Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario

Transcription

1 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario TECHNICAL SERIES

2 2001, Queen s Printer for Ontario Printed in Ontario, Canada Single copies of this publication are available at no charge from the address noted below. Bulk orders may involve charges. Ministry of Natural Resources Natural Resources Information Centre 300 Water Street Peterborough, Ontario K9J 8M5 Current publications of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and price lists, are also available from this office. Telephone inquiries about ministry programs and services should be directed to the Natural Resources Information Centre: General Inquiry Renseignements en francais FAX (705) Find the Ministry of Natural Resources on-line at: Cette publication technique n est disponsible qu en anglais.

3 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario FORWARD FORWARD A comprehensive and consistent silvicultural effectiveness monitoring program is a critical component to ensure the sustainability of Ontario s forest resources. It provides the basis for measuring, collecting, analyzing and reporting information on the renewal and state of Ontario s public forests whether they have been depleted by harvest or natural means. This information is not only needed by the people and companies managing the forest, but also by the owners of the forest the public. The Environmental Assessment Board, in their decision on the Class Environmental Assessment for Timber Management on Crown Lands in Ontario, noted the need to improve the tracking and reporting of silvicultural information (Term and Condition 96). The Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario has been prepared, in part, to address Term and Condition 96. Silvicultural effectiveness may be viewed from various perspectives: at the stand level for particular prescriptions or treatments, at the forest or management unit level for trends on particular forest units, and at the regional and provincial levels to measure program success. Analysis at each level provides answers to the basic questions: What did we intend to accomplish?, What did we actually accomplish?, and How well did we do it? (Robbins 1992). This manual addresses these questions by describing the objectives, standards and methodologies, compilation and reporting, and analysis and evaluation of silvicultural effectiveness at each level. Ontario s silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system begins with setting silvicultural objectives. The objectives are determined in the forest management planning process by establishing the desired outcome of silviculture activities (desired future forest condition) and the planned method of meeting that outcome (silviculture treatment package). The objectives must include minimum regeneration standards and management standards which are required to assess the success and effectiveness of the silvicultural activities. An essential component of the silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system is the ability to store and retrieve the required information. There are minimum information requirements for data collection, reporting and analysis to assess silvicultural effectiveness. The basic information that satisfies these needs includes: original stand number and inventory year, Ontario Base Map (OBM) number, actual original forest condition, development information (e.g., yield curves), desired future forest condition, year of depletion, year of assessment, planned treatment package, actual treatment package, actual forest unit, new forest resources inventory (FRI) description, and new stand number. It is important to note that the minimum information requirements needed to monitor silvicultural effectiveness should already be collected, recorded and, in some cases, reported for other purposes. As identified in the Forest Management Planning Manual and the Forest Information Manual, the forest licensee is responsible for providing the required information to the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR). The MNR does not mandate the use of specific methodologies for silvicultural effectiveness monitoring. However, the Silvicultural Treatment, Assessment and Reporting System and the Free Growing Regeneration Assessment methodologies will be used by MNR to substantiate their spot checks and by independent forest auditors to conduct their field assessments of regeneration. Reporting the results of silvicultural effectiveness monitoring serves two main purposes: to ensure that the data and associated analysis and results are recorded and available to those requiring them (now and in the future); and to fulfil legal requirements to report publicly. Reporting of ongoing survey and assessment results is required as part of the annual report for each management unit. These reports must be available to the public upon request. These reports are rolled up to produce the provincial Annual Report on Forest Management, which is tabled in the legislature, published and also made available to the public. A summary of the management unit report statistics are also provided annually to the federal government for inclusion in The Compendium of Canadian Forestry Statistics and The State of Canada s Forests. I

