Sustainable Forest Management Plan Indicator Forecasting and Modeling. Forest Stewardship Council Certification Scenarios

Transcription

1 Sustainable Forest Management Plan Indicator Forecasting and Modeling Forest Stewardship Council Certification Scenarios March 17, 21 Prepared For: Vincent Day, RPF Canadian Forest Products Ltd. Radium Division Submitted By: Forsite Consultants Ltd. Box 279, nd Street SW Salmon Arm, B.C. V1E 4R1 (25)

2 Executive Summary In support of the ongoing Sustainable Forest Management Planning (SFMP) process for Canfor s operating area in the Invermere TSA, and in order to prepare for potential certification under the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), modeling/forecasting of numerous scenarios was completed to illustrate long-term outcomes of management actions. The following scenarios were modeled: 1. Current Practice Base Case Reflects current management in the DFA 2. Full FSC Adds incremental management requirements needed to be compliant with FSC standards. 3. FSC Riparian Only adds FSC riparian management requirements to the base case assumptions. 4. No Harvest Only natural disturbances occur on the land base. The following general trends were observed in the reporting of the scenario forecasts: FSC riparian management effectively removes 3.2% (2,583 ha) of the Timber Harvesting Land Base (THLB) which in turn results in an 3.9% reduction in short-term harvest levels and 3.7% in long-term harvest levels. Harvest Forecast (m³/yr) 35, 3, 25, 2, 15, 1, Harvest Forecast Full FSC Initial = 221, m³/yr mid = 214, m³/yr LTHL = 23, m³/yr Current Practice Base Case Initial = 23, m³/yr mid = 223, m³/yr LTHL = 239, m³/yr Current AAC (221,5 m³/yr) 5, Years from Present Increased Equivalent Clearcut Area (ECA) limits for Watersheds and HCV4 Polygons did not impact timber supply but did decrease timber availability in certain periods. ECA levels in community and domestic watersheds increased slightly as harvest levels increased. Economic indicators increased proportionately with harvest levels as they are estimated using direct multipliers. The Mountain Pine Beetle (MPB) salvage that is modeled in the short term results in a lasting cyclical harvest of pine stands well into the future. The conversion of the THLB from older natural stands to generally younger managed stands significantly reduced coarse woody debris and snag densities on the managed landbase. The conversion of the THLB from older natural stands to generally younger managed stands increased the presence of hardwoods on the land base. The scenarios that involved harvesting showed little impact on the amount of natural regeneration used. SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modelling: Canfor Radium Division i

3 Table of Contents Executive Summary... i Table of Contents... ii List of Tables... iv List of Figures... v Abbreviations... vi 1. Introduction Purpose Objective Study Area Scenario Overview Modeling Approach / Methodology Current Practice Base Case Land Base Assumptions Rare and Uncommon Ecosystems High Value Conservation Forests Caribou Wildlife Habitat Areas Wildlife Management Areas Permanent Sample Plots Old Growth Management Areas and Mature Management Areas Wildlife Tree Patches Management Assumptions Integrated Resource Management Silviculture Assumptions Harvesting Assumptions Growth and Yield Assumptions Natural Disturbance Assumptions Full FSC Certification Scenario FSC Riparian Management (FSC Criterion 6.5 bis) ECA limits in Community and Domestic Watersheds (FSC Criterion 6.5.8) High Conservation Value Forests (Category 3) Protected Reserves Strategy (FSC Criterion 6.4) Sustainable Harvest (FSC Criterion 5.6) FSC Riparian Management No Harvest Indicator Forecasting Methodology Summary of Indicators Modeled Indicator Modeling Approach Scenario Forecasting Results Economic Indicators Timber Supply Stability/Certainty Harvest Species Profile over time Direct and Indirect Employment Direct and Indirect Income Levels Fees Paid to Government... 2 SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modelling: Canfor Radium Division ii

4 5.2 Social Indicators Disturbance in Visual Areas Preservation VQOs Retention VQOs Partial Retention VQOs Modification VQOs All VQOs Environmental Indicators Dead Standing Trees >2cm dbh Coarse Woody Debris Hardwoods Equivalent Clear Cut Area in Community/Domestic Watersheds Equivalent Clear Cut Area in HCV Disturbance in Ungulate Winter Ranges Patch Size Distribution Natural Disturbance Type 3A (Douglas-fir generally absent) Natural Disturbance Type 3B (Douglas-fir present) Natural Disturbance Type 4 (frequent stand maintaining fires) Old Seral Interior Forest Condition Natural Regeneration Conclusion / Discussion References Appendix A Overview of Scenario Results Appendix B Habitat Indicator Modeling Methods Coarse Woody Debris Snag Abundance Deciduous Forest... 5 Literature Cited SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modelling: Canfor Radium Division iii

