Believe there is a pressing need to promote and maximise the environmental and socio-economic benefits of increased market access for U.S. hardwoods from low intensity managed forests – notably with respect to carbon mitigation, support for rural livelihoods, biodiversity conservation, legal compliance, deforestation-free status and recognition of indigenous, community and private family ownership rights.
Acknowledge the importance of ensuring verification procedures in no way compromise, and ideally enhance, efficient utilisation of the U.S. hardwood products that managed natural forests can provide in a sustainable manner, contributing to reduced pressure on forests, and reduced energy consumption and waste throughout the supply chain.
Believe there is a need to develop verification procedures that avoid imposition of any additional unnecessary costs on low intensity managed U.S. hardwood forest and wood processing operations that already demonstrate negligible risk of legal non-compliance and deforestation.
Believe there is a need to develop a form of verification which aims to maximise the use of new technologies and innovative new procedures to achieve these objectives.
Note that existing forest certification schemes have not succeeded in providing market access for millions of U.S. forest owners in many settings for a variety of valid reasons.
Note that high levels of forest governance have driven forest management standards upwards towards levels that are sustainable in U.S. hardwood forests.
Believe that it is appropriate to risk assess the system of governance, the drivers of forest loss and forest practices used in low intensity forestry management at a state or county jurisdictional level to determine whether there is inherent risk of illegal practices or agriculture driven deforestation.
Believe that a jurisdictional risk assessment undertaken by an appropriately qualified team of independent experts is an appropriate basis on which to make robust and legitimate claims of the legal and deforestation-free status of U.S. hardwood in trade.
Believe that a jurisdictional risk assessment undertaken by an appropriately qualified team of independent experts is an appropriate basis on which to make robust and legitimate claims of the legal and deforestation-free status of U.S. hardwood in trade.
Believe that, in the context of consignments of U.S. hardwood where a negligible risk of illegal harvest is demonstrated through independent expert assessment at state level, and a negligible risk of deforestation is demonstrated through regular expert analysis of high-resolution remote sensing data (such as the European Space Agency’s Copernicus Sentinel-2 data at 10m resolution), it is appropriate to provide the geolocation coordinates of the U.S. counties where the wood is harvested as evidence of legal and deforestation-free provenance.
Believe that plant-chemistry based testing procedures such as Stable Ratio Isotope Analysis (SIRA), Trade Element Analysis (TEA) and Laser-induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS), linked to the establishment of a comprehensive database of timber samples collected from across the U.S. hardwood producing region, have potential to independently verify claims of provenance to county-level in the U.S. and thereby enhance the integrity of the verification procedures.
Conclude that a comprehensive jurisdictional risk assessment process, using bespoke standards and a series of safeguards has the potential to become a viable, low cost and credible verification scheme for U.S. hardwoods produced through low intensity management by small forest operators, including private non-industrial owners, local communities and indigenous groups.
Therefore, we:
Support the Sustainable Hardwood Coalition’s efforts to conduct state jurisdictional risk assessments combined with smart geolocation at a county-level as the most effective, efficient and equitable way to demonstrate the legal and deforestation-free status of U.S. hardwood.