Yesterday I talked about how giving credit only to FSC-certified wood discriminates against North American wood for LEED projects. Today’s post discusses the widespread support shown by the forest community and government leaders to open the LEED standard.

SFI and FSC are both respected independent, non-profit charitable organizations. Both groups have third-party audits and have equal representation from environmental, social and economic chambers. Both protect endangered species and water quality. Both are promoting responsible forestry. SFI was specifically developed to advance sustainable forestry in North America, while FSC was developed in response to concerns over global deforestation, particularly in the tropics and subtropics.

With similar goals and rigorous certification standards, it doesn’t make sense not to include both standards in the LEED rating system. In fact, LEED should include all credible certification programs including the American Tree Farm System, the Canadian Standards Association and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification. We’re not alone in that thought. Several in the forestry community, as well as government officials, have spoken out:

Larry Selzer, President and CEO, The Conservation Fund (statement March 2010)
“Independent certification of sustainable forest management, such as that provided by the SFI program, is a powerful tool for ensuring these forests are managed well, and it is long past due for certification programs such as the USGBC to recognize the value of the SFI and its peers. The Conservation Fund has been involved in the SFI Program since its inception because we see the incredibly positive results on the ground – and we believe consumers increasingly are recognizing the power of SFI to drive good conservation in our nation’s private forests.”

Canadian Council of Forest Ministers, Chair Kathy Dunderdale (Dec. 2, 2009 letter to USGBC)
“The draft benchmarks recently circulated for comment are so detailed and prescriptive that they would likely exclude most credible forest certification programs – even including several regional, national or interim FSC standards currently recognized in LEED … The environmentally preferable, as well as administratively more manageable, solution is for the USGBC to recognize all credible forest certification programs, namely the Canadian Standards Association Z809 standard, the Forest Stewardship Council, the Sustainable Forestry Initiative and national standards around the world independently endorsed by the Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification.”

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (Feb. 16, 2010 letter to USGBC)
“Recognizing only FSC-certified wood in the LEED benchmarks will result in discrimination against wood products derived from well-managed lands in green building projects. The USGBC should fairly assess and include all credible forest certification programs, including SFI and ATFS systems.

I urge you to quickly make a board decision to recognize well-managed wood from Minnesota and all credible forest certification programs. In doing so, USGBC can join other government agencies and green building rating programs in recognizing wood as an environmentally friendly building material.”

Washington Governor Christine Gregoire (Oct. 2, 2008 letter to USGBC)
“By recognizing internationally endorsed certification systems, the proposed changes in USGBC policy have the potential to include forest products from more than 800 certified family forest owners in our state. Many more small forest parcels can be included as certification systems bring more lands under recognized sustainable management practices. Forest products from 4.8 million acres of third party audited state and industrial forestlands also have the opportunity to be included for LEED rating points under proposed changes in USGBC policy.”

Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln (April 16, 2010)
“I appreciate the efforts of the U.S. Green Building Council to promote energy efficiency and environmental conservation in building design and construction. I have been disappointed to learn, however, that the USGBC’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system discriminates against wood products produced in our own backyard and prohibits the two largest sustainable forest certification program in the U.S. – the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) and the American Tree Farm System (ATFS) – from gaining credit by recognizing only Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood.”

As you may have seen, the National Association of State Foresters and Canadian Institute of Forestry have also shown their support with letters to the USGBC.

We’re grateful that these and other leaders see a strong value to including SFI and other third-party certification systems in the LEED rating system. You can find a broader list of supporting statements on our website. Additionally, we’ve gotten extensive support in the way of signatures and comments on the petition to open LEED. I’ll share some of these comments in tomorrow’s post. And as always, find the latest information regarding the LEED issue on our website.

You’ve probably seen the U.S. and Canadian SFI statements on the LEED Certification credits referenced on our website, the petition and in various other mediums. These statements are meant to help people understand what we stand for and why LEED must change. Over the next four days, I would like to break down parts of the statements to give you a little more insight into why we feel so strongly about the U.S. Green Building Council opening the LEED Rating System.

SFI largely believes the current system discriminates against wood from North American forests. Currently, the LEED system only recognizes wood certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). More than three quarters of North America’s certified forests meet SFI, CSA or ATFS standards, while only one-quarter meet FSC standards. Additionally, more than 60 percent of the forests certified to FSC standards are located outside of North America.
When it comes to certified wood, LEED gives credit only to FSC certified wood products, effectively limiting the amount of North American wood that can earn points in LEED-certified green building projects in the U.S. and Canada. Using domestic products is especially important for government agencies, which have a responsibility to deliver economic benefits to communities across the country, as well as meet environmental goals. We’re not saying to stop using offshore products from certified sources; we’re saying forest products from your own backyard should be given equal access for a wood credit. Government-owned or occupied LEED buildings make up close to one third of all LEED projects.

According to the USGBC’s website, “Various LEED initiatives including legislation, executive orders, resolutions, ordinances, policies, and initiatives are found in 45 states, including 202 localities (138 cities, 36 counties, and 28 towns), 34 state governments (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico), 14 federal agencies or departments, 17 public school jurisdictions, and 41 institutions of higher education across the United States.” It’s great to see the government backing green building, but why not support it (and our economy) with certified wood from this continent?

The LEED standard should also recognize the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) Sustainability Benchmarks. More than two-thirds of the world’s certified forests are managed in compliance with PEFC, which is SFI’s global partner. PEFC is the world’s largest forest certification system and widely used by small- and family forest owners, yet LEED inexplicably excludes wood certified to this standard too.

The United Nations has noted current “initiatives have a narrow focus, and sustainable development in the building and construction sector is still hampered by limited coordination and cooperation between different stakeholders throughout a building’s life span.” The UN goes on to say in order to advance green building, “it is necessary to create the conditions and incentives that would encourage stakeholders in the sector to jointly and more actively pursue sustainable building and construction in a life cycle perspective.” So why is the USGBC limiting certification to the FSC? Several experts in the forestry community, as well as government leaders, have spoken out with support for making the LEED system more inclusive. Read about this support tomorrow in part two of the series. Additionally, find the latest information regarding the LEED issue on our website.

Let me start out by saying how grateful I am to all of the SFI, ATFS, CSA and PEFC supporters who have stood behind us in our efforts urging the U.S. Green Building Council to open its LEED Rating System to all credible third-party forest certification systems. We asked you to add your name to a petition, and in less than 24 hours, more than 1,000 people who believe in our cause expressed comments of general encouragement toward this mission. I thank you for this, but we’re not done yet. We’re now at more than 2,450 signatures and hope to see that number keep rising.

We encourage you to add your name to the petition if you haven’t done so already. Email this message to employees, friends, family, colleagues and anyone you feel supports responsible forestry, our communities and the future of green building. The momentum of the USGBC petition is strong—and we hope to keep the numbers climbing!

I want to share just a few of the great comments posted with signatures on the petition:

Trees are the only truly renewable resource. It is tragic to think that mined and energy intensive products such as steel, sheet rock and concrete are considered more environmentally friendly than wood. Let ALL recognized and independently verified certification programs into the LEED standard!
–Kurt Zweizig

There is no doubt that SFI has established credible standards supporting best management practices in forestry along with verifiable data. It is time for science and verifiable data to drive the certification. Good forestry follows good markets as data will show. We will plant, grow, harvest, and replant as the market grows. This will enhance clean air, clean water, wildlife and all the supports of our quality of life. As 2009 National Tree Farmer of the Year and 2010 Governor’s Agricultural Stewardship Award winners, Earl and I know firsthand how important sustainability, stewardship and conservation are to our industry, state and nation.
–Wanda T. Barrs

I respect the LEED standard, but LEED seems not to have respect for SFI, ATFS or PEFC. We all want the same thing…and it is a great shame that LEED wants to lock out these wonderful groups with the highest of standards that include so many good stewards of the land. WAKE UP, LEED!
–Chuck Leavell

Your signatures and comments make us proud to be involved with SFI and reinforce what we stand for. We value your continued support.

We’ve heard from a lot of people and organizations over the past few weeks about dissatisfaction with the direction the USGBC is taking the forest certification benchmarks. The deadline to submit comments on this latest round has passed, but there is still more we can all do. Another way you can get involved and take action is by signing this petition for USGBC to open the LEED Rating System.

All credible certification standards, including SFI, ATFS, CSA, and PEFC should be recognized by LEED.
Why should you sign? Well, for a couple of reasons:

For the sake of our forests, our communities and the future of green building, I urge you to sign the petition. For more information about this issue, download SFI’s statement and read what voices in leadership roles are saying. From politicians to community leaders to forestry experts to environmental groups, all walks of life are taking a stance and recognizing SFI, ATFS and CSA as viable systems for the LEED Rating System.