4 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario FORWARD Longer-term trends for each management unit are summarized, compared and reported at the end of each forest management plan term in the Report of Past Forest Operations. The results of these reports are rolled up to the provincial level to contribute to Ontario s State of the Forest Report once every five years. Regeneration statistics are also used to report on criteria and indicators used to determine forest sustainability in provincial and national reports. Ontario s silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system data standards, collection and reporting are fundamental for providing analysis and evaluation of silvicultural effectiveness at various scales. At the stand level, the analysis must answer site specific questions for the forest manager, e.g., was a particular treatment successful on a certain stand. The forest manager will also use the silvicultural effectiveness monitoring data to evaluate the success or failure of past management decisions, to compare the results of alternative management strategies, to compare results between forests, and to compare their results with others. Analysis and evaluation at the site region through to the provincial, national and international levels also rely upon this information. Ontario is committed to ensuring that all areas within the forested landbase capable of growing productive forests are regenerated after disturbance to identified management targets within a reasonable period of time. This commitment is reflected from the stand level evaluation of forest management practices through to the national and international evaluation of forest sustainability. Future developments in changes to forest strategies and in information technology will result in changes to the types of variables that will be monitored as well as monitoring techniques, data recording, and analysis and storage. Ontario s silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system will be revised as these changes and revisions to the forest management planning process are made. II

5 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION Purpose of Manual What is Monitoring? Importance of a Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring System Structure of the Manual Definitions and Concepts Legislative and Policy Basis Consideration of the Statement of Environmental Values SILVICULTURAL OBJECTIVE SETTING The Forest Management Planning Process Silvicultural Ground Rules Annual Work Schedules Forest Operations Prescriptions Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Records Phase-in Period SILVICULTURAL STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY Management Principles Ecological Basis for Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Regeneration and Management Standards Additional Minimum Management Standards for Selection System Forest Resource Inventory Information Requirements Assessment Methodologies Dispute Resolution COMPILATION AND REPORTING Introduction Overview Management Unit Annual Reports Management Unit Five Year Reports (Report of Past Forest Operations) Provincial Annual Reports Provincial Five Year Reports III

6 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.6 National Annual Reporting National Five Year Reporting ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION Introduction Stand and Forest Unit Analysis and Evaluation Management Unit Analysis and Evaluation Site Region Analysis and Evaluation Provincial, National and International Analysis and Evaluation FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS IN SILVICULTURAL EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING REFERENCES APPENDIX A LEGISLATION AND POLICIES RELATED TO SILVICULTURAL EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING Environmental Assessment Terms and Conditions Appendix 18: Annual Report (Forest Management Unit) Appendix 8: Report of Past Forest Operations Crown Forest Sustainability Act Licences Policies APPENDIX B EXAMPLES OF REPORTING AND ANALYZING SILVICULTURAL EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING Introduction Assessment Results from 1999/2000: Assessment Results from 2000/2001: Clearcut System Results Shelterwood System Results Selection System Results Report of Past Forest Operations Interpretation of Results Applications of Results IV

7 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures Figure 1. Changes to a forest occur within forest stands Figure 2. Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Components within the Forest Management Planning System: Stand and Management Unit Level Figure 3. Stand-level regeneration success Figure B-1. Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring and Reporting Process Figure B-2. Silvicultural Effectiveness Decision Process List of Tables Table 1. Minimum information required to track silvicultural effectiveness Table 2. Comparison of survey results to the 40% minimum standard for acceptable species Table B-1. Summary of Assessment Results: Clearcut System Assessed 1999/ Table B-2. Example of reporting clearcut system assessment results (Table B-1) in Annual Report Tables AR-7 and AR Table B-3. Summary of Assessment Results: Clearcut System Results Assessed 2000/ Table B-4. Examples of reporting clearcut system assessment results (Table B-3) in Annual Report Tables AR-7 and AR Table B-5. Summary of Assessment Results: Shelterwood System Assessed 2000/ Table B-6. Example of reporting shelterwood system assessment results (Table B-5) in Annual Report Tables AR-7 and AR Table B-7. Summary of Assessment Results: Selection System Assessed 2000/ Table B-8. Example of reporting selection system assessment results (Table B-7) in Annual Report Tables AR-7 and AR Table B-9. Table RPFO-8 for the Ideal Management Unit Table B-10. Table RPFO-9 for the Ideal Management Unit Table B-11. Summarized assessment results for the Ideal Management Unit Table B-12. Summary of original Forest Units and silvicultural treatment packages for the Ideal Management Unit V