5 List of Tables TABLE 1. LAND BASE AREA NETDOWN SUMMARY... 3 TABLE 2. LAND BASE REDUCTIONS FOR RARE AND UNCOMMON ECOSYSTEMS... 4 TABLE 3. LAND BASE REDUCTIONS FOR HCVF S (CATEGORIES 1&2)... 4 TABLE 4. LAND BASE REDUCTIONS FOR CARIBOU GAR (U-4-13) RESERVES... 4 TABLE 5. LAND BASE REDUCTIONS FOR WILDLIFE HABITAT AREA... 4 TABLE 6. LAND BASE REDUCTIONS FOR WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT... 4 TABLE 7. LAND BASE REDUCTIONS FOR PERMANENT SAMPLE PLOTS... 5 TABLE 8. LAND BASE REDUCTIONS FOR OLD GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND MATURE MANAGEMENT AREAS... 5 TABLE 9. ADDITIONAL OLD SERAL COVER CONSTRAINTS APPLIED IN LOW BIODIVERSITY EMPHASIS LU S... 5 TABLE 1. LAND BASE REDUCTIONS FOR WILDLIFE TREE PATCHES... 5 TABLE 11. SUMMARY OF UWR COVER CONSTRAINTS FOR THE INVERMERE TSA... 6 TABLE 12. DEVIATION OF MINIMUM HARVEST AGES RELATIVE TO TSR3 MINIMUM HARVEST AGES USED FOR ALL SCENARIOS TABLE 13. FSC RIPARIAN RETENTION BUDGETS AND EQUIVALENT RESERVE WIDTH BY RIPARIAN CLASS... 9 TABLE 14. SUMMARY OF INDICATORS ASSESSED TABLE 15. DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF SFM INDICATORS FOR MODELLING TABLE 16. MODEL PARAMETERS FOR FORECASTING THE VOLUME (M 3 /HA) OF COARSE WOODY DEBRIS (CWD) ON THE INVERMERE TSA TABLE 17. CWD DECAY CONSTANTS FOR TRESS SPECIES PROVIDED BY TIPSY 3.H AND MODIFIED AS IN WILSON ET AL. (24; BOLD TEXT) TABLE 18. MODEL PARAMETERS FOR FORECASTING THE DENSITY OF LARGE SNAGS (>2 CM DBH) ON THE INVERMERE TSA TABLE 19. TREE SPECIES AND ASSOCIATED TIPSY MODEL COEFFICIENTS FOR FORECASTING SNAGS, FROM WILSON ET AL. (24). PARAMETERS DIFFERING FROM TIPSY DEFAULTS ARE IN BOLD TEXT. NO COEFFICIENTS FOR THE INTERACTION TERM (B 3 ) HAVE BEEN CALCULATED... 5 TABLE 2. PARAMETERS OF MODELS USED TO FORECAST THE ABUNDANCE OF DECIDUOUS FOREST ON THE INVERMERE TSA SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modelling: Canfor Radium Division iv

6 List of Figures FIGURE 2. PROJECTED HARVEST LEVELS FOR THE CANFOR DFA (CANFOR OPERATING AREA) FIGURE 3. PROJECTED CONTRIBUTION OF SPECIES TO HARVEST OVER TIME - CURRENT PRACTICE FIGURE 4. PROJECTED CONTRIBUTION OF SPECIES TO HARVEST OVER TIME - FULL FSC FIGURE 5. PROJECTED CONTRIBUTION OF SPECIES TO HARVEST OVER TIME - FSC RIPARIAN FIGURE 6. PROJECTION OF LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL EMPLOYMENT LEVELS IN THE FOREST SECTOR (DIRECT PY'S OF EMPLOYMENT) FIGURE 7. PROJECTION OF LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL EMPLOYMENT LEVELS OUTSIDE THE FOREST SECTOR (INDIRECT PY'S OF EMPLOYMENT) FIGURE 8. PROJECTION OF LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL INCOME LEVELS WITHIN THE FOREST SECTOR (DIRECT INCOME) FIGURE 9. PROJECTION OF LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL INCOME LEVELS OUTSIDE THE FOREST SECTOR (INDIRECT INCOME) 2 FIGURE 1. PROJECTION OF FEES PAID TO PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT... 2 FIGURE 11. PROJECTION OF % AREA UNDER VEG HT FOR PRESERVATION VQOS ON THE DFA FIGURE 12. PROJECTION OF % AREA UNDER VEG HT FOR RETENTION VQOS ON THE DFA FIGURE 13. PROJECTION OF % AREA UNDER VEG HT FOR PARTIAL RETENTION VQOS ON THE DFA FIGURE 14. PROJECTION OF % AREA UNDER VEG HT FOR MODIFICATION VQOS ON THE DFA FIGURE 15. PROJECTION OF % AREA UNDER VEG HT FOR ALL VQOS ON THE DFA FIGURE 16. PROJECTION OF DEAD STANDING TREE DENSITY ON THE DFA THLB FIGURE 17. PROJECTION OF COARSE WOODY DEBRIS (CWD) LEVELS ON THE DFA THLB FIGURE 18. PROJECTION OF EFFECTIVE HARDWOOD AREAS ON THE DFA THLB FIGURE 19. PROJECTION OF ECA FOR CWS/DWSS WITHIN THE DFA CFLB FIGURE 2. PROJECTION OF ECA FOR HCV4 POLYGONS WITHIN THE DFA CFLB FIGURE 21. DISTURBANCE IN MANAGED FOREST - DRY UWR HABITAT TYPES RELATIVE TO TARGETS (MIN. 1% > 1 YEARS) FIGURE 22. DISTURBANCE IN MANAGED FOREST - TRANSITIONAL UWR HABITAT TYPES RELATIVE TO TARGETS (MIN. 1% > 1 YEARS) FIGURE 23. DISTURBANCE IN MANAGED FOREST - TRANSITIONAL UWR HABITAT TYPES RELATIVE TO TARGETS (MIN. 1% > 1 YEARS) FIGURE 24. DISTURBANCE IN MANAGED FOREST - MESIC UWR HABITAT TYPES RELATIVE TO TARGETS (MIN. 1% > 6 YEARS)... 3 FIGURE 25. DISTURBANCE IN MANAGED FOREST - MESIC UWR HABITAT TYPES RELATIVE TO TARGETS (MIN. 2% > 1 YEARS)... 3 FIGURE 26. DISTURBANCE IN MANAGED FOREST - MOIST UWR HABITAT TYPES RELATIVE TO TARGETS (MIN. 2% > 6 YEARS) FIGURE 27. DISTURBANCE IN MANAGED FOREST - WET UWR HABITAT TYPES RELATIVE TO TARGETS (MIN. 33% > 1 YEARS) FIGURE 28. DISTURBANCE IN ALL UWR HABITAT TYPES (YOUNG SERAL FOREST REQUIREMENTS) RELATIVE TO TARGETS (MAX. 33% <2 YEARS) FIGURE 29. PROJECTION OF PATCH SIZE DISTRIBUTION (<2 YEAR OLD) FOR NDT3A OVER TIME CURRENT PRACTICE FIGURE 3. PROJECTION OF PATCH SIZE DISTRIBUTION (<2 YEAR OLD) FOR NDT3B OVER TIME CURRENT PRACTICE FIGURE 31. PROJECTION OF PATCH SIZE DISTRIBUTION (<2 YEAR OLD) FOR NDT4 OVER TIME CURRENT PRACTICE 34 FIGURE 32. PROJECTION OF INTERIOR FOREST CONDITION OVER TIME ON THE DFA CFLB AREA FIGURE 33. PROJECTION OF THE % NATURAL REGENERATION USED ON THE DFA THLB AREA SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modelling: Canfor Radium Division v

