Alaska is the largest U.S. state in terms of area and also contains some areas of the most untamed wildlife in North America. In 2012, there was around 91.8 million acres of forest area located in Alaska, more than any other U.S. state.

U.S. lumber production The United States lumber industry has seen ups and downs over the last several years. In 2006, some 49.74 billion board feet of lumber were produced in the United States. Three years later this figure had decreased to around 30.2 billion board feet, the lowest it had been in recent years. By 2016, the production volume of lumber had recovered somewhat, reaching 41 billion board feet.

U.S. national park system As a country with so much natural splendor, it only makes sense that there is a vast network of national parks and forests in the United States dedicated to preservation and public enjoyment. In 2018, the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in California was the leading unit in the national park system in terms of visitors. In addition, 58 percent of American campers intended to visit a national park in 2017.

The state of Amazonas had by far the most public forest area in Brazil in 2022. The state's public forest area accounted for more than 40 percent of Brazil's public forest area that year. The state of Pará followed with nearly 79 million hectares, which represents some 24 percent of Brazil's public forest area. Both states are in the Amazon biome. By comparison, Sergipe was the state with the least public forest area in 2022, with around 47,200 hectares. The "Cadastro Nacional de Florestas Públicas" (CNFP) was created in 2006 as a forest management and planning instrument, to gather georeferenced data on federal, state and municipal public forests. These forests are later categorized into different types according to the use, such as conservation, indigenous land, public rural settlements, military areas, and others.

Russia had the largest forest area in the world in 2021, amounting to around 815 million hectares, more than twice that of Canada, whose forest area amounted to 347 million hectares. The forestry industry in Canada With the third largest forest area in the world, Canada’s forestry industry is a significant contributor to the country’s gross domestic product. In 2021, the nominal GDP of Canada’s forest industry reached more than 34 billion Canadian dollars, with the wood product manufacturing sector alone contributing around 19.8 billion Canadian dollars in nominal GDP. A comparison of Canadian provinces shows that British Colombia has the largest forestry and logging industry in the country, followed by Quebec and Ontario. The Amazon rainforest in Brazil Brazil has the second largest forest area in the world after Russia, with total forest areas in the South American country amounting to approximately 494 million hectares in 2022. This is largely because around 62 percent of the Amazon rainforest is located in Brazil. The Amazon rainforest is the world’s largest rainforest, what some call “the lungs of the planet”. However, in recent years, deforestation has been a salient issue in the Amazon, with illegal logging and wildfires raging across the rainforest have contributed to very high deforestation rates. Indeed, around 8,000 square kilometers were destroyed in the Brazilian Amazon in 2023. Deforestation and its impact on climate change has spurred opposition to the logging industry, which was the sector responsible for the most killings of environmental activists in 2021.

This statistic shows the total forest land in the United States as of January 1, 2017, sorted by region. In 2017, the South had the most of forest land with a total of 245,513 thousand acres, while the North had a total of 175,789 acres of forest land.

EuroAmerican land use and its legacies have transformed forest structure and composition across the United States (US). More accurate reconstructions of historical states are critical to understanding the processes governing past, current, and future forest dynamics. Gridded (8x8km) estimates of pre-settlement (1800s) forests from the upper Midwestern US (Minnesota, Wisconsin, and most of Michigan) using 19th Century Public Land Survey System (PLSS) records provide relative composition, biomass, stem density, and basal area for 26 tree genera. This mapping is more robust than past efforts, using spatially varying correction factors to accommodate sampling design, azimuthal censoring, and biases in tree selection. We compare pre-settlement to modern forests using US Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) data to show the prevalence of lost forests, pre-settlement forests with no current analogue, and novel forests, modern forests with no past analogs. Differences between PLSS and FIA forests are spatially structured as a result of differences in the underlying ecology and land use impacts in the Upper Midwestern United States. Modern biomass is higher than pre-settlement biomass in northern Minnesota, northwestern and south central Wisconsin along the former prairie-forest border through Minnesota that was largely open savanna and the Big Woods of Minnesota. PLSS biomass was higher than today in northern Wisconsin and upper and lower Michigan due to shifts in species composition and, presumably, average stand age. Modern forests are more homogeneous, and ecotonal gradients are more diffuse today than in the past. Novel forest assemblages represent 29% of all FIA cells, while 25% of pre-settlement forests no longer exist in a modern context. Lost forests are centered around the forests of the Tension Zone, particularly in hemlock dominated forests of north-central Wisconsin, and in oak-elm-basswood forests along the forest-prairie boundary in south central Minnesota and eastern Wisconsin. Novel FIA forest assemblages are distributed evenly across the region, but novelty shows a strong relationship to spatial distance from remnant forests in the upper Midwest, with novelty predicted at between 20 to 60km from remnants, depending on historical forest type. The spatial relationships between remnant and novel forests, shifts in ecotone structure and the loss of historic forest types point to significant challenges to land managers if landscape restoration is a priority in the region. The spatial signals of novelty and ecological change also point to potential challenges in using modern spatial distributions of species and communities and their relationship to underlying geophysical and climatic attributes in understanding potential responses to changing climate. The signal of human settlement on modern forests is broad, spatially varying and acts to homogenize modern forests relative to their historic counterparts, with significant implications for future management.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grants #DEB-1241874, 1241868, 1241870, 1241851, 1241891, 1241846, 1241856, 1241930.