8

9 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario INTRODUCTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of Manual A comprehensive and consistent silvicultural effectiveness monitoring program is a critical component to ensure the sustainability of Ontario s forest resources. It provides the basis for measuring, collecting, analyzing and reporting information on the renewal and state of Ontario s public forests whether they have been depleted by harvest or natural means. This information is needed not only by the people and companies managing the forest, but also by the owners of the forest the public. The purpose of this manual is to describe Ontario s Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring program, providing consistency in how this necessary information will be treated and reported. Consistent definitions and standards ensure that the results from forest management activities on similar sites and forest conditions are comparable from stand to stand and management unit to management unit across the province. For many years, information on the effectiveness of silvicultural treatments was retained locally and used by forest managers to improve their forest management practices. This information, however, was not always exchanged between management units nor was it reported beyond the forest level. The Environmental Assessment Board, in their decision on the Class Environmental Assessment for Timber Management on Crown Lands in Ontario (Timber EA), identified many areas of silvicultural information assessment, recording and reporting that needed improvement (EA Board 1994, Term and Condition 96). Many of these needs were resolved during the creation of the Forest Management Planning Manual (FMPM) (MNR 1996) and are being addressed through the implementation of the planning process. The Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario highlights those aspects of the current forest management planning process that relate to silvicultural effectiveness monitoring, explains the link between those individual components. It generally describes Ontario s silvicultural effectiveness monitoring program, comprised of objective setting (Section 2), standards and assessment methodology (Section 3), compilation and reporting (Section 4) and analysis and evaluation (Section 5). 1.2 What is Monitoring? Monitoring can generally be described as observing, recording or detecting an operation or condition. Environmental monitoring is the measurement of characteristics over an extended period of time to determine status or trends in some aspect of environmental quality (Sutter, 1993). There are three types of monitoring programs described in the Forest Operations and Silviculture Manual (FOSM) (MNR 1995a) that are used during normal forestry operations in Ontario, namely compliance monitoring, effects monitoring and effectiveness monitoring 1. Compliance monitoring is used to determine whether an operator conforms to the approved plan or permit. For example, one could check to determine if the harvest operator is maintaining a 30 metre reserve beside a specific value, as prescribed in the applicable forest management plan (FMP). This monitoring activity involves the collection of data through observation and measurement as operations progress. Effects monitoring is used to determine how a particular treatment, group of treatments or operation interacts with, or affects, other organisms or ecological processes. Road construction and water crossings, for example, are activities that must be monitored for their effects on other resources, such as water quality and fish habitat. 1. Exception monitoring is not a requirement of normal forest operations, but rather a requirement when operations used differ from those listed in a forest management guideline or a silvicultural guide. Exception monitoring programs are designed to answer specific questions and to address specific situations or forest operations. Further details are provided on page A-133 of the Forest Management Planning Manual (MNR 1996). 1

10 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario INTRODUCTION Effectiveness monitoring is used to determine if management activities are producing the expected results. On Ontario s Crown forests, it must be ensured that the stated desired effects given in an approved FMP are occurring. For example, effectiveness monitoring enables the forester to determine whether the current forest units are being changed to the desired forest units in the proportion described in the FMP. It also permits the foresters (from both the forest industry and the MNR) to examine whether certain treatments are meeting expectations and, if they are not, to investigate why they were not as successful as expected and make appropriate modifications in the future. In short, silvicultural effectiveness monitoring entails data collection and recording, reporting, trend analysis and the examination of reasons behind the trends. 1.3 Importance of a Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring System Information collected consistently throughout the province provides the local forest manager with a larger and more reliable database for analytical purposes than that which would otherwise be available. Silvicultural effectiveness data also provide the most elemental information from which to assess and report on forest sustainability at the management unit and provincial level, knowledge that is of continual interest to the public, forest companies and industry investors. Silvicultural effectiveness may be viewed from various perspectives: at the stand level for particular prescriptions or treatments, at the forest or management unit level for trends on particular forest units, and at the regional and provincial levels to measure program success. Analysis at each level provides answers to the basic questions: What did we intend to accomplish? What did we actually accomplish? How well did we do it? (Robbins 1992) By contrast, a compliance monitoring system focuses only on the first two questions, and in a much simplified manner: Did we do what we said we would? At the management unit (MU) level, the ultimate goal is to fulfill the activities outlined in the FMP and to meet the desired future forest condition. At the eco-regional and provincial levels, the goal is to preserve the continuity of healthy, sustainable forest ecosystems. A silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system can contribute to the successful attainment of these goals. A functional silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system also provides opportunities for continual improvement of other products and activities such as silvicultural prescriptions and treatments, guidelines and fiscal commitments at the various levels. Potential uses of a silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system include: setting or revising silvicultural targets; strategic and operational planning; work planning and implementation; reviewing and evaluating prescriptions and techniques; updating forest inventories; modeling; evaluating effectiveness of actions; determining the economics of silvicultural treatments; identifying areas or treatments requiring further research or development; revising forest management guidelines, including silvicultural guides; monitoring activities in relation to targets including budgets; monitoring changes in stand compositions; monitoring sustainability; historical reporting and trend analysis. While the purpose of this manual relates primarily to the goals of timber production and the work of forest managers, data gathered from this silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system may also be used by other professionals to evaluate other aspects of the ecological function of the forest (such as wildlife habitat). Additional information on stand composition, structure and ecological function can be analyzed based on data collected from the living and dead overstory (e.g., a count of live and dead cavity trees or diameter distribution of trees). 2