7 Abbreviations AAC Allowable Annual Cut MoE Ministry of Environment Analysis Timber Supply Analysis MoFR Ministry of Forests and Range AU Analysis Unit (groups of like stands) MPB Mountain Pine Beetle BCTS BC Timber Sales (Formerly Small MSY Maximum Sustained Yield Business Forest Enterprise Program) BEC Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem MSYT Managed Stand Yield Tables Classification BEO Biodiversity Emphasis Options NCC Non-Commercial Cover Bl Balsam Fir NDT Natural Disturbance Type CF Chief Forester NP Non Productive CFLB Crown Forested Land base NRL Non-Recoverable Losses CW Western Red Cedar NSR Not Satisfactorily Restocked CWD Coarse Woody Debris NSYT Natural Stand Yield Tables CWS Community Watershed OAF Operational Adjustment Factor DBH Diameter at breast height (1.3m) OGMA Old-Growth Management Areas DFA Defined Forest Area Pa Whitebark Pine DM District Manager PEM Predictive Ecosystem Mapping DWS Domestic Watershed Pl Lodgepole Pine ECA Equivalent Clearcut Area PSP Permanent Sample Plot ERDZ Enhanced resource development zone PSYU Public Sustained Yield Unit ESA Environmentally Sensitive Area Pw White Pine Fd Douglas Fir PY Person Year FIP/FC1 Old Forest Cover Digital Files Py Ponderosa Pine (tree species) or person years (economics) FIZ Forest Inventory Zone RM Regional Manager FMER Fire Maintained Ecosystem RMZ Riparian Management Zone Restoration FPC Forest Practices Code ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum FSC Forest Stewardship Council SFMP Sustainable Forest Management Plan FSSIM Forest Service Simulation Model Snags Dead Standing Trees GAR Government Action Regulation THLB Timber Harvesting Land base GIS Geographic Information System TIPSY Table Interpolation Program for Stand Yields (growth and yield model) HCVF High Conservation Value Forest TSA Timber Supply Area HLPO Higher Level Plan Order TSR Timber Supply Review HW Western Hemlock UREP Use, Recreation, and Enjoyment of Public IRM Integrated Resource Management UWR Ungulate Winter Range IWAPS Interior Watershed Assessment Procedure System VDYP Variable Density Yield Predictor (growth and yield model) LRMP Local Resource Management Plan VEG Ht Visually Effective Greenup Height LTHL Long Term Harvest Level VQO Visual Quality Objective LU Landscape Unit VRI Vegetation Resources Inventory Lw Western Larch WHA Wildlife Habitat Area MHA Minimum Harvest Age WMA Wildlife Management Area MMA Mature Management Area WTP Wildlife Tree Patch SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modelling: Canfor Radium Division vi

8 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose Canadian Forest Products Ltd. (Canfor) is currently working to maintain CSA certification of their operating areas in the Invermere TSA and is considering certification under the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). This project is one of a series of projects that are assisting Canfor in preparing for potential certification under FSC. In December 29, Canadian Forest Products Radium Hot Springs requested proposals to complete forecasting and modeling for Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) indicators within Canfor Radium s operating area. This work was previously completed in 26 to satisfy the CSA Z89-2 SFM standard for forecasting and used the SFM indicators current at that time. Since then, the indicators have been updated and Canfor wishes to understand how the indicators would be impacted by implementing the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification standard. 1.2 Objective The objective of this project is to examine the status of the updated SFM indicators relative to different forest management scenarios including scenarios where management requirements as defined by the BC FSC standards are implemented. 1.3 Study Area The Defined Forest Area (DFA) covered by this analysis consists of Canfor s operating area in the Invermere Timber Supply Area, which is located in the northern half of the TSA. Figure 1. Canfor operating area in the Invermere TSA 2. Scenario Overview Four different scenarios were modeled and analyzed and are briefly described below. Further detail can be found in Section Current Practice Base Case This scenario was designed to reflect current management in the DFA and will likely be based on the last TSR base case assumptions. As Canfor has been operating under an SFMP for some time now, this scenario also includes many of the management requirements outlined in Canfor s most recent SFMP as well as Canfor s Forest Stewardship Plan (FSP). 2. Full FSC This scenario incorporates current practice management plus incremental management requirements associated with FSC certification. This includes all assumptions that can be captured in a timber supply model (enhanced riparian, ECAs limits imposed in HCVFs, more restrictive ECA limits, SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 1