This data publication contains 250 meter raster data depicting the spatial distribution of forest ownership types in the conterminous United States. The data are a modeled representation of forest land by ownership type, and include three types of public ownership: federal, state, and local; three types of private: family (includes individuals and families), corporate, and other private (includes conservation and natural resource organizations, and unincorporated partnerships and associations); as well as Native American tribal lands. The most up-to-date data available were used in creating this data publication. A plurality of the ownership data were from 2014, but some data were as old as 2004.

The statistic displays the states with the largest forest cover area estimates in India in 2015. The forest area in the state of Kerala was estimated be approximately 19,239 square kilometers, while Madhya Pradesh was the state with the largest forest cover during the measured time period.

The national silviculture compendium is the first-ever compendium of silviculture treatments that cover most commercially operable forest types in the United States, built with input from a national team of silviculture experts from each National Forest System Region and Research Station of the USDA Forest Service. The compendium contains 240 silvicultural treatments, and 266 associated keyword component files (KCP) that are used with the Forest Service-supported Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS), covering all regions and most commercial forest types in the United States in 2020. The treatments are based on current national forest plans and objectives but are relevant to other forested lands with similar conditions and management objectives. In part, the silvicultural compendium provides plausible real-world treatments to be used by planners, modelers, for training purposes (e.g., National Advanced Silviculture Program), and by others needing to simulate management-driven treatments with validated silvicultural parameters defined by silviculture experts from each region. Currently, KCP files for Regions 1-6 are available (Regions 8, 9 and 10 will be added as they are finalized). This data publication also includes information files such as a complete description of the 8 main treatment types and a list of each national forest and their organization code and region. Also included is a crosswalk between the KCP files and vegetation characteristics which can be used to apply KCPs to stands within each national forest in the United States, assigning treatments by biophysical setting, NVC and Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) cover type is included. Additionally, a table documenting a broad potential application of KCP files to appropriate National Vegetation Classifications (NVC) that are not represented in the compendium but exist within a given national forest is provided. This list of treatments by NVC and forest can be used to assign treatments to areas that are otherwise unassigned treatments within the compendium.The rapid pace of environmental and socioeconomic change poses a considerable challenge to managing for resilient and productive forests for the remainder of the 21st century. Nuanced management priorities will continue to evolve but the current challenges to address climate change, wildfires, insects and diseases, and invasive species will remain, and will require science-based and often active forest management to achieve resilient and productive forests. The national silviculture compendium was designed for use in large-scale modeling of forest treatments with potential application on over 300 million forested acres in the United States. Treatments are not intended to replace site-specific information or local expertise for actual on-the-ground plans but are generalized treatments that include parameters that are plausible for an identified objective, current condition, and desired condition. And although not intended to cover every conceivable situation, the silvicultural treatments were developed within the context of biophysical settings and forest types and address most of the conditions and objectives that prevail in each region across the country. Management needs that are addressed include forest restoration, fuel reduction, insects and disease resilience, timber production, wildlife habitat improvement, and many others. Moreover, almost all of the prescriptions were designated as improving multiple management objectives.