11 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario INTRODUCTION Further discussion of how the results obtained from silvicultural effectiveness monitoring are used as part of the forest management planning process at the stand, management unit, eco-regional and provincial levels is provided in Section Structure of the Manual This manual is organized into separate sections that follow the various steps involved in any form of monitoring system: Section 2 Silvicultural Objective Setting identification of desired outcome identification of proposed activities documentation of actual activities phase-in of report Section 3 Silvicultural Standards and Assessment Methodology standards for determining success assessment methodologies Section 4 Compilation and Reporting reporting of results Section 5 Analysis and Evaluation analysis and evaluation of results Section 6 Future Developments in Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring future developments in monitoring Each section will, where appropriate, discuss silvicultural effectiveness monitoring at the stand, management unit, eco-regional and provincial levels. Similarly, specific requirements for the three silvicultural systems commonly used in Ontario s three main forest regions will be highlighted throughout the manual. 1.5 Definitions and Concepts All users of this manual must have the same understanding of the various terms and concepts used. The following definitions and descriptions will assist with the proper implementation of this manual. Definitions for other commonly used forestry terms (e.g., stocking, density) are found in the Forest Management Planning Manual (MNR 1996). Silvicultural Effectiveness During the Timber EA hearings silvicultural effectiveness was defined as achieving the desired management objectives at the lowest possible cost consistent with sound environmental practices. The EA Board further explained, It is important to use consistent measures of success, consistent definitions of silviculture effectiveness to determine whether objectives are being achieved. (EA Board 1994). Since the Timber EA hearings, further refinements have led to the current definition: silvicultural effectiveness is the comparison of how the results of a prescription or treatment compare with: a) the targeted results; b) the results and costs of other prescriptions on similar sites; and c) silvicultural standards or target measures. While the aspect of cost is not analyzed or reported provincially, it will be of interest to individual forest companies. Free-to-Grow The FMPM defines free-to-grow (FTG) or free-growing as: stands that meet stocking, height, and/or height growth rate as specified in the ground rules and are judged to be [healthy and] essentially free from competing vegetation (MNR 1996). The terms FTG and free-growing are hereafter both encompassed by the term FTG. The FTG concept is accepted provincially as the critical point in determining regeneration success for the clearcut silvicultural system. Attaining the FTG standard permits the regenerating forest to be re-entered into the inventory and used in subsequent allowable harvest calculations. It provides the point at which the forest manager can determine how well the forest is growing, how well the silvicultural prescription has worked and whether the desired future forest condition will likely be reached. 3