9 non declining harvest level). All other aspects of the FSC standards are assumed to be met using the management guidelines applied in the base case scenario. 3. FSC Riparian This scenario explores the component of FSC management that is anticipated to result in the greatest change to indicators FSC riparian management. 4. No Harvest This scenario is designed to illustrate the status of the land base and SFM indicators if only natural disturbances were to occur into the future. No changes were made to the base case model except to add natural disturbance to the timber harvesting land base (THLB) throughout the planning horizon. These disturbances were determined in the same manner as the disturbances implemented on the non-thlb. 3. Modeling Approach / Methodology The modeling approach used for the three scenarios mentioned in Section 2. is detailed in this section. Unless otherwise stated, all assumptions for the Full FSC and FSC Riparian management scenarios remained the same as the Current Practice Base Case scenario. Modeling was completed using Patchworks, a fully spatial forest estate model that utilizes a goal seeking approach and an optimization heuristic to schedule activities across time and space in order to find a solution that best balance the targets and goals defined by the user. Modeling explored outcomes over a 3 year planning horizon and required assumptions in 4 keys areas: Land Base Assumptions: Used to define where on the land base timber harvesting can occur (THLB) and what other portions of the land base can help to meet non-timber objectives. Management Assumptions: Used to define how non-timber values are reflected / addressed in the model and how forest management will occur (harvesting/regeneration assumptions). Growth and Yield Assumptions: Used to define the net volumes that will be realized when natural and managed stands are harvested. They also describe various tree/stand attributes over time (ie. height, diameter, presence of dead trees, etc) Natural Disturbance Assumptions: Used to define the extent and frequency of natural disturbances across the land base. 3.1 Current Practice Base Case Base line modeling assumptions for this project are largely consistent with the 24 TSR3 assumptions documented in the Invermere TSR3 Analysis Report (Forsite 24). As Canfor has been operating under an SFMP for some time now, this scenario also includes many of the management requirements outlined in Canfor s most recent SFMP as well as Canfor s Forest Stewardship Plan (FSP). Changes made to TSR3 assumptions are summarized below, with additional detail following: Forest cover depletions to reflect harvesting to September 29 Forest cover projected to January 29 with VDYP7 Addition of Rare and Uncommon Forests Ecosystem reserves Addition of High Value Conservation Forests Reserves Addition of Caribou GAR reserve linework (U-4-13, MoE, Dec. 9, 29) Exclusion of Permanent Sample Plots from the THLB. Exclusion of Wildlife Habitat Areas Exclusion of Wildlife Management Areas Updated spatial OGMAs (Canfor) Current Ungulate Winter Range Guidelines (U-4-8, MoE, Feb. 25) Equivalent Clearcut Area (ECA) was limited to 3% in CWS s and DWS s MPB focused harvest priorities (75% of AAC focused toward pine stands) SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 2

10 Relaxation of VQO for polygons with >25% pine. Minimum harvest Ages (MHA s) were reduced for pine leading stands Regeneration delays were built into yield curves Land Base Assumptions Assumptions are used to define the crown forested land base (CFLB) and timber harvesting land base (THLB). The THLB is designated to support timber harvesting while the CFLB is identified as the broader land base that can contribute toward meeting non-timber objectives (i.e. caribou habitat). The land base assumptions used in this project are based on those defined in TSR3 1 and utilize the same logic except where management approaches have changed as summarized above and described below in more detail. Table 1. Land Base Area Netdown Summary Total Land Base Designation Productive Area (ha) Effective Area (ha) Total Canfor-Radium Operating Area 56,852 56,852 Less: Total Non-Forested / Non-Crown 321, ,281 Crown Forested Land Base (CFLB) 239, ,571 Less: TSR3 Netdown Factors 144, ,184 Less additional netdown factors since TSR3: Ecosystem Representation (Rare and Uncommon) 7,238 3,192 HCVF reserves 14,113 1,392 Caribou Habitat 1,122 2 Wildlife Habitat Areas Wildlife Management Areas 1,35 54 Permanent Sample Plots Old Growth Management and Mature Management Areas 39,37 8,857 Wildlife Tree Patches 1, Timber Harvesting Land Base 8, Rare and Uncommon Ecosystems Canfor was involved in developing an Ecosystem Representation strategy 2 that identified a number of at-risk habitats (ecogroups) that are to be reserved from harvesting (except for required road or trail crossings where no other practicable options exist). These are: Rare ecosystem types, defined as <1 ha in the East Kootenay Conservation Project (EKCP), Uncommon, small and less represented ecosystem types. Defined as <2 ha in the EKCP and < 5% representation within the non-harvesting land base. These special habitats were treated as no harvest reserves in the model as per Table 2. 1 Invermere Timber Supply Area - Timber Supply Review #3 - Analysis Report, Forsite, Wells, R., Haag, D., and Braumandl, D., Bradfield, G., and A. Moy. 24. Ecosystem Representation in the East Kootenay Conservation Program Study Area. SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 3

11 Table 2. Land base reductions for Rare and Uncommon Ecosystems Management Zone Ecosystem Representation Description Productive Reduction (ha) Effective Reduction (ha) Rare and uncommon ecotypes with total area less than 2 ha 7,238 3, High Value Conservation Forests Canfor has developed a High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF) Strategy as part of it s Sustainable Forest Management Planning (categories 1&2). Designation of HCVF areas ensures that specific ecological and cultural values are identified and that those values are considered in the management practices that are applied in those areas. For timber supply modeling, the HCVFs identified by Canfor that completely precludes harvesting were modeled as no harvest reserves. Table 3. Land base reductions for HCVF s (Categories 1&2) Productive Reduction Effective Reduction Management Zone (ha) (ha) HCVF reserves 14,113 1, Caribou New Carbou GAR reserve linework (U-4-13, MoE, Dec. 9, 29) was used in place of the HLP caribou guidelines modeled in TSR3. Table 4 summarizes the areas impacted by the GAR reserves. Table 4. Land base reductions for Caribou GAR (U-4-13) reserves Productive Reduction Effective Reduction Management Zone (ha) (ha) Caribou Habitat 1, Wildlife Habitat Areas The provincial Identified Wildlife Management Strategy provides for the creation of wildlife habitat areas (WHAs) to protect key habitat features of listed wildlife species. Since the last TSR, WHAs have been spatially established within the Inveremere TSA and were therefore excluded from the THLB. Table 5 summarizes the areas impacted by the WHAs. Table 5. Land base reductions for Wildlife Habitat Area Productive Reduction Effective Reduction Management Zone (ha) (ha) Wildlife habitat Areas Wildlife Management Areas Wildlife management areas (WMA s) are areas of BC government land where the Ministry of Environment limits development activities to those deemed consistent with the management objective. There are two WMA s within Canfor s operating area: the East Side of Columbia Lake and the Columbia Wetlands. Canfor does not conduct harvesting operations within these areas so they were removed from the THLB for this analysis. Table 6 summarizes the areas impacted by the WMAs. Table 6. Land base reductions for Wildlife Management Productive Reduction Effective Reduction Management Zone (ha) (ha) Wildlife Management Areas 1,35 54 SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 4