The treatments in the compendium are limited to one entry, or the first entry within a multi-step process (referred to as a silviculture system). For example, the uneven-aged group selection treatment here includes species to retain, the percentage of stand in harvested groups, the size of the groups, the residual density of the matrix, as well as other parameters, but it does not specify the length of the cutting cycle. The primary objective of the silviculture compendium is to test the effectiveness of meeting landscape, regional, and national goals in the short term (3 to 5 years) by simulating real-world silvicultural treatments used presently, which are also socially acceptable, ecologically viable, economically desirable, and consistent with regional and forest-level standards and guidelines.For more information about these data, see Schuler et al. (2024).

These data were published on 07/20/2023. On 06/04/2024, data for Region 4 were added along with minor metadata updates.

FIA Modeled Abundance:�This dataset portrays the live tree mean basal area (square feet per acre) of the species across the contiguous United States. The underlying data publication contains raster maps of live tree basal area for each tree species along with corresponding assessment data. An efficient approach for mapping multiple individual tree species over large spatial domains was used to develop these raster datasets. The method integrates vegetation phenology derived from MODIS imagery and raster data describing relevant environmental parameters with extensive field plot data of tree species basal area to create maps of tree species abundance and distribution at a 250-meter (m) pixel size for the contiguous United States. The approach uses the modeling techniques of k-nearest neighbors and canonical correspondence analysis, where model predictions are calculated using a weighting of nearest neighbors based on proximity in a feature space derived from the model. The approach also utilizes a stratification derived from the 2001 National Land-Cover Database tree canopy cover layer.�This data depicts current species abundance and distribution across the contiguous United States, modeled by using FIA field plot data. Although the absolute values associated with the maps differ from species to species, the highest values within each map are always associated with darker colors. The Little's Range Boundaries show the historical tree species ranges across North America. This is a digital representation of maps by Elbert L. Little, Jr., published between 1971 and 1977. These maps were based on botanical lists, forest surveys, field notes and herbarium specimens.Forest-type Groups:This dataset portrays the forest type group. Each group is a subset of the National Forest Type dataset which portrays 28 forest type groups across the contiguous United States. These data were derived from MODIS composite images from the 2002 and 2003 growing seasons in combination with nearly 100 other geospatial data layers, including elevation, slope, aspect, ecoregions, and PRISM climate data.Harvest Growth:This data shows the percentage of timber that is harvested when compared to the total live volume, at a county-by-county level. Timber volume in forests is constantly in flux, and harvest plays an important role in shaping forests. While most counties have some timber harvest, harvest volumes represent low percentages of standing timber volume.Carbon Harvest:The Carbon Harvest raster dataset represents Mg of annual pulpwood harvested (carbon) by county, derived from the Forest Inventory Analysis in 2016.

The US Forest Service manages 193 million acres including the nation's 154 National Forests and 20 National Grasslands. These lands provide a wide variety of recreational opportunities, protect sources of clean water, and supply timber and forage.Dataset SummaryPhenomenon Mapped: United States lands managed by the US Forest Service Coordinate System: Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereExtent: Contiguous United States, Alaska, and Puerto RicoVisible Scale: The data is visible at all scales.Source: USFS Surface Ownership Parcels layerPublication Date: February 2024This layer is a view of the USA Federal Lands layer. A filter has been used on this layer to eliminate non-Forest Service lands. For more information on layers for other agencies see the USA Federal Lands layer.What can you do with this layer? This layer is suitable for both visualization and analysis across the ArcGIS system. This layer can be combined with your data and other layers from the ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World in ArcGIS Online and ArcGIS Pro to create powerful web maps that can be used alone or in a story map or other application.Because this layer is part of the ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World it is easy to add to your map:In ArcGIS Online you can add this layer to a map by selecting Add then Browse Living Atlas Layers. A window will open. Type "forest service" in the search box and browse to the layer. Select the layer then click Add to Map.In ArcGIS Pro open a map and select Add Data from the Map Tab. Select Data at the top of the drop down menu. The Add Data dialog box will open on the left side of the box expand Portal if necessary then select Living Atlas. Type "forest service" in the search box, browse to the layer then click OK.In both ArcGIS Online and Pro you can change the layer's symbology and view its attribute table. You can filter the layer to show subsets of the data using the filter button in Online or a definition query in ProThe data can be exported to a file geodatabase, a shape file or other format and downloaded using the Export Data button on the top right of this webpage..This layer can be used as an analytic input in both Online and Pro through the Perform Analysis window Online or as an input to a geoprocessing tool, model, or Python script in Pro.The ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World provides an easy way to explore many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics like this one.

