Species Selection and Stocking: landscape-scale approach to promote adaptability and self-organization

Transcription

1 Species Selection and Stocking: landscape-scale approach to promote adaptability and self-organization Dave Coates Ministry of Natural Resource Operations Smithers, BC and Ben Heemskerk, Allen Banner, Phil LePage, Erin Hall 1

2 My Experiences Ecological classification program - wow, learned so much, still effects my thinking Clearcuts about 10 years, all about plantation management Retention issues - more to forest ecology/management than planting trees Stand dynamics - out of clearcuts into the forest = partial cutting, species interactions, complex stands Mountain pine beetle and secondary structure depression, new insights, still big issues Forests as complex adaptive systems perplexing, mind bending, tremendous potential to improve practice

3 Forests Especially but also economies and communities Global change with numerous direct and indirect impacts Increased variability Uncertainty is the rule rather than the exception Foresters must strive to maintain open as many options as possible Management emphasis on adaptability and productivity

4 Forests as Complex Adaptive Systems More than choosing or modifying traditional tools or choosing different silvicultural systems. Will require new: Viewpoints (need to think differently) Decision criteria (different temporal and spatial scales) Practices (designed to influence adaptive capacity over the long-term, e.g., functional traits, diversity, interactions) Models (uncertainty, non-linear responses) Adaptability and self-organization are good concepts for managing forests as complex adaptive systems We want our managed stands to adapt or self-organize after unexpected disturbances or changes and to continue to provide desired goods and services. Increase ecosystem adaptability and promote desirable outcomes 4

5 Adaptability Dothistroma damaged lodgepole pine plantation 5

6 Moving Forward The efficiency paradigm and the notions of homogeneity and stability as a basis for management presents many risks that should no longer be ignored Viewing forests as complex adaptive systems is the logical next step in our changing view of forest dynamics and the evolution of silvicultural practices. Silvicultural practices should aim to increase resistance to change, promote resilience to change, and facilitate the forest s ability to prepare (or adapt) for changing conditions Adaptability is a general criteria for evaluating the success of policy goals in forests managed as complex adaptive systems 6

7 The ICHmc2 Pilot Part of the Tree Species Selection Project, Landscape Level Species Strategy Shirley Mah, Kevin Astridge and many others Purpose of the pilot Test the data gathering and analysis process required to determine the current species composition and variation across the managed landscape To examine the feasibility of determining success at the landscape scale rather than the stand scale To propose a system that allows greater flexibility in species composition and density at the individual stand scale 7

8 ICHmc2 Pilot Data Sources RESULTS Data Used to determine original management intent Silviculture and inventory labels Vegetation Resource Inventory (VRI) Data Natural and managed stands by broad age classes 0-60 years, years, and older than 140 years BEC plot data tree species data from 236 mature and old BEC plots Ecosystem Recovery Data Data from 123 plots established by our research group Young, mature and old stands 8

9 Species proportion in natural yr old stands in the landscape Western hemlock 26.9 Western redcedar 26.1 Hybrid spruce 10.4 Lodgepole pine 10.4 True firs (Bl, Ba) 6.8 Paper birch 11.7 Trembling aspen 6.4 Black cottonwood 1.3 9

10 10

11 Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Proportion mode mean % lower % upper

12 Plantations What level of diversity and variability exists in our managed forests? Two species, spruce and pine have dominated planting programs = management intent Other species such as redcedar, hemlock, subalpine fir and amabilis fir have been planted but in far less numbers Broadleaved species have been actively discouraged although they are allowed in current default stocking standards Are managed stands with the same management intent highly uniform or diverse? How different are units with different management intent? How similar are managed stands to natural stands? 12

13 13

14 Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Proportion Mean sph % lower % upper

15 Adaptability management approach Ecosystem characteristics Management objective C A Adaptability management objective Silvicultural interventions TIME 15 Modified from Puettmann et al. 2009

16 Distribution of Species in Landscape Spruce Plantations - Inventory label - ICHmc Density Probability Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Stems per hectare Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Proportion Mean density % lower % upper

17 Distribution of Species in the Landscape Pine Plantations - Inventory label - ICHmc2 Density Probability Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Stems per hectare Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Proportion Mean density % lower % upper

18 Distribution of Species in the Landscape Pl-Sx Plantations - Inventory label - ICHmc2 Density Probability Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Stems per hectare Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Proportion Mean density % lower % upper

19 Distribution of Species in the Landscape All Plantations - Inventory label - ICHmc2 Density Probability Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Stems per hectare Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Proportion Mean density % lower % upper

20 Distribution of Species in the Landscape Ecosystem Recovery Plots - ICHmc2 (0 to 40 years) Density Probability Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Stems per hectare Hemlock Spruce Pine Cedar Balsam Aspen Birch Cottonwood Proportion Mean density % lower % upper

21 Tree Species Composition in Managed Stands Spruce and pine dominate, remainder natural regeneration diversity in these managed stands largely a result of natural ingress from surrounding natural stands Cedar and subalpine fir are poorly represented in the managed stands hemlock at 13-20% in all conditions We can use this approach to set specific landscape objectives and monitor success over time 21

22 Landscape Species Selection and Stocking Standards Provide for a wider range of stand conditions Encourage natural regeneration Encourage species mixtures Reduce management efforts required to bring every stand up to a single uniform standard Foresters manage for a specific distribution with a known mean and pre-planned variability Provides increased flexibility for foresters to use a wider variety of treatments 22