12 Permanent Sample Plots Permanent sample plots (PSPs) are established throughout the province in order to provide long-term, local data on growth of existing forests. They provide information on rates of growth, mortality, and changes in stand structure from stand establishments to maturity. For this reason, it is important that established permanent sample plots are not disturbed. Therefore, all PSP core areas were removed from the THLB (Table 7). Table 7. Land base reductions for Permanent Sample Plots Productive Reduction Effective Reduction Management Zone (ha) (ha) Permanent Sample Plots Old Growth Management Areas and Mature Management Areas The Kootenay Boundary Higher Level Plan Order specifies percentage requirements of old and mature-plus-old seral that must be retained within each LU and BEC combination. The equivalent area of both the old and the mature-plus-old seral has been mapped and Canfor actively manages the location of these areas. These areas are called OGMA s (old growth management areas) and MOGMA s (mature old growth management areas) and their areas are summarized in Table 8. These areas will be treated as no-harvest zones for the entire planning horizon. In low Biodiversity Emphasis Options (BEOs), the Old seral requirements start off at 1/3 of the full requirement then increase in 1/3 increments for each successive 8 year rotation. The extra requirement was handled by implementing an aspatial constraint to ensure the required old area was retained in an old seral condition (Table 9). Table 8. Land base reductions for Old Growth Management and Mature Management Areas Management Zone Productive Reduction (ha) Effective Reduction (ha) Old Growth Management and Mature Management Areas 3,81 8,857 Table 9. Additional old seral cover constraints applied in Low Biodiversity Emphasis LU s Old Seral Requirements Low 2 nd Rotation (applied at 8 years) Low 3 rd Rotation (applied at 16 years) BEC Zone NDT Old Age (yrs) ESSF wm/wmu 1 > % 19% ESSF dk1/dk2/dku 3 >14 9.3% 14% ICH mk1 3 >14 9.3% 14% IDF dm2/dm2n/xh 4 >25 8.7% 13% MD dk 3 >14 9.3% 14% PP dh2 4 >25 8.7% 13% Wildlife Tree Patches Wildlife Tree Patches (WTP) were removed from the THLB in TSR3. Since that time, additional WTP s have been established. These additional WTP s have been removed from the THLB. Table 1. Land base reductions for Wildlife Tree Patches Productive Reduction Effective Management Zone (ha) Reduction (ha) Wildlife Tree Patches 1, SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 5

13 3.1.2 Management Assumptions Management practice assumptions can be grouped into three broad categories: Integrated Resource Management, Silviculture, and Harvesting Integrated Resource Management In order to accommodate the range of timber and non-timber resource objectives that occur within the DFA or maintain appropriate levels of specific forest types that are needed to satisfy objectives for wildlife habitat, visual quality, biological diversity, etc. The specific forest cover requirements modeled for each objective are provided below: IRM Greenup A maximum of 33% of each LU s THLB can be under 2.5m in ht (12 yrs old) ERDZ Greenup A maximum of 33% of each LU s THLB can be under 2 yrs old Ungulate Winter Range In February 25, new ungulate winter range orders were introduced for the Invermere TSA (U-4-8). Ungulate winter range management under this order are similar to the PEM UWR range modeled in TSR3 as a sensitivity. Since these cover requirements reflect current management of UWR in this TSA, they were applied on the CFLB portion of each LU as cover constraints in the model. Table 11. Summary of UWR cover constraints for the Invermere TSA Habitat Type Managed Forest - Dry Managed Forest - Transitional Managed Forest - Mesic Managed Forest - Moist Managed Forest - Wet Visual Resources Mature Forest Cover Requirements Min. 1% > 1 years Min. 1% > 6 years and Min. 1% > 1 years Min. 1% > 6 years and Min. 2% > 1 years Min. 2% > 6 years Min. 3% > 6 years Maximum Young Seral Requirements Maximum 33% <21 years Maximum disturbance levels were assigned to individual VQO polygons according to visual quality objectives, visual absorption capability ratings, and viewing distances from major viewpoints. Preservation VQO s were limited to -5% disturbance, Retention VQO s were limited to 3-15% disturbance, Partial Retention VQO s were limited to 1-25% disturbance, and Modification VQO s were limited to 15-33% disturbance. A stand younger than the visual greenup age was considered disturbed. These ages were a function of average slope in the VQO polygons and ranged from yrs old Community/Domestic Watersheds In TSR3, a cover constraint (max 3% < 6m or 22 years) was modeled as a surrogate for ECAs in community and domestic watersheds, however due to the potential impacts of MPB salvage, it was decided that more detailed ECA constraints would be applied. This was done by assigning ECA curves to each AU and limiting ECA to a maximum of 3% within the CFLB area of each Community/Domestic watershed. ECA heights were determined by first determining the area weighted average site index of each analysis unit within community and domestic watersheds and then using Site Tools (v.3.3) to determine height / age relationships. Recovery was based on the published IWAP standard, except that full recovery was assumed at 12m in height. SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 6

