Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />"1976: These regu~ons and guidelines require; a~ early stage in the <br />planning process, ~ establishment of economicall~nd biologically driven <br />benchmarks which, in conjunction with pUblic issues, management concerns, and <br />resource use and development opportunities identified during the scoping stage <br />of the planning process, form the basis for formulation of a full range of <br />planning alternatives. The economic efficiency with which specific units of <br />forest land can be managed for timber production must also be evaluated and" -:::5' <br />identified as part of the second step of the procedure for analyzin~ ~l~)-~ <br />suitability of land for timber production. (36 em 219.17-(b) (2) (1-9'821. (/1 <br /> <br />'The procedural 'guidelines for analysis issued by the Fores~ Service on Mav 3l,~ <br />1983 to complement the planning direction contained in the NFMA Regulations <br />PfOVide detailed and comprehensive guidance for carrying out the economic <br />analyses necessary to evaluate alternatives. <br /> <br />In a paper dated October 10,1983, titled "Role of Economic Analysis in Nation- <br />al Forest Land Management Planning and Decisionmaking," this office has also <br />issued policy guidance on this issue. This paper summarized that policy as <br />follows: <br /> <br />(f) <br /> <br />"(1) Economic efficiency is one criterion to be considered in <br />decisionmaking. <br /> <br />"(2) The primary measure of economic efficiency is present net value <br />(PNV)...a determination of anticipated benefits less anticipated <br />costs, both discounted to the present. Present net value is an ex- <br />tremely important economic concept. It is one component or partial <br />measure of public net benefits...PNV is very important in decision- <br />making. By definition, PNV measures only the net economic value of <br />resource benefits to which dollar values can be assigned. These <br />usually include: timber; minerals; range forage; visitor-days for <br />wildlife, wilderness, and other recreation uses; and some uses of <br />water... <br /> <br />"(3) The economic, social, and environmental effects of a broad <br />range of alternatives must be fully evaluated and displayed. In <br />doing so, the benefits and the specific costs of non-priced objec- <br />tives having a significant effect on PNV must be identified and <br />evidence provided that a .rigorous effort was made to assure they are <br />achieved efficiently. <br /> <br />"(4) The analysis will evalute alternative bundles or mixes of <br />resource outputs. Because of the joint nature of many resource in- <br />vestments and other activities, no attempt will be made to evaluate <br />investments by arbitrarily allocating costs and benefits to a single <br />resource, such as timber or recreation. Instead, planning alterna- <br />tives emphasizing particular resource objectives will be formulated <br />and compared to alternatives emphasizing other resource objectives <br />and output levels." <br /> <br />It is clear that applicable regulations, policy, and planning procedural <br />guidelines impose an obligation on the Forest Service to explain the economic <br />implications of the planning alternatives it evaluates. Indeed, they impose <br />an obligation on the agency to utilize economic considerations not just in the <br /> <br />- 5 - <br /> <br />, <br />\'69 <br />