1 / 10

Multiple Perspectives Project

Multiple Perspectives Project. Progress Report May 11, 2005. Project Purpose. Key findings that flow from the data contained in the National Report Potential refinements in the Montreal Process C&I Data gaps that impede understanding

coen
Download Presentation

Multiple Perspectives Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multiple Perspectives Project Progress Report May 11, 2005

  2. Project Purpose • Key findings that flow from the data contained in the National Report • Potential refinements in the Montreal Process C&I • Data gaps that impede understanding • Theories, concepts, and experiences that stakeholders from different perspectives use as the basis for their understanding

  3. Proposal Authors • Robert Fledderman, MeadWestvaco • Lloyd Irland, The Irland Group • Jay O’Laughlin, University of Idaho and Western Governors’ Association Forest Health Advisory Committee • Craig Patterson, Advocating for Rural Communities

  4. Proposal Authors • Tom Bancroft and Carolyn Alkire, Wilderness Society • Jeff Horan, Maryland DNR Forest Service Donald Outen, Baltimore County Dept. of Environmental Protection • Stephanie Madson and Daniel Markewitz, University of Georgia • David Morman, OR Dept. of Forestry Leslie Lehman, OR Forest Resource Inst. Linc Cannon, OR Forest Industries Council

  5. Proposal Authors • Mathew Smidt, Auburn University James Finley, Penn State University Leon Liegel, Oregon State University A. Scott Reed, Oregon State University Richard Brinker, Auburn University Christienne Pereira, USDA CSREES

  6. Stakeholder Perspectives • Academic • Community • Environmental NGO • Forest Products Industry • Industrial Private Landowner • Forest Management Consultant • Government: Federal, State, and County

  7. Review Committee • Nadine Block, AF&PA • Connie Carpenter, USDA Forest Service • Hanna Cortner, Cortner & Associates • Paul Geissler, U.S. Geological Survey • Bernard Hubbard, Michigan DNR • Eric Norland, USDA CSREES • Laurie Schoonhoven, Sustainable Forestry Partnership

  8. Donors • USDA Forest Service • U.S. Geological Survey • The Wilderness Society • Boise • Weyerhaeuser

  9. Next Steps • Seven drafts received to date • Drafts edited and distributed to Review Committee • Consolidated RC comments to authors • Authors will have ~30 days to respond • Launch on-line dialogue site (July) • Provide feedback received from site to authors (late August) • Authors prepare and submit written response to feedback (late September) • Multiple Perspectives Workshop (November) • Begin publication process (late November)

  10. Next Steps

More Related