14 Silviculture Assumptions Historical and current silvicultural practices in the TSA have been included in the modeling and are consistent with TSR3 assumptions. These include: Silvicultural systems (clearcut vs partial cutting systems), Regeneration assumptions such as establishment method (plant vs natural), species distribution, and establishment density, Regeneration delay (time between harvesting and when the site becomes stocked with crop trees) Use of select seed, and Treatment of Backlog and current Not Satisfactorily Restocked (NSR) stands. All harvesting was modeled as clearcut with reserves. It is recognized that many blocks have mature trees retained in clumps, patches or as scattered stems to meet various management objectives. An in-block retention study 3 was completed in 24 to provide an estimate of the amount of volume being left across the area modeled as clearcut so that a volume reduction factor could be applied to address this issue Harvesting Assumptions Harvest Priority (MPB Salvage) There has been an ongoing pine beetle epidemic in the province over the last ten years. BCMPB modeling work has predicted that between 21 and 22, approximately 4.74 million m³ will be killed by the MPB 4. Given the current TSA AAC harvest rate of 598,57 m³/yr, it is conceivable that much of thus mortality could be salvage harvested if 75% of the harvest was directed to salvage harvesting efforts. However, management constraints such as UWR and greenup constraints limit the amount of harvest area in a particular management unit. 9 8 Observed Cumulative Red- and Grey-Attack (27) Projected Cumulative Red- and Grey-Attack (27) Observed Cumulative Red- and Grey-Attack (28) Projected Cumulative Red- and Grey-Attack (28) 7 1,'s of cubic metres Year In order to reflect ongoing pine salvage priorities due to the Mountain Pine Beetle infestation, a target of 75% of the annual harvest was directed to salvage priority pine stands in the first 1 year period. Priority pine stands were defined as being >=5% lodgepole pine and where >= 5% killed by MPB by 22 from the provincial level 3 Invermere TSA In-Block Retention Study, March 19, 24, Forsite Consultants 4 Walton A. 29. Provincial-Level Projection of the Current Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak: Update of the infestation projection based on the 1999 to 28 Provincial Aerial Overviews of Forest Health and revisions to "the model" (BCMPB.v6). SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 7

15 MPB Model. The assumption is that salvage harvesting will keep up to the MPB mortality therefore no MPB related pine mortality was modeled Minimum Harvest Ages in Pl dominated stands Salvage harvesting efforts is commonly being directed into productive age class 4 stands (61-8 years). In order to reflect this practice, the minimum harvest ages (MHAs) for Pl stand groups used in TSR3 were reduced by 1 years for the pine stand groups. Table 12. Deviation of minimum harvest ages relative to TSR3 minimum harvest ages used for all scenarios. TSA Invermere Stand Group TSR3 MHA (age) MHA for MPB Scenarios (age) Description 11 Pl leading - poor SI - ground based Pl leading - mod. SI - ground based Pl leading - High SI - ground based Pl leading - poor SI - cable ground Pl leading - mod. SI - cable ground Pl leading - High SI - cable ground Growth and Yield Assumptions Timber growth and yield refers to the prediction of the growth and development of forest stands over time and the associated volume yields that would occur with harvesting. For modeling purposes, stands of similar characteristics, growth rates, and management are grouped together into Analysis Units (AUs). Analysis Units in this project are consistent with TSR3 assumptions. The attributes of each AU are input into growth and yield models to predict net volume yields per hectare at various stand ages. The estimate of net timber volume in a stand assumes a specific utilization level, or set of dimensions, that establishes the minimum tree and log sizes that are removed from a site. Utilization levels used in estimating timber volumes specify minimum diameters near the base and the top of a tree. The yields generated for the last timber supply (TSR3) were used for this project. Two growth and yield models were used to estimate timber volumes in that analysis. The Variable Density Yield Prediction (VDYP 6) model supported by the BC MoF was used for estimating timber volumes for all existing natural stands and all coniferous stands that will be harvested in the future by partial harvesting. The Table Interpolation Program for Stand Yields (TIPSY), developed by the B.C. MoF was used to estimate timber volumes for both existing and future managed stands. Existing managed stands are those that are currently under 2 years of age, or older stands that have a history of planting and/or density control practices. Future managed stands are stands that will regenerate after they are harvested by the model during the planning horizon (excluding partial cut stands) Natural Disturbance Assumptions The model relies upon three mechanisms to disturb stands. Harvesting is the most common method of disturbance and occurs only within the timber harvesting land base. In order to recognize that natural disturbances are also occurring on the land base, the following are also modeled: Natural disturbances in the timber harvesting land base: Each year timber volume is damaged or killed on the THLB and not salvaged or accounted for by other factors. These losses are due to a number of factors that cause tree mortality, including insects, disease, blowdown, snowpress, wildfires, etc. In order to address losses from catastrophic natural events in the THLB, the model harvests an extra volume of timber in each time period that is not counted toward harvest levels. Endemic pest losses are dealt with through factors applied in the growth and yield models. The annual unsalvaged loss applied in this analysis was the Invermere TSR3 unsalvaged loss prorated by the THLB area within Canfor s operating area (Canfor s Op Area NRL (m³/yr) = Canfor s Area THLB [8,712 ha] * TSR3 SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 8

16 NRL [24,327m³/yr] / TSR3 THLB [233,875 ha]). The result of this proportion calculation and the unsalvaged losses assumed for Canfor s operating area in the Invermere TSA is 8,395 m³/yr. All harvest forecasts shown in this report are net of unsalvaged losses. Natural disturbances outside the timber harvesting land base: Because stands outside of the THLB contribute toward several forest cover objectives (i.e. landscape level biodiversity), it is important that the age class distributions in these stands are modeled to remain consistent with natural processes. By simulating natural disturbance in these stands, a natural age class distribution can be maintained in the model and a realistic contribution toward seral goals ensured. An area of ~672 ha is disturbed each year in the analysis to prevent age classes in the Non-THLB from becoming unrealistically old during modeling. This is roughly equivalent to an average disturbance interval of 25 yrs. 3.2 Full FSC Certification Scenario The following sections describe changes in modeling assumptions made to reflect the full implementation of management requirements set forth by the BC FSC standards FSC Riparian Management (FSC Criterion 6.5 bis) Canfor recently completed phase 1 of a detailed riparian assessment project in the Invermere TSA in support of FSC criterion 6.5.bis1. As a result of this work, a dataset was created to represent default FSC reserve and management widths for various stream/lake/wetland classes. Classes were assigned to each lake/wetland based on size and ecosystem. FSC s riparian protection standards are designed to move away from fixed width riparian buffers in favor of watershed level targets with moderate flexibility to leave retention where it will provide the highest value. The spatial locations of these reserves will likely incur some change as the Integrated Riparian Assessment approach becomes fully implemented across Canfor s operating area, but it is expected that the amount of area in riparian reserves will be approximately equal to what is assumed here. Therefore, under the Full FSC scenario, a dataset was created to represent the effective reserve widths (1% retention equivalent) required by FSC. Table 13. FSC riparian retention budgets and equivalent reserve width by riparian class Default Reserve Width (m) Default Management Zone Width (m) Mgmt Zone Retention (%) Effective Reserve Width (m)** Productive Reduction Area incremental to FRPA Riparian (ha) Effective Reduction Area (ha) Riparian Class S1a , S , S , S ,5 672 S5a , S5b 15 3 / 1* 4.5 / S6a S6b 15 3 / 1* 4.5 / L1-L W1-W Totals 18,322 2,583 *3 % retention for NDT1, 2, and 4. 1 % Retention for NDT 3. ** Effective reserve width = Rsv width + (Mgmt zone width * % retention) ECA limits in Community and Domestic Watersheds (FSC Criterion 6.5.8) FSC Criterion requires that in order to protect water resources and minimize increases in peak flow and landslide initiation resulting from management activities, a weighted ECA of less than 25% must be maintained unless recommended otherwise by a publicly available hydrologic assessment. Therefore, the FSC scenario will limit ECAs to a maximum of 25% in domestic and community watersheds (is 3% in current practice base case). ECA s were weighted equally for the upper portions and lower portions of the watersheds. SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 9