Old-growth forest is uncommon across the northeastern United States, as most areas have been historically cleared for agriculture or harvested for timber. This study provides rare direct insight into the overstory and midstory dynamics across a semi-contiguous old-growth landscape in New England. Pisgah State Park in southwestern New Hampshire comprises 5300 ha of Hardwoods-Hemlock-White Pine forest, all but 300 ha of which was cutover by the 1880s. To protect a high-quality, old-growth stand from harvest, Harvard Forest purchased a 10 ha tract (the Harvard Tract) in 1927. In 1929 and 1930, Branch, Daley, and Lotti located and sampled all of the known remaining old-growth stands in the Pisgah area. This included 74 0.04 ha old-growth stands, 14 of which were located the Harvard Tract. They also surveyed 27 0.04 ha stands that had been cut just prior to the study (stump plots), where stumps as well as the remaining overstory trees were recorded. Note that only 61 old-growth plots and 23 stump plots have valid measurements. Species, diameter class, and position (overstory or midstory) were recorded for each tree; cover type, elevation, and location was described for each plot. Dead and downed trees were also recorded.

Data on Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) includes information on Palau's forests 2013-2014. The Pacific Northwest Forest Inventory and Analysis (PNW-FIA) program measures and compiles data on plots in coastal Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and U.S.- affiliated Pacific Islands. Most data are available in Access databases and can be downloaded by clicking one of the links below. PNW data are combined with data from all states in the U.S. and stored in the national FIADB. Data for any state can be accessed on the national website (see links to national tools below). Please be aware that some documents may be very large. The PNW-FIA Program shifted from a periodic to an annual inventory system in 2001. Periodic inventories sampled primarily timberland plots outside of national forests and most reserved areas, in a single state within a 2- or 3-year window. Typically, re-assessments occurred every ten years in the West. For the annual inventory in the Pacific Northwest all forested plots are now sampled, with one-tenth of the plots in any given state being visited annually. A full annual inventory cycle is complete in ten years. To download and use the FIA Database, follow this link https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/rma/fia-topics/inventory-data

Forests are more frequently being managed to store and sequester carbon for the purposes of climate change mitigation. Generally, this practice involves long-term conservation of intact mature forests and/or reductions in the frequency and intensity of timber harvests. However, incorporating the influence of forest surface albedo often suggests that long rotation lengths may not always be optimal in mitigating climate change in forests characterized by frequent snowfall. To address this, we investigated tradeoffs between three ecosystem services: carbon storage, albedo-related radiative forcing, and timber provisioning. We calculated optimal rotation length at 498 diverse Forest Inventory and Analysis forest sites in the state of New Hampshire, USA. We found that the average optimal rotation lengths across all sites is 94 years (s = 44), with a large cluster of short optimal rotation lengths that were calculated at high elevations in the White Mountain National Forest. Using a regressio...

Available water supply varies greatly across the United States depending on topography, climate, elevation and geology. Forested and mountainous locations, such as national forests, tend to receive more precipitation than adjacent non-forested or low-lying areas. However, contributions of national forest lands to regional streamflow volumes is largely unknown. Using outputs from the Variable Infiltration Capacity hydrologic model, we calculated mean annual and mean summer (July and August) streamflow metrics based on total flow and flow from national forest lands for each 1:100,000 scale National Hydrography Dataset stream reach in the contiguous United States. Specifically, this data publication contains twenty-one comma-delimited ASCII text files (for different drainage areas and processing units across the United States) containing 1915-2011 mean annual flow and mean summer flow.Data can be downloaded here: Geodatabase or ShapefileThese files also contain the mean annual and mean summer flows from National Forest System (NFS) lands as well as the portion of total mean annual and summer flow contributed by flow from NFS lands.These data provide insight into 1915-2011 hydrologic regimes and national forest contributions to total water yield. These non-spatial files were then merged and joined to the September 2012 snapshot of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD), version 2.Note: 'Forest Service lands' are here defined as those lands within the Forest Service administrative boundaries; these include some inholdings and other non-USFS lands enclosed within these boundaries.This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.

description:

This data layer depicts North Dakota state forest lands owned/managed by the North Dakota Forest Service.

