Longer-term Growth Projections from VMAP Studies F. Wayne Bell Ontario Forest Research Institute Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

Transcription

1 Longer-term Growth Projections from VMAP Studies F. Wayne Bell Ontario Forest Research Institute Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources The annual Boreal Science Seminar June 3 & 4 th, 2008 Le Centre de Loisirs In Kapuskasing, Ontario

2 Outline Introduce Vegetation management alternatives program (VMAP) and Old Studies and ARIO VMAP projects Review progress on yield analysis o o o o Data collections (Old studies project) Fallingsnow (Sw) results Nipigon Ground (Sb) results Domtar (E.B.Eddy) (Pj) results Summary

3 Vegetation Management Alternatives Program (VMAP) Goals to develop approaches to managing forest vegetation that could reduce dependence on herbicides in Ontario s forests to determine economically- and ecologicallysound vegetation management practices that are socially acceptable to advance forest regeneration knowledge and further all aspects of forest vegetation management

4 10 th year assessments 10 th yr remeasurement sponsored by: CEC-FRP (OMNR, Tembec, CFS, Living Legacy Trust) SERG (Monsanto, Manitoba Conservation, Forest Protection Ltd) LU (NSERC) Domtar Grant Forest Products, Norboard Industries Inc., Weyerhaeuser Canada Data analysis sponsored by: CEC-FRP (OMNR and Tembec) LU (EFPSF)

5 Acknowledgements Science Partners Old Studies ( ) OMNR Lisa Buse Michael Irvine Scott McPherson Andree Morneault Tom Noland Bill Parker Fred Pinto Michael Ter-Mikalean Bill Towill NGOs Margaret Penner Vic Wearn NRCan Darwin Burgess Steve D Eon Rob Fleming Doug Pitt Phil Reynolds Craig Robinson Suzanne Wetzel Universities Jason Dampier (Lakehead) Doug King (Carleton) Nancy Luckai (Lakehead) Steve Newmaster (Guelph) Darren Pouliot (Carleton) Suzanne Visser (Calgary) Robert Wagner (Maine) Greg Zimmerman (LSSU) Tembec Al Stinson Monsanto Roy Maki FERIC Mark Ryans

6 VMAP Studies Table 1. List of available studies, type and quantity of data, and how the data is proposed to be used. Study Study Title Year assessed Indiv. Trees 1 Data Type Veg. plots 2 Quadra ts 3 Comp. index Modelling and Analysis Efforts Ht model Aspen/ conifer Treatment efficacy Diversity 1 Arboretum x x Inter-specific x Comp. tolerance x x Wharncliffe 2001/ x x NE Glyphosate x x x - 6 Time x Rate x x - x - 7 Velpar-L x x - x x 8 Intensive SIP 2001/ x - 9 South River x x - x - 10 Cartier & Foleyet x x x x 11 Nipigon Ground 2000/ x x x x x 12 E.B. Eddy x x x x x 13 Bending/ Leether 2002/ x x x x x 14 Fallingsnow x x x x x 15 Mattawa x x - x - Totals 41,770 5,216 2,772

7 Agriculture Research Institute of Ontario (ARIO) VMAP Project 1. Synthesize relevant vegetation management literature 2. Conduct landscape level analysis related to alternatives for releasing conifers 3. Conduct yield and cost:benefit analysis 4. Update Canadian Forest Pest Management database 5. Transfer results through a report, regional workshops, journal manuscripts (as appropriate), and websites

8 ARIO VMAP Partners Lakehead University Forestry Research Partnership - Tembec, OMNR, CFS FORREX QcMNRF Spatial Planning Systems University of Toronto University of Guelph NCASI

9 Treatment comparison studies Comparison studies established between 1990 and 1994 and reassessed between 2000 and site/species/treatment combinations Include white spruce, black spruce, and jack pine