17 3.2.3 High Conservation Value Forests (Category 3) Additional High Conservation Value Forests have been identified with category 3 5 attributes in a recently completed report 6. The land base was assessed and areas were identified for potential hazards in four categories: likelihood of landslides, likelihood of snow avalanches, likelihood of forestry related flooding, and likelihood for forestry related increases in stream sedimentation. No areas were identified specifically for the snow avalanche hazards. For the other hazards that did have mapped areas, the management strategies do not specify any forest cover constraint or ECA, however a reduction of harvest in these areas is anticipated. Therefore, these areas will be treated similar to community and domestic watersheds and the ECA will be limited to a maximum of 25% for all identified HCV 3 polygons Protected Reserves Strategy (FSC Criterion 6.4) A protected reserves analysis report (Forsite 29) was recently completed that compared the network of currently reserved areas with FSC requirements from Table P6-1. The report found that there were two management units currently in deficit within the Upper Columbia Valley Ecosection. However, there are areas of non-timber harvesting land base within these two units that can be rationalized as reserves to meet the target because they extend the size of existing reserves and create larger reserve patches and/or enhance connectivity between patches. Therefore, for the purposes of this scenario, only the reserve designations as described in the reserve report will be implemented. Since all reserves described in the report are included in the current practice scenario, no additional reserves will be modeled for the full FSC scenario Sustainable Harvest (FSC Criterion 5.6) The base case of the last TSR (TSR3) for the Invermere TSA showed a harvest that declined to a mid-term harvest level before climbing back to a stable long-term harvest level. FSC criterion 5.6 stipulates that the rate of harvest of forest products shall not exceed levels which can be permanently sustained. In other words, the harvest must be sustainable over the long term. The TSR3 harvest forecast met this because although it declined, the initial harvest rate was lower than the long-term harvest level. However, this may not be the case for the current practice scenario as many landbase and management assumptions have changed and the harvest forecast is based solely on Canfor s Operating area in the Invermere TSA. The harvest flow for full FSC scenario will have controls implemented to ensure that the harvest flow will never exceed the long-term sustainable harvest. 3.3 FSC Riparian Management This scenario is meant to explore the components of FSC management requirements that is expected to result in the greatest change to indicators. The single largest impact in terms of reducing the area available for timber harvesting or THLB is anticipated to be the application of FSC riparian reserve and management zones. Therefore, for this scenario, only the incremental FSC riparian areas implemented in the Full FSC scenario were modeled. 3.4 No Harvest This scenario is designed to illustrate the status of the land base and SFM indicator if only natural disturbances were to occur. No changes were made to the base case model except to add natural disturbance to the timber harvesting land base (THLB) throughout the planning horizon. These disturbances were determined in the same manner as the disturbances implemented on the non-thlb. Ultimately, all land base constraints were turned off and a target area ha was disturbed annually inside the THLB (non THLB disturbance remained unchanged). 5 FSC BC Main Standards October 25, pg 67,68 6 Halleran, Will and Green,.K. 29. High Conservation Value (3) Forests Preliminary Assessment For Canfor-Radium Operating Area. Apex Geoscience Consultants Ltd. Nelson, BC. SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 1

18 4. Indicator Forecasting Methodology Numerous indicators where modeled for each scenario based on the current SFMP requirements and proposed FSC requirements. 4.1 Summary of Indicators Modeled Modeled indicators fall into two categories; Static or Dynamic. Static indicators are those that do not fluctuate within a modeled scenario (i.e. landbase definition) while dynamic indicators fluctuate within a scenario based on harvesting patterns/levels. Table 14 summarizes the indicators modeled and indicates which are static and which are dynamic. Table 14. Summary of indicators assessed. Static Category Dynamic Indicator Protected reserves and HCVFs Species at Risk and GAR Percent compliance with regen standards Percent compliance with FG standards Regen delay period Riparian Reserves Genetic Diversity Range of Natural Variability Timber Supply Coarse Woody Debris Stand Level Retention Hardwoods Stands Snags Ungulate Winter Range Visual Quality Permanent access structures ECA Condition over time Patch Size Distribution Interior Forest Condition Harvest Species Profile over time SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 11