Constraints:
Not to be used for navigation, for informational purposes only. See Game and Fish disclaimer for more information.

This data layer depicts North Dakota state forest lands owned/managed by the North Dakota Forest Service.

Constraints:
Not to be used for navigation, for informational purposes only. See Game and Fish disclaimer for more information.

The "State"-Wide Assessment and Resource Strategy (SWARS) identifies the Marshalls' highest priorities for forest resource management and needs for assistance from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service (FS). State assessments and resource strategies are integral to the Forest Service's State and Private Forestry (S&PF) Redesign and required as an amendment to the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act (CFAA), as enacted in the 2008 Farm Bill. Each "State" is required to complete a State Assessment and Resource Strategy within two years after enactment of the 2008Farm Bill (June 18, 2008) to receive funds under CFAA. The 2008 Farm Bill also made the Republic ofthe Marshall Islands eligible for CFAA programs that are available to states, territories and commonwealths of the USA.

The Marshalls SWARS thus includes two components to the assessment and planning required by the S&PF Redesign approach to identify priority forest landscape areas and highlight work needed to address national, regional, and state forest management priorities:

State-wide Assessment of Forest Resources: provides an analysis of forest conditions and trends in the state and delineates priority rural and urban forest landscape areas.

State-wide Forest Resource Strategy: provides long-term strategies for investing state, federal, and other resources to manage priority landscapes identified in the assessment, focusing where federal investment can most effectively stimulate or leverage desired action and engage multiple partners.

Analysis of ‘Surface Drinking Water Importance - Forests on the Edge (Feature Layer)’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/b7591774-f55d-46e4-9cfa-65310be52473 on 11 February 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

Note: This is a large dataset. To download, go to ArcGIS Open Data Set and click the download button, and under additional resources select the shapefile or geodatabase option. America's private forests provide a vast array of public goods and services, including abundant, clean surface water. Forest loss and development can affect water quality and quantity when forests are removed and impervious surfaces, such as paved roads, spread across the landscape. We rank watersheds across the conterminous United States according to the contributions of private forest land to surface drinking water and by threats to surface water from increased housing density. Private forest land contributions to drinking water are greatest in the East but are also important in Western watersheds. Development pressures on these contributions are concentrated in the Eastern United States but are also found in the North-Central region, parts of the West and Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest; nationwide, more than 55 million acres of rural private forest land are projected to experience a substantial increase in housing density from 2000 to 2030. Planners, communities, and private landowners can use a range of strategies to maintain freshwater ecosystems, including designing housing and roads to minimize impacts on water quality, managing home sites to protect water resources, and using payment schemes and management partnerships to invest in forest stewardship on public and private lands.This data is based on the digital hydrologic unit boundary layer to the Subwatershed (12-digit) 6th level for the continental United States. To focus this analysis on watersheds with private forests, only watersheds with at least 10% forested land and more than 50 acres of private forest were analyzed. All other watersheds were labeled ?Insufficient private forest for this analysis'and coded -99999 in the data table. This dataset updates forest and development statistics reported in the the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis using 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, Grid Values=41,42,43,95. and Theobald, Dr. David M. 10 March 2008. bhc2000 and bhc2030 (Housing density for the coterminous US in 2000 and 2030, respectively.) Field Descriptions:HUC_12: Twelve Digit Hydrologic Unit Code: This field provides a unique 12-digit code for each subwatershed.HU_12_DS: Sixth Level Downstream Hydrologic Unit Code: This field was populated with the 12-digit code of the 6th level hydrologic unit that is receiving the majority of the flow from the subwatershed.IMP1: Index of surface drinking water importance (Appendix Map). This field is from the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis and has not been updated for this analysis.HDCHG_AC: Acres of housing density change on private forest in the subwatershed. HDCHG_PER: Percent of the watershed to experience housing density change on private forest. IMP_HD_PFOR: Index Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure - identifies private forested areas important for surface drinking water that are likely to be affected by future increases in housing density, Ptle_IMP_HD: Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure (Figure 7), percentile. Ptle_HDCHG: Percentage of each subwatershed to Experience an increase in House Density in Private Forest (Figure 6), percentile. FOR_AC: Acres forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_AC: Acres private forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is private forest. HU12_AC: Acreage of the subwatershedFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is forest. PFOR_IMP: Index of Private Forest Importance to Surface Drinking Water. .Ptle_PFIMP: Private forest importance to surface drinking water(Figure 4), percentile. TOP100: Top 100 subwatersheds. 50 from the East, 50 from the west (using the Mississippi River as the divide.) Metadata