10 Location of study sites Leether Lake Sb Bending LakePj1 Nipigon Sb2 Hele Nipigon Sb3 Corrigal Fallingsnow Sw1 Domtar Pj2 (E.B. Eddy) N 40+ W E S Kilometers

11 Details of the Study Sites ID Fallingsnow Predisturbance vegetation type Block 1 = V-7* Block 2 = V-5* Block 3 = V- 28* Design # 20m 2 transects, m 2 / exp. unit RCBD; 3 blocks Treatments 6, 120 Control, brushsaw, Silvana selective, aerial spray (t), aerial spray (g) Leether Lake V-17* CRD 4, 80 Control, brushsaw, continuous removal backpack (g), aerial spray (g) n Nipigon- Hele V-4* RCBD; 3 blocks 3, 60 Control, continuous removal (g), reel&hose (g), spot gun (h) 12 Nipigon - Corrigal V-14* RCBD; 3 blocks 3, 60 Control, brushsaw, Ezject (g), basal bark (t), continuous removal backpack (g) 18 Bending Lake V-17 RCBD; 4 blocks 6, 120 Control, brushsaw, aerial spray (g), continuous removal backpack (g) 16 Domtar (E.B.Eddy) Block 1 = V-18 Block 2 = V-17 Block 3 = V-17 RCBD; 3 blocks 4, 80 Control, brushsaw, basal bark (t), BRR, mist-blower (g), aerial (g), continuous removal backpack (g) 21 *Taylor et al FEC for Northeastern Ontario Sims et al FEC for Northwestern Ontario g= glyphosate, t = triclopyr, and h = hexazinone

12 Sampling Design Planted Conifer Competing tree (e.g. aspen) Competing clump

13 Fallingsnow Ecosystem Project Controls Cutting Herbicides

14 Vegetation Response Efficacy The following patterns occurred in year two: (a) cover of all vegetation increased (e.g., untreated control) (b) cover of deciduous trees decreased, while cover of other vegetation increased (e.g., brush saw and Silvana Selective); (c) cover of deciduous trees and shrubs decreased, while cover of other vegetation increased (e.g., Release); (d) cover of deciduous trees, shrubs and ferns decreased, while cover of other vegetation increased (e.g., Vision). Figure shows 10 th -year results

15 Fallingsnow (GTV at 16 years post harvest / 10 yr post-release)

16

17 Fallingsnow Site occupancy Composition of stocked plots. Values are averaged over m x 2 m quadrats located in treated portions of each of 3 plots per treatment. Symbols reflect average tree heights Conifer and hardwood density and stocking levels directly affect outcome. Source: Pitt and Bell 2005.

18 Fallingsnow - Control

19 Fallingsnow - Brushsaw

20 Aspen Quality Brushsaw A Silvana Percent area of stem sprouts Decay Stain Healthy wood B Source: Greifenhagen et al

21 Fallingsnow - Vision

22 Nipigon Ground Release Brushsaw Continuous Removal glyphosate Control Reel and Hose

23 Nipigon (GTV at 13 years post harvest/ 10 yr post-release)

24

25 Domtar (E.B. Eddy) study Untreated control Basal bark Aerial spray Brushsaw Mist blower Annual removal glyphosate 5 yrs

26 Domtar Study GTV at 13 years post-harvest/ 10 yr post-release)

27

28 Domtar Study Competition yr 10

29 Domtar Study Competition vs. Volume

30 Bending Lake Study Competition vs. Volume

31 Inter-specific Competition Study e.g., Pj with willow on clay (7 yr post plant)

32 Take Homes Messages Need to control both herbaceous and woody competition to maximize conifer growth more so for spruce than for jack pine. Glyphosate, which killed both herb and woody competition, was most effective at releasing conifers Brushsaws were effective on sites with low herbaceous competition Treatments shown should be classified as basic, because conifer densities are too low to support a commercial thin.

33 NEBIE Framework Natural Extensive Basic Intensive Elite

34 Questions?