12 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario INTRODUCTION For stands managed using the uniform shelterwood system, the new stand description would be given after the final removal cut, and the overstory description of a forest managed under the selection system is updated as it changes over time. Specific regeneration and management standards, as defined below, are used to measure the effectiveness of treatments when using these two silvicultural systems. Regeneration Standards Regeneration standards are criteria used for determining the status of regenerating stands under the clearcut and shelterwood silvicultural systems. They must be consistent with the associated desired future forest condition and silvicultural treatment package (MNR 1996). The regeneration standards are set to measure whether a stand is regenerating successfully and in a manner to meet the desired future forest condition. Management Standards Management standards are the criteria used for determining the status of managed forest stands using the clearcut and shelterwood systems, and also the selection silvicultural system. As with regeneration standards, management standards must be consistent with the associated desired future forest condition and treatment package. Management standards include the same criteria as regeneration standards, along with additional criteria such as a measure of stand structure, wildlife habitat, etc. Regeneration Success A developing stand may be viewed as a regeneration success when regeneration meets all the standards of an SGR other than the one originally associated with that stand. This information is recorded in Annual Report Table AR-9. If the standards are not met, and the treatments are deemed to be a failure, the forest manager will determine whether retreatment is required, analyze why the stand did not respond to the treatment(s) as expected, and use this information to improve future prescriptions for, and treatments on, similar stands. Target Species These are the tree species (and their relative proportions) identified in the SGR that are required to be present in order to meet the desired future forest condition. They are ecologically suited to the stand, their characteristics are consistent with the management objectives for the stand and management activities are aimed at establishing these species. Acceptable Species These are the tree species that can be present for purposes of measuring silvicultural effectiveness as long as they are compatible with the ecosystem, the target species and the attainment of the management objectives and the desired future forest condition. Silvicultural Success Regeneration is considered to be a silvicultural success when all the standards contained in the silvicultural ground rule (SGR) applied to that stand have been met. This information is recorded in Annual Report Table AR-7. Silvicultural ground rules contain standards for target species, acceptable species, future forest condition and may contain management standards for wildlife habitat or partial harvest silvicultural systems. If the standards are not met, and the treatments are deemed to be a failure, the forest manager will determine whether retreatment is required, analyze why the stand did not respond to the treatment(s) as expected, and use this information to improve future prescriptions for, and treatments on, similar stands. 4

13 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario INTRODUCTION 1.6 Legislative and Policy Basis Two of the manuals (the Forest Information Manual (FIM) and the FOSM) that are regulated by the Crown Forest Sustainability Act (CFSA) refer to the Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario. This manual has been completed in accordance with the regulated manuals and other documents that provide legal direction. These include the EA Board s decision on the Timber EA; the CFSA itself; and various licences issued under the CFSA. In addition, direction is found in strategic policies, such as the Policy Framework for Sustainable Forests. Relevant details of these other documents are included in Appendix A. These documents should be reviewed for a complete understanding of how silvicultural effectiveness monitoring fits within the larger sustainable forest management context. 1.7 Consideration of the Statement of Environmental Values The MNR is responsible for managing Ontario s natural resources in accordance with the statutes it administers. In 1994, the MNR finalized its Statement of Environmental Values (SEV) under the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR). The MNR s SEV describes how the purposes of the EBR are to be considered whenever decisions that might significantly affect the environment are made by the MNR. The SEV is based on the goals and objectives of the MNR as set out in the strategic documents Direction 90s and Direction 90s Moving Ahead During the development of the Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario, the MNR has considered Direction 90s, Direction 90s Moving Ahead 1995, Beyond 2000 and the SEV. The directions set out in those documents are reflected in this manual which furthers the objectives of managing Ontario s resources on a sustainable basis. 5

14 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario OBJECTIVE SETTING 2.0 SILVICULTURAL OBJECTIVE SETTING 2.1 The Forest Management Planning Process 2 The forest management planning process provides the opportunity to address the three questions posed by Robbins in The answers to the first two, What did we intend to accomplish? and What did we actually accomplish?, are documented in: the desired outcome of silvicultural activities (i.e. the desired future forest condition); the planned method of reaching that outcome (i.e. the silvicultural treatment package); the standards that will be used to assess success (i.e. regeneration or management standards); and the actual treatments that are conducted (i.e. the annual work schedule (AWS) and Annual Report). These four components are located in the SGRs, the AWSs, and the Annual Reports. In this manual, the first two components are discussed in Sections 2.2 to 2.4; Section 3.0 deals with the third component; and Annual Reports are discussed in Section 4.0. While silvicultural objectives are set, measured and assessed at the stand-level, it is necessary to consider and analyze the overall effectiveness at the forest-level as well. The results of these stand- and forest-level analyses answer the third question posed by Robbins How well did we do it? This is discussed more fully in Section 5.0. Forest management plans that came into effect prior to 1998 may not include all four components, at least not exactly as described above. Further references to forest management planning requirements, tables and reports will use the current planning terminology (e.g., Table FMP-10); the reader is expected to understand that similar or equivalent information (e.g., Table 4-11) can also be found in older-style plans. Direction on how to apply this manual to areas harvested under these older style plans is provided in Sections 2.6 and 4.0. The key element for initiating a successful silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system is the ability to store and retrieve the four components described in the first paragraph in order to provide a geo-referenced string of information (i.e. original forest unit and condition, desired forest unit and condition, year of depletion, year of assessment, planned treatment package, actual treatment package, etc.). This element is known as a forest operations prescription (FOP), and is described in more detail later in this section. When combined with the reporting of results through Annual Reports and the Report of Past Forest Operations (RPFO), the minimum requirements of a silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system have been met. The list of information that must be recorded and reported is itemized in Sections 2.5 and 4.0 of this manual. The FIM explains who is responsible for collecting, storing, retrieving and transferring this information, and provides the requirements for data transfer. 2.2 Silvicultural Ground Rules The SGRs are found in Table FMP-10 of an FMP. They are organized by forest unit (a grouping of stands with similar composition, development pattern and silvicultural system) and ecosite (site type) and describe what is planned to occur for that forest unit. They provide the opportunity for documenting the first three portions of the silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system, i.e. the desired outcome, the planned activities and the standards. Each SGR describes the current forest condition, the desired future forest condition and the series of harvest, renewal and tending treatments that the forest manager expects to follow in order to attain the desired outcome. It also includes the standards that must be met for a stand to be considered successfully regenerated or man- 2. The forest management planning process is described in its entirety in the FMPM. Some explanation of the portions that are relevant to silvicultural effectiveness monitoring will be provided in this section and elsewhere in the manual (see Section 4.0). For further details refer to the FMPM. 6