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

America's private forests provide a vast array of public goods and services, including abundant, clean surface water. Forest loss and development can affect water quality and quantity when forests are removed and impervious surfaces, such as paved roads, spread across the landscape. We rank watersheds across the conterminous United States according to the contributions of private forest land to surface drinking water and by threats to surface water from increased housing density. Private forest land contributions to drinking water are greatest in the East but are also important in Western watersheds. Development pressures on these contributions are concentrated in the Eastern United States but are also found in the North-Central region, parts of the West and Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest; nationwide, more than 55 million acres of rural private forest land are projected to experience a substantial increase in housing density from 2000 to 2030. Planners, communities, and private landowners can use a range of strategies to maintain freshwater ecosystems, including designing housing and roads to minimize impacts on water quality, managing home sites to protect water resources, and using payment schemes and management partnerships to invest in forest stewardship on public and private lands.This data is based on the digital hydrologic unit boundary layer to the Subwatershed (12-digit) 6th level for the continental United States. To focus this analysis on watersheds with private forests, only watersheds with at least 10% forested land and more than 50 acres of private forest were analyzed. All other watersheds were labeled ?Insufficient private forest for this analysis'and coded -99999 in the data table. This dataset updates forest and development statistics reported in the the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis using 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, Grid Values=41,42,43,95. and Theobald, Dr. David M. 10 March 2008. bhc2000 and bhc2030 (Housing density for the coterminous US in 2000 and 2030, respectively.) Field Descriptions:HUC_12: Twelve Digit Hydrologic Unit Code: This field provides a unique 12-digit code for each subwatershed.HU_12_DS: Sixth Level Downstream Hydrologic Unit Code: This field was populated with the 12-digit code of the 6th level hydrologic unit that is receiving the majority of the flow from the subwatershed.IMP1: Index of surface drinking water importance (Appendix Map). This field is from the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis and has not been updated for this analysis.HDCHG_AC: Acres of housing density change on private forest in the subwatershed. HDCHG_PER: Percent of the watershed to experience housing density change on private forest. IMP_HD_PFOR: Index Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure - identifies private forested areas important for surface drinking water that are likely to be affected by future increases in housing density, Ptle_IMP_HD: Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure (Figure 7), percentile. Ptle_HDCHG: Percentage of each subwatershed to Experience an increase in House Density in Private Forest (Figure 6), percentile. FOR_AC: Acres forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_AC: Acres private forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is private forest. HU12_AC: Acreage of the subwatershedFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is forest. PFOR_IMP: Index of Private Forest Importance to Surface Drinking Water. .Ptle_PFIMP: Private forest importance to surface drinking water(Figure 4), percentile. TOP100: Top 100 subwatersheds. 50 from the East, 50 from the west (using the Mississippi River as the divide. Metadata

The Forest Legacy Program (FLP) is a federal grant program to protect forestlands from conversion to non-forest uses. The Vermont Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation working in conjunction with the USDA Forest Service is the State Lead Agency for Vermont's Forest Legacy Program. The federal Forest Legacy (16 U.S.C. Sec. 2103c) program was part of the 1990 Federal Farm Bill. The program acknowledges that most forested lands in the United States are held in private ownership and that those landowners are facing growing financial pressure to convert those lands to uses that would remove them from the forested land base. Much of this pressure arises from the demand for residential and commercial development.