CUMULATIVE HYDROLOGIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE INFESTED STANDS AND PROPOSED RETENTION PLAN

Transcription

1 POWERS CREEK COMMUNITY WATERSHED CUMULATIVE HYDROLOGIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE INFESTED STANDS AND PROPOSED RETENTION PLAN PREPARED FOR BY JANUARY 2008

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ASSESSMENT CURRENT WATERSHED CONDITION FIELD INSPECTIONS HYDROLOGIC IMPACT OF LOSS OF MATURE LODGEPOLE PINE HYDROLOGIC IMPACTS OF PROPOSED RETENTION PLAN CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS /26106/January 2008 Page i of i

3 POWERS CREEK COMMUNITY WATERSHED CUMULATIVE HYDROLOGIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE INFESTED STANDS AND PROPOSED RETENTION PLAN 1. INTRODUCTION This report s been prepared for Tolko Industries Limited (Tolko) to update the hydrologic conditions for the two sub-basins in the watershed within TFL 49. This report will address the s and assess the potential hydrologic impacts of the loss of forest cover as a result of the expansion of the mountain pine beetle as input to the development of mountain pine beetle salvage plans. The report also provides summary comments regarding the proposed retention plans. This report only addresses the North Powers and West Powers Creek sub-basins tt are within TFL 49 tt are managed by Tolko. The remainder of the watershed is held under forest licenses managed by others. The remainder of the watershed will be addressed in a separate report to be completed at a later date. The previous watershed assessment for the watershed was completed in The zard ratings for these two sub-basins were all rated as low except for the cnnel stability in North Powers tt was rated as moderate. The loss of most or all of the remaining mature lodgepole pine in Tolko s TFL in the Powers Creek watershed will affect the hydrology of the two sub-basins. The mature lodgepole pine in this watershed was originally attacked in the late 1970s resulting in an aggressive rvesting program. However the areas tt were rvested at tt time are substantially hydrologically recovered. It will be the loss of canopy and related decrease in evapotranspiration combined with increased water yields, particularly in the snow accumulation zone in the upper watershed area tt will impact the hydrology. The primary area of concern is the snow sensitive zone, the source for the spring freshet and peak stream flows. Loss of canopy closure results in increased snow accumulation on the ground and subsequent increase in melt rates. The decrease in evapotranspiration due to the tree mortality further exacerbates the problem resulting in the potential for even greater water yields. The impacts on the magnitude and the timing of peak flows are a concern in the areas above the reservoirs due to the location of the snow sensitive zone as well as in the southwest corner of the watershed tt drains into the mainstem above the intake. Tolko provided the data used to carry out the hydrologic assessments. The results of the initial assessment were used to provide guidance in the development of the retention plan. The impacts of the proposed salvage logging, as presented in the retention plan were subsequently reviewed and the final recommendations for salvage logging are provided in this report. is a community watershed for the Westbank Irrigation District (WID). The watershed drains to the east off the Thompson Plateau into Okanagan Lake. The portion of the watershed included in this review s an area of approximately 9,547 [refer to Map 1 Appendix A]. Storage s been developed in the Lambly Reservoir, Jackpine Reservoir and Dobbin/Horseshoe Reservoir. The community watershed intake is located in the lower Powers Creek watershed approximately 11 km downstream from the Lambly Reservoir. The terrain in the project area is generally benign gently rolling plateau with no evidence of instability. The soil erosion zard is generally moderate on the glacial till soils. Although the mainstem cnnels are typically stable they will be susceptible to impacts from the loss of