15 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario OBJECTIVE SETTING aged, and developing in a way that will permit it to attain the desired forest condition. These standards are described fully in Section 3.0 of this manual. 2.3 Annual Work Schedules The AWS describes where and what forest management operations will be conducted in any given year. The AWS documents the activities to be conducted on a specific location, and is the fourth component of the silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system. The AWS contains a schedule of areas that will be inspected or surveyed during the year to determine their status in meeting the regeneration or management standards (i.e., Table AWS-6). 2.4 Forest Operations Prescriptions As noted earlier, the FOP is the vehicle that ties together the objectives, activities and results for a particular location and site. It is the key building block for the foundation of the silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system. An FOP is a site specific, integrated set of harvest, renewal and maintenance activities that is developed before any operations can commence in a particular stand. The FOP for a particular stand is the accumulation of the original SGR for the stand, the portions of the AWSs that relate to the stand (including any in-year changes that are appended to the AWS) and the signature of a Registered Professional Forester (R.P.F.) verifying the appropriateness of the treatments. Together, these documents (along with the Annual Reports) describe the desired outcome for the stand, the activities that were originally planned, what standards are or were to be met and what was actually implemented on the ground. Although these documents may be stored in different locations and formats, both paper and electronic, to facilitate tracking of this information they must be retrievable as a geo-referenced record. Prior to the implementation of the SGR, the forest manager must confirm that the actual conditions on the ground are the same as those anticipated during the preparation of the FMP and the SGR. For example, he or she would ensure that the stand is the same ecosite and has the same composition as anticipated, the treatment(s) identified for the stand is appropriate for the site and current stand conditions, there are no previously unidentified non-timber values present, etc. As part of the AWS, this confirmation is documented in the form of a statement signed by an R.P.F. (or, where the treatment is outside of the normal purview of a forester, another suitably qualified professional such as a wildlife biologist, if the treatment pertains primarily to wildlife habitat). 2.5 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Records Table 1 identifies the information that must be collected as part of the silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system, and indicates the location where it is recorded for future reference and retrieval. It is important to note that the minimum information requirements needed to monitor silvicultural effectiveness should already be collected, recorded and, in some cases, reported for other purposes. The exact format and level of detail for which each of these must be recorded are described in the FMPM and in the FIM. These items and records represent the basic level of information required to satisfy the MNRs silvicultural effectiveness monitoring system. More comprehensive procedures (such as crop planning and economic analyses) and more detailed information or FOPs may be deemed appropriate by the forest manager, and may provide additional background documentation which will facilitate the reporting requirements outlined in Section

16 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario OBJECTIVE SETTING Table 1: Minimum information required to track silvicultural effectiveness. Information to be Recorded Other Purpose Location Original FRI Stand Number & inventory year OBM Number Actual Original Forest Condition (including forest unit & FEC site type or ecosite) Development Information (e.g. yield curves) Desired Future Forest Condition (including forest unit) Year of Depletion Year of Assessment Planned Treatment Package Actual Treatment Package (including year of treatment) Actual Forest Unit New FRI Description (including B&S, map) New Stand Number FOP requirement FOP requirement FOP requirement Annual Reporting FOP requirement FOP requirement Annual Reporting FOP requirement Annual Reporting Annual Reporting FOP requirement FOP requirement Annual Reporting Annual Reporting needed for return to inventory needed for return to inventory FMP stand listing; stewardship, planning inventories FMP stand listing; stewardship, planning inventories SGR AR 7, 8, 9 SGR SGR AR-8 AWS AR-9 AR-7 SGR AWS AR-6 AR Phase-in Period The FMPM was regulated in the fall of 1996, and was implemented in its entirety for the first time with the FMPs that commenced on April 1, Partial implementation was required for the 1996 and 1997 plans. The completion of FOPs became a legal requirement on April 1, Therefore, information has been recorded in various forms and formats over recent years. Forest managers must retain and develop linkages for information related to SGRs, regeneration standards/management standards, FOPs, silvicultural treatments, and forest units/working groups from previous FMPs for the purpose of tracking silvicultural effectiveness. All management units will be able to fully apply the direction described in this manual to all areas harvested after April 1, 2002 (i.e., with the commencement of the 2002 FMPs). By that date, all management units will be implementing FMPs written following the FMPM. Even then, silvicultural treatments on areas harvested under plans with a commencement date prior to April 1, 1998 will be based on SGRs that were written as much as 15 (and possibly 20) years previously (e.g., a final herbicide treatment to release crop trees prior to the FTG declaration). Such ground rules will relate to working groups, rather than forest units, as was the practice at the time. In other cases, the forest unit descriptions may have changed over time, complicating year to year comparisons. Attempts must be made to accommodate these anomalies, to approximate equivalencies between working groups and forest units, and to compare and assess the effectiveness of similar treatments on similar stands. Methods to summarize this information are described in further detail in Sections 4.3 and

17 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT 3.0 SILVICULTURAL STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3.1 Management Principles The Forest Operations and Silviculture Manual states: the key to good management is common-sense and practical application of the principles contained in the guidelines. Therefore, rather than prescribing specific methodologies to assess silvicultural effectiveness, this manual describes the minimum requirements for data collection, reporting and analysis. Application of these requirements ensures that data are adequate to allow the forest manager to: i) specify problems, monitor trends and develop corrective actions; ii) determine whether the standards in the SGRs, found in Table FMP 10 of an FMP have been met; iii) determine the growth curve on which the stand is tracking (e.g., intensive, extensive); and iv) identify the stand for re-introduction to the inventory and provide an inventory update. 3.2 Ecological Basis for Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Ecosystems are complex and not fully understood. One simple way of looking at ecosystems is to assume that the structure and composition of an ecosystem reflects some of the underlying ecological processes and functions of that ecosystem. To monitor the impacts of forestry practices on ecosystem sustainability, a number of key components of an ecosystem, called indicators of sustainability, need to be measured on an ongoing basis. Silvicultural effectiveness monitoring is one component of a suite of indicators that are used to measure forest sustainability. Silvicultural effectiveness monitoring measures the changes in important components of forest composition and structure (Figure 1). It tracks the changes in tree composition, height, age, and the distribution of regeneration. Silvicultural effectiveness monitoring also tracks the changes in the structure and composition of the overstory when partial cutting systems are used. Figure 1: Changes to a forest occur within forest stands. Changes in composition and structure are used to predict and monitor changes in forest processes and function such as habitat. Stand 1 Stand 2 Stand 3 Forest The composition and structure of individual stands integrate with other components of a landscape to form the composition and structure of a forest. A system that monitors the changes in stand vegetation and structure can be used to: complement and update forest inventories monitor changes in wildlife habitat measure changes in landscape diversity verify predictive models used in planning timber supply, habitat supply and landscape diversity. 9

