogue and help bring the issue to the marketplace, and it is there that the primary question will be answered. Are people really prepared to buy certified wood and pay a premium for it if necessary? That answer will ultimately determine the future of forest certification.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Wal-Mart Connection

Anybody who has been in a Wal-Mart store knows it is big. The corporation behind the store is really BIG. In 1992 it had sales of $43.9 billion and it opened a new store in the U.S. every two days. In doing so, it uses a tremendous amount of resources and has a large cumulative impact on the environment.

In earlier years the company faced environmental problems arising partly from clearing land for the stores and parking lots. As time went on, Wal-Mart began to develop policies and Procedures that not only allowed it to avoid most previous problems but also brought it recognition for its preparations and follow-through on fulfilling wetlands regulations.

In 1992 Wal-Mart collaborated with architect William McDonough to design an "environmental store." It was to use solar heating and cooling, and solar-powered signs. It would use 50 percent less energy and have recycling areas both for store packaging and for the greater community. The roof would be made entirely of wood--all of which had to come from "sustainably managed" sources.

Called the Lawrence Project, the store would be built in Lawrence, Kansas.

Richard Miller and Arnie Koss of The Timber Source headed up the effort to locate and obtain 900,000 board-feet of plywood and other construction materials worth $500,000 to build this first "ecostore" prototype. At that time, none of the products was available from certified sources.

To locate the necessary harvest areas, Miller established a relationship with the Rogue Institute in Oregon and Global Resource Consultants in Virginia. two organizations involved in sustainable forestry projects. All the plywood was to come from Oregon and all the high-quality root timbers and other construction wood would come from Virginia.

At each site the harvesting methods had to lit the following criteria: No old-growth trees were to be cut: no endangered-species problems existed there; no clearcut harvesting could be used: and exceptional care would be taken to leave behind a viable sustainable forest.

Global Resource Consultants was to "audit" the Virginia project to ensure compliance. GRC would also track the "chain of custody" confirming the movement of the trees from preharvest through harvesting, milling, drying, end shipping to the construction site. It was also put in charge of project publicity, which involved working with the media and taking representatives of the environmental community and forest-products industry on tours of the sites, only 70 miles from Washington, DC. Most of tours took Place while the logging was ongoing.

The sites themselves were crucial to the success of the project and not easy to find. Fortunately, one of my associates was David Tice, an internationally renowned resource manager and forester and president of North American Resource Management in Charlottesville, Virginia. He has overseen several exceptional sites including the estates of former Presidents James Madison and Zachary Taylor.

Madison's much-visited Montpelier estate included a mixed pine/hardwood forest in the early stages of a beetle attack. We could remove all of the 70-Year-old pines and still have a viable forest, mostly hardwoods. The Taylor sites were in the final stages of a shelterwood cut that had been thinned out in 1983 to let the sun get to the forest floor. A thick stocking of pines four to 10 feet tall had grown up underneath the older remaining pines. A careful harvesting could allow the older Pines to be removed and the understory to be released as a functioning new forest area.

David Tice and assistant Paul Haney became the hey on-the-ground project coordinators. They brought in Jay Phaup, district forester for Stone Container Corporation, to be the project logging coordinator.

Stone Container could see the benefits of getting established with Wal-Mart and being part of a high-profile cooperative project, but had reservations that such an unusual selective pine harvest might somehow be Publicized as an anti-forest industry project. All parties agreed that this would not happen. The work was clearly an example of environmental concerns and forest industry working together on a mutually beneficial situation.

The project was economically feasible because Wal-Mart was prepared to pay a reasonable premium to have its wood harvested in this manner. It was understood that this premium would drop or be eliminated if Wal-Mart bought more certified wood in the future. A contributing factor was that this store design used substantially more wood than current stores, and the company would consider building 20 more such stores if this project went well.

Enter another cooperator: Dick Yancey of Yancey's Mill agreed to mill and dry the wood and to keep this audited material--marked with red stripes--totally separated from the rest of the lumber at the mill.

The harvesting itself was done with a Hydro-ax, a large mechanized harvester that holds the tree erect while a blade cuts the stem and then lays the tree down where it's wanted. Thus tree-felling could be more tightly controlled and key "falling corridors", could be established that would minimize damage to the remaining understory.

Also, a minimal amount of skid trails would be allowed, and they were to be seeded after the harvest to minimize soil displacement. Several snags or otherwise harvestable trees would be left Per acre for wildlife use. Buffer zones would be left along all roads and waterways.

Before long the cutting segment was completed. With few exceptions, Jay Phaup's loggers did an exceptional job of harvesting, with an extremely low degree of damage to the understory. By the time they were done and gone, the area was cleaned up and a forest remained.

The milling and drying was a complicated process, and Yancey's Mill was hard pressed to handle this special order. But Dick Yancey was persistent, and shortly ahead of our deadline, truckloads of wood began to make their way to Lawrence, Kansas, to become part of retailing history.

Out in Oregon, Rogue Institute was working through a similar process, certifying 300,000 board-feet of selectively harvested 45-year-old Douglas-fir timber. The overall intent of this harvest was to demonstrate that Doug-fir did not have to come from a clearcut or an old-growth forest. This small-diameter material was successfully peeled and segregated, thanks to the cooperative effort of sick Baldwin, president of Springfield Forest Products.

Today the Lawrence Project stands as the largest building fob in the world to use all certified wood products. As another sign of its success, it proved that big business, environmentalists, and the wood-Products industry can work together in a sustainable forestry venture.

Next time you decide to put an addition on your house or build a garage, look into the certified-wood-product options available. You may well find that you can use your Personal purchasing power to cast a vote for the future of the forests of this world.

RELATED ARTICLE: MORE INFO

American Forest & Paper Association 1250 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: [phone]

The Forest Partnership P.O. Box 426 Burlington, VT 05402 Phone: [phone]

Forest Stewardship Council Avenida Hidalgo 502 Oaxaca, 68000 Oaxaca, Mexico Phone: [phone]

Global Resource Consultants 9501 Lomond Dr. Manassas, VA 22110 Phone: [phone]

International Tropical Timber Organization International Organizations Center 5th Floor Pacifico-Yokohama 1-1-1 Minato Mirai, Nishi-Ku Yokohama, 220 Japan Phone: [phone]

North American Resource Management P.O. Box 6777 Charlottesville, VA 22906 Phone [phone]

Rainforest Alliance 65 Bleeker St. New York, NY 10012 Phone: [phone]

Scientific Certification Systems Forest Conservation Program Ordway Bldg. One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 901 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: [phone]

Society of American Foresters 5400 Grosvenor Ln. Bethesda, MD 20814 Phone: [phone]

Richard Fox--is president of Global Resource Consultants of Manassas, Virginia. He East Coast auditor for the Wal-Mart Ecostore project, an advisor to the original FSC Principles and Criteria Working Group, and recently led a USAID team that helped design a sustainable forestry program for Albania.