4 canopy in the riparian areas where mature lodgepole pine is the dominant species, and they will be susceptible to increase in peak flow as the pine dies. For the purposes of this assessment the watershed s been sub-divided in two sub-basins, the North Powers sub-basin and the West Powers sub-basin. The point of interest is the confluence of the two sub-basins on. 2. ASSESSMENT 2.1 Current Watershed Condition The current watershed condition is based on the s to December 31, The values presented in Table 1 illustrate the estimated hydrologic recovery for all blocks including any blocks planned for rvest by December 31, The values of interest are those for the snow sensitive zone (SSZ) tt is defined as the upper 40 of the watershed. For the SSZ, the current s based on past rvesting are 33 in North Powers and 23.3 in West Powers (refer to Table 1). The total area may be rvested by December 31, 2006 is 1,203.8 (35.7 of the sub-basin) in North Powers and 1,823.7 (29.5 of the subbasin in West Powers). The for the SSZ in both sub-basins translates into low peak flow zards. The data summaries are provided in Appendix B. Table 1. Current s (December 31, 2006) Drainage Area () Total Area Harvested ()/() Current Total ()/() Current below snowline ()() Current above snowline ()() North Powers 3, ,203.8/ / / /33.0 sub-basin West Powers sub-basin 6, ,823.7/29.5 1,169.5/ / /23.3 Growth of trees is modeled using Variable Density Yield Predictor (VDYP) and site index values. Site index values are updated using the BC Ministry of Forests Site Index estimates by Site Series (SIBEC) - Second Approximation published in All stands 12m in height are considered to be fully recovered, hydrologically, and ve been excluded from the calculations. Snow zone is calculated as the non-recovered area in the snow sensitive zone divided by the total area of the snow sensitive zone. 2.2 Field Inspections Due to an early snowfall in the fall of 2006 no field review were completed in these subbasins. 2.3 Hydrologic Impact of Loss of Mature Lodgepole Pine As indicated previously the zone of specific interest is tt area within the snow sensitive zone. For this assessment the snow sensitive zone in the sub-basins tt contributes to the peak flow during the spring runoff is approximated as the upper 40 of the watershed [refer to Map 1, Appendix A]. This area is based on the results of snowline monitoring of other watersheds in the Okanagan Valley since Table 2 provides an estimate of the s given the loss of all mature lodgepole pine forest cover plus all rvesting to the end of The pine considered in Table 2 is the 1 Dobson Engineering Ltd., 2002, Synthesis of the 1999 to 2001 Snow Course and Snowline Results For the Cse Creek Watershed /26106/January 2008 Page 2 of 12

5 net area of pine for all polygons >40 pine. The definition of net area is the area remaining after the area for all non-pine species ve been excluded. Table 2. s assuming loss of all mature Lodgepole Pine over the next 3-5 years including areas rvested to December 31, 2006 Drainage Area () Total Area Impacted incl MPB ()/() Total 1 (Net Area) ()/() below snowline 1 (Net Area) ()/() Area above snowline () above snowline 1 (Net Area) ()/() North Powers sub-basin 3, ,246.4/66.6 1,838.3/ /46.4 1, ,085.2/63.0 West Powers 6, ,283.0/53.2 2,628.8/42.6 1,187.9/34.3 2, ,440.9/53.2 sub-basin 1. The area value in this column is the combined area of past rvesting (recovery modeled) + the net area of lodgepole pine. The value is the for the area of past rvesting as a + the net pine area as a, not discounted since it is a net value, i.e. all non-pine species removed. This represents a worst-case from a hydrologic perspective as it assumes tt when the mature pine dies it will act hydrologically similar to a clear-cut. In the following discussion the term effective is used to describe the potential hydrologic impacts of the loss of the mature pine. The effective is the for the gross area of a forest cover polygon tt contains >40 mature pine as well as other non-pine species, combined with the for all past rvesting limited to the snow sensitive zone. The effective is used since it more accurately reflects how salvage rvesting might impact the hydrology. To calculate the value, the area s been discounted by 50 to approximate the impact on snow accumulation and melt in mixed stands (>40 pine) including dead pine and with consideration for any secondary structure. Increases in peak flows generated in the snow sensitive zone typically result from increased snow accumulation and faster melt rates. The effective value is different from the values in Table 2 tt are based on net areas of pine (as s been discussed previously). Unfortunately there is very limited data available regarding the effect on runoff from the loss of canopy in dead pine stands 2. It s been documented tt there is still some interception of snow in dead stands therefore the accumulation of snow on the ground will be greater tn under a live stand but less tn for a clear-cut. Also the standing dead stems may affect the melt rates tt will be greater tn for a live stand but likely less tn for a clear-cut. Preliminary research results for stands in the northern interior indicate tt the potential for dead pine stands in tt area may be in the 50 range of those for a clear-cut. The adjustment factor is intended to represent the average stand; the actual value will depend upon the species composition and the secondary structure. There are a number of research projects in progress 3 tt are focused on this issue by researchers from the Ministry of Forests and Range in Kamloops, Williams Lake and Prince George, various 2 Review and Synthesis of Potential Hydrologic Impacts of Mountain Pine Beetle and Related Harvesting Activities in British Columbia, J.F. Hélie; D.L. Peters; K.R. Tattrie; J.J. Gibson, Mountain Pine Beetle Initiative Working Paper , Canadian Forestry Service, 2005; Determining the impact of MPB-killed forest and elevated rvesting on snow accumulation and the projected impacts on melt and peak flow. BC Ministry of Forests, S. Boon, UNBC, FIA-FSP Report #M065006; Snow Surveys in Supply Block F Prince George, January to April 2006, P. Beaudry, P. Beaudry and Associates Ltd. CANFOR report, Projects include work by: R. Winkler, MoFR, Kamