JRA's reveal forest land ownership protections in place

In the U.S., both the legal status of land ownership and associated use rights are identified and protected under law, and guarantee an owner the exclusive right to hold, control, use, dispose, and allow or exclude others. Property rights are addressed in the U.S. Constitution, including the Fifth Amendment which states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Property rights and land use rights are identified and protected with a variety of federal, state, and municipal laws, regulations, and legal instruments such as recorded deeds of ownership, treaties, easements, zoning laws, and legally designated land use classifications. Land tenure and use rights are typically assigned and transferred by lease or contract through easements, deeds, and similar legal documents.

At the state level local planning, zoning, and land use regulation functions are granted to municipalities through several laws. Local planning and zoning commissions are formed at municipal government levels. Planning commissions make recommendations to elected representatives of the corresponding jurisdictions. Public participation is a fundamental requirement of zoning and land use planning. Land use planning decisions can be appealed, typically through a local board of adjustment. Appeal procedures are described within zoning ordinances. Decisions made by the local board of adjustment can in turn be appealed at the corresponding circuit court through a State’s judicial system.

Civil rights are well defined, established, and protected in numerous federal and state statutes. Federal and state agencies are assigned, as stipulated in legal code and associated statutory provisions, with enforcement responsibility and authority to investigate non-compliance, pursue criminal charges and impose penalties.

Property rights and land use rights are identified and protected with a variety of federal, state, and municipal laws and regulations including the U.S. Constitution. Property tenure and use rights are documented in deeds and other legal instruments, maintained in state and county records and available to the public.

Land ownership and rights disputes regarding infringement of civil rights, property ownership and use rights are resolved in the State and federal court systems.

Recognition of Tribes and Tribal lands

The U.S. government has established relationships with recognized Tribes through the U.S. Constitution and formal treaties entered into with Tribes. These treaties are legally binding and assign a trust responsibility which requires the federal government to protect the safety and well-being of the Tribes including Tribal treaty rights, lands, and resources retained in treaties. The U.S. federal government has signed more than 650 treaties with Native American Tribes. There are 574 federally recognized Tribes located in 35 of 50 states throughout the U.S.. Additionally, 13 States have formally recognized one or more Tribes at the State level.

Alabama serves as an example of a State that is home to a federally recognised Tribe and a number of State recognised Tribes. By law, federally recognised Tribes are considered to be sovereign governments and interact with the U.S. federal government via a government-to-government relationship. In Alabama the Poarch Band of Creek Indians manages natural resources, including timber harvest, on a 263-acre reservation in accordance with Title 26, Section III of the Tribe’s Code of Ordinances. The State of Alabama has recognized nine Tribes including the Poarch Band of Creek Indians, and eight other tribes that are not recognized by the federal government. The rules for federal recognition are stipulated in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations.

The Alabama Indian Affairs Commission (AIAC) was formed by state legislative action to serve as a liaison between state-recognized tribal communities and the state government. A representative from each state-recognized Tribe serves as a member of the AIAC. A formal process for State recognition of Tribes is established in Title 475 of Alabama Administrative Code. State-recognized Tribes are not categorically afforded any use rights or claims to land within the State as a result of their recognition, and there is no legal requirement for State agencies to consult with Tribes in advance of decision-making on issues that may be of interest to Tribes. However, AIAC is directed to “review all proposed or pending legislation and amendments to existing State legislation affecting Indians in Alabama; and to conduct public hearings on matters relating to Indian affairs”.

In compliance with the National Indian Forest Resources Management Act, each year the Division of Forestry (DOF) develops and submits a report to Congress on the status of forests on federal Indian trust land.

Across all of the States identified as home to federally recognised Tribes or State recognised tribes there were no indications of systematic failings that would affect the lawful trade in hardwood products.

Low levels of corruption

The assessments indicated that across all 33 States, federal, state, and local governing bodies are in place and functional in terms of regulatory enforcement leading in all States to a conclusion of negligible risk for this indicator.

This conclusion is reasoned by the World Bank assessment of the U.S. to be in control of corruption with a percentile rank of 82, 88 and 89 in 2022, 2017 and 2012 respectively. The U.S. has consistently been ranked above the 80th percentile for countries since 2012 in terms of control of corruption.

Further, Transparency International ranked the U.S. in the 87th percentile (24^th out of 180) in their Corruption Perceptions Index indicating a high level of public confidence in government efficacy. Transparency International ranks 180 countries in a Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) that functions as a guide to confidence of experts and businesses of public officials and government employees. The ranking indicates a relatively strong level of confidence in governance in the U.S. and a low level of public corruption. Such indices consider society in the broadest context and are not focused on the forest industries.

The 2019 FSC U.S. Controlled Wood National Risk Assessment made a `low risk’ determination for all its 21 indicators related to forest legality ranging from permitting to taxing to trade.

Corruption and perceptions of corruption do vary by State. For all 33 States assessed the assessors found no evidence that any corruption is associated with hardwood forest management or environmental protection and there was no evidence that the issue extends to the forest products industries. As with other indicators, corruption does exist (as in all industries and in all societies) and there are very isolated examples to be found which do on rare occasions affect the hardwood forest sector - but no examples of systematic failures were identified.