Local Implementation Team Update Mark Hainds & Vernon Compton Longleaf Partnership Council April 8, 2014

Goals identified in the Range-wide Conservation Plan require the resources, talents, leadership, and collaborative efforts of a full range of private and public landowners.

The Local Implementation Teams (LITs) are these partnerships. Implementation efforts have now been initiated and enhanced across the entire longleaf range with 16 Local Implementation Teams in place and more under consideration.

Current Implementation Teams LIT Challenges/Needs Conservation Planning Process Reporting Protocol Case Study

Local or Place-Based Teams/Efforts -West Texas Longleaf Ridge Implementation Team Longleaf Ridge Place Based Project (TX) DeSoto-Camp Shelby Longleaf Implementation Team West- Central Louisiana Ecosystem Partnership

Local or Place-Based Teams/Efforts -Central Fort Stewart/Altamaha Longleaf Restoration Partnership Ocala Longleaf Pine Local Implementation Team Chattahoochee Fall Line Conservation Partnership Apalachicola Regional Stewardship Alliance Okefenokee/Osceola Local Implementation Team Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership (GCPEP)

Local or Place-Based Teams/Efforts –Carolinas & Virginia Sewee Longleaf Conservation Cooperative Sandhills Longleaf Pine Conservation Partnership (SC) Onslow Bight Conservation Forum (NC) North Carolina Sandhills Conservation Partnership Cape Fear Arch Conservation Collaboration SoLoAce Longleaf Partnership

More prescribed burn contractors Private land parcelization and development complicates burning and other forest management activities. Texas - Proposed USFWS policy change in Texas pertaining to coop agreements with Texas landowners will require use of NWCG qualified prescribed burn crews. It is expected this will lead to a profound decrease in acres burned.

Getting more acres under proper fire management. Work with large commercial landowners to plant LL and conduct prescribed burns. Support dedicated fire teams as identified by LITs. Each landscape may use a different model that works best for their area. Important that the team be structured in a way as supported by the LIT.

Educating private landowners regarding both management needs and cost-share programs. Need more cost-share incentives, Texas - NRCS EQIP payment rates essentially the same for all pine species, resulting in a less than 50% cost share. Rec.: Increase longleaf rates.

Procuring additional funding to continue building on past cost share project successes. Tracking NRCS cost-share enrollment -privacy laws. Difficult to obtain how much longleaf is planted through various programs.

Removal of non-native species impacting longleaf restoration. Invasive species are becoming an increasing problem in the longleaf range. Dedicated teams need to be supported or built to address this threat.

Funding for organizational staff to coordinate longleaf efforts. Development of a long-term consistent source of funding for LIT Coordinator positions. Additional funding sources for restoration and management projects and acquisitions. Funding for longleaf based training programs would encourage more private landowners, consulting foresters, and contractors to engage. Continued funding for education and outreach remains important to sustain the longleaf restoration effort.

Determination of longleaf acreage in LIT project areas, particularly on private lands. Development of a list of small private landowners within the LIT. Prioritization of private lands to assist with landowner outreach and promotion of longleaf pine. ID best ways to support private landowner management needs, especially related to prescribed fire and ecological burning. Cultivating a network of contractors that understand ecological burning is important

Maintaining consensus while buffering large blocks of conservation land and identifying broad corridors for restoration. Developing a map showing appropriate sites for LL restoration. Focus on highest priority land protection projects per each LIT. Some projects already have partial funding in place and only need supporting funds to complete the project.

Gaining a better understanding of longleaf pine coordinating entities and their roles. Maintaining contact with other LIT coordinators to learn from both challenges and accomplishments. Staying connected with everyone to be able to build upon successes together.

Smart, efficient coordination on the regional scale will help LIT’s avoid wasting resources. In-person meetings should be hosted when a variety of goals can be accomplished. Updating and/or completion of a conservation plan which requires extensive coordination and amalgamation of information.

Establish a document to outline specific goals for LITs to contribute to regional progress. Develop materials that clarify and condense the LIT message. Region-level and consistent, local-level marketing could make outreach much easier. More direction on SGA-wide conservation plans would help with consistency. Identification of appropriate partners for the LITs at the regional level. Important for federal partners to encourage staff at the local level to take an active role in LITs.

To develop pine straw & other forest product markets Promoting understory development on private lands in an area with a highly lucrative pine straw market. Other issues include landowner interest, availability of areas to plant with limited competition, and willingness of landowners to site prep before planting.

More longleaf seedlings. Multiple teams identified the lack of a dedicated coordinator as a major challenge.

The Longleaf Leader All LITs encouraged to contribute 200 word update on quarterly basis – Next deadline is May 2 nd The LLA Regional Conference in Mobile is Oct One session will be devoted to LITs To reach me: Mark J. Hainds Office:

Thank You For All You Do In Support of Implementation Teams Thank You For All You Do In Support of Implementation Teams Beth Maynor Young