19 4.2 Indicator Modeling Approach The following table provides a list of indicators that had the potential to be incorporated into the modeled forecasts and describes if/how they were incorporated. Table 15. Detailed Assessment of SFM indicators for Modelling Indicator Category Protected Area Reserves And Distinct Habitat Type Indicator / Measure Reference SFMP 1-1.1, And FSC 6.4.1, Genetic Diversity SFMP 1-6.1, Coarse Wood Debris SFMP And FSC Implementation Model all currently designated protected areas and sites of biological significance according to the established objectives. Old growth management area s (OGMA s) and Wildlife Habitat Area (WHA) will be reserved. Prior to modeling, (rare and uncommon ecosystems) were identified for removal from the THLB to ensure they remained in an unmanaged state. FSC: Use protected reserves report for guidance on requirements prior to modeling. The BEC units in deficit had additional areas of reserves identified but because they were in the non THLB no modeling actions were required. Document assumptions used in growth and yield generation if changes to TSR3 yield assumptions are required to reflect current practice and target variance. Otherwise, cite TSR3 growth and yield assumptions. The volume of CWD for each polygon in the THLB will be predicted relative to stand age, and ecosystem (BEC). CWD in natural stands will be estimated using conceptual models of CWD dynamics calibrated with local existing empirical data. [Same approach as in 26 forecasting project] Reporting Amount of area protected by BEC variant Area of rare/uncommon on the THLB and NTHLB Percent mature and old by BEC variant over time Percent harvested area using natural regeneration over time. CWD/ha on the THLB over time (natural and managed stands). Stand Level Retention Hardwood Stands Snags Riparian Reserves SFMP And FSC SFMP And FSC SFMP And FSC SFMP And FSC Wildlife tree retention assumptions used in TSR3 will be implemented in this analysis. A constant yield reduction of 3.5% will be applied to all yield curves. This reflects the assumption that 3.5% of the WTR requirement will be realized on the THLB, with the remainder coming from pre-existing landbase removals (riparian areas, OGMAs, and other forested netdowns). The presence of deciduous species will be forecasted over the entire THLB. A predictive model was developed to model the dynamics of deciduous abundance in natural and harvested stands based on stand age and ecosystem. Predictive curves were linked with modeling outputs. The number of large snags/ha (>2cm DBH) for each polygon in the THLB will be estimated relative to stand age and ecosystem type for natural stands using conceptual models of snag dynamics calibrated with existing empirical data from the southern interior. Snag densities in managed stands will be modeled for each analysis unit using the snag submodel of Tipsy 4.1d FRPA riparian management in the base case buffers developed during TSR modeling. FSC management represented using enhanced buffers generated during the FSC IRA project. Stand level retention levels are static within each LU/BEC in the model. A net THLB impact of 3.5% is assumed for all stands. This level exceeds the FSC stems/ha target and appears to be consistent with the RONV report. Effective area (ha) with deciduous species in the THLB over time. The percent of the land base expected to have any deciduous content over time was calculated and then multiplied by the expected percent of deciduous in the stand to get an effective area in deciduous at any time. Snags/ha on the THLB over time (natural and managed stands). Report static area (gross and net) set aside for riparian for each scenario. SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 12

20 Indicator Category Ungulate Winter Range Indicator / Measure Reference Implementation Model landscape level habitat requirements as constraints in the model as per ungulate winter range order U-4-8 for Elk, Bighorn sheep, Mule deer, White-tailed SFMP deer, Mountain goat, and Moose. Reporting For landscape level requirements, report condition of UWR areas relative to targets over planning horizon.. Species At Risk GAR Orders Range of natural Variability Patch Size Distribution Interior Forest Condition SFMP SFMP And FSC 6.3 SFMP And FSC 6.3 SFMP And FSC 6.3 SFMP SFMP Ensure that all parks, reserves, protected areas, wildlife management areas, WHA s, and rare/uncommon ecosystems are netted out of the timber harvesting land base. Model old seral targets as defined in the Kootenay Boundary Higher Level Plan by implementing spatially delineated OGMAs and MMAs Incorporate patch size targets in the Patchworks model consistent with Canfor s strategy for patch size distribution. Report areas within these categories. Area reserved as OGMA and MMA by Landscape unit and BEC variant. Patch size distribution over time. Use patch size metrics on for old seral forest conditions to estimate the amount of The area of interior forest over time. interior habitat present on the land base over time. Assume that the sum of o 1% of -4 ha old seral patches, o 5% of 4-8 ha old seral patches, o 7% of 4-25 ha old seral patches, o 8% of 8-25 ha old seral patches, o 9% 25+ ha old seral patches make up the total interior forest condition. Apply a 5% reduction in productive capacity (yield curves) to natural stand yields Document assumption. Modeling assumption prorated by the area of THLB greater than 5 m from roads. assumes 1% compliance with target. Apply a percent reduction in productive capacity (yield curves) to natural stand yields The area of natural stands converted to managed prorated to the area of THLB greater than 5 m from roads. TSR3 assumed a future stands in each period multiplied by the % reduction road reduction of 8.1%. factor. Percent reduction factor to vary by scenario. Timber Volume Flow available for harvest SFMP SFMP SFMP SFMP SFMP Build assumptions in model to reflect detrimental soil disturbance - limit to allowable levels (5-1%) so that the site in general has no net loss in productivity. Build regeneration delay into yield predictions based on TSR3 information. A delay of 1 yr planted stands and a delay of 1 yrs for naturally regenerated stands. If this needs to change for FSC because of reduced access to herbicides then it will be adjusted for the FSC scenarios. Model using the regeneration assumptions for species, density, and timelines defined in TSR3 to build yield curves Timber supply sustainability projected using a forest estate model which incorporated a full range of timber and non timber considerations. Timber supply harvest flow controlled at the DFA level (not the TSA level as is consistent with provincial policy). Predict forest sector employment levels using TSR3 multipliers and harvest levels determined for each scenario. Local/regional =.545 PY s per 1m³ Provincial =.77 PY s per 1m³ Document OAF1 and OAF2 assumptions used in yield curve development, plus impacts modeled for roads/trails/landings. A constant regeneration delay of either 1 yr or 1 yrs was assumed relative to regeneration method. Documented input assumptions for future managed yield curves. Timber supply (m 3 harvested /yr) over time for Canfor s operating area in the Invermere TSA. Employment (person years) in the forest section over time, locally, regionally, and provincially. SFM Indicator Forecasting and Modeling: Canfor Radium Division 13