18 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT 3.3 Regeneration and Management Standards One objective of silvicultural effectiveness monitoring is to determine whether the objectives that have been specified for that area have been met. The minimum objectives for a particular stand will be described in the SGRs in Table FMP-10 in an FMP. Since there is a great diversity of stands and values in Ontario, additional objectives may be described. In these cases additional standards may also have to be described, monitored and reported. The minimum regeneration standards for clearcut and shelterwood systems and the management standards for the selection system are determined as part of the SGRs at the time of FMP preparation and must include: target tree species (desired or crop) and acceptable tree species based on ecological condition and management objectives; minimum height of target and acceptable tree species; time frame, expressed either as the prescribed maximum number of years to reach FTG for evenaged systems or the number of growing seasons elapsed since the last disturbance before the survey was conducted for unevenaged systems; stocking and/or density per hectare for target and acceptable species free from competing vegetation (define minimum/maximum/target); and survey methodologies (e.g. how stocking is determined) as a footnote to Table FMP Additional Minimum Management Standards for the Selection System These standards encompass the regeneration standard requirements noted above as well as the following: stand structure (diameter distribution, i.e., basal area by diameter class; see Appendix B for an example) quality of residuals (basal area/hectare of acceptable growing stock (AGS) and unacceptable growing stock (UGS)). Regardless of the silvicultural system used, the appropriate data must be collected and analyzed in order to assess whether a particular area has met the regeneration objectives. The minimum data requirements are reflected in the regeneration and management standards noted above, which ensure the forest manager has the ability to assess current stand and site conditions and also the ability to track stand development over time toward the desired future forest condition. Some examples of additional management standards that may be required are the number of live cavity trees, number of seed trees, number of veteran trees or amount of major logging damage to residual trees or established regeneration on the site. The data is used to predict long term results by projecting future stand and forest development through computer modeling. The data from the monitoring program allows forest managers to ascertain if the stands or forest are developing as anticipated, and whether the actual and expected results are the same. The impacts of these differences are assessed in relation to the forest management planning process. The details of silviculture effectiveness data reporting and analysis are presented in Sections 4.0 and 5.0. In circumstances where the standards of the SGR have not been met, the information collected through silvicultural effectiveness monitoring allows the forest manager to determine follow-up treatments including re-treatment or vegetation management. The forest manager may also accept the resultant stand and reclassify it to another forest unit, but it is important that this decision be recorded and tracked. The impact of the future forest condition on the forest must also be analyzed depending on how common, extensive or severe the changes. 10

19 Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Manual for Ontario STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT 3.4 Forest Resource Inventory Information Requirements If the SGR regeneration and management standards have been met, the stand may be re-entered into the forest resources inventory. The silvicultural effectiveness monitoring data also provides the forest manager with the information needed to update the forest inventory. Updates to FRIs for all silvicultural systems must include, but are not limited to: species composition and working group height age (year of origin) stocking. There are additional information requirements for stands managed under the selection and shelterwood silvicultural systems. For the selection system, the FRI description requires additional information on: stand structure(ags and UGS basal area and basal area distribution by diameter size class). For the shelterwood system the additional requirements include the following data for both the overstory and understory: stocking age (year of origin) height species composition and working group. All the requirements of the FRI are detailed in the FIM. 3.5 Assessment Methodologies Three categories of surveys to assess regeneration are described in the Regeneration Survey Manual for Ontario (MNR 1981): stocking assessment (fifth year and FTG), plantation survival assessment, and seeding assessment. All of these were required to be conducted with the objective of providing meaningful information on the state of forest regeneration. Changes in forest management and planning responsibilities have resulted in all but the FTG surveys being optional, although many forest companies continue to include these surveys as part of their forest management activities. Free-to-grow is the term used to describe stands that meet the regeneration or management standards. Assessment methodologies that are used to determine FTG are referred to as either intensive or extensive. Extensive methodologies are generally used where there are obvious successes or failures or to zero-in on problem areas requiring more intensive assessment. Intensive methods are intended for stands where the status of regeneration is uncertain or specific quantitative data is required to determine the silvicultural effectiveness of operational treatments. Regardless of the methodology, intensive or extensive, the minimum data must be collected and reported in order to provide an assessment of whether the area is FTG or not and to forecast stand development. Refinements to models and improvements to forest management decisions depend on accurate quantifiable information characterizing the regenerating forest. Mandatory use of specific assessment methodologies is not required. Two methodologies have been developed and the documentation will be finalized upon the completion of field testing. Brief descriptions of these two methodologies follow. The Silviculture Treatment, Assessment and Reporting System (STARS) is a computer-based data collection and analysis system designed to simplify silvicultural effectiveness monitoring. This system is appropriate for use in all silvicultural systems, providing both stocking and density data for all forest types found in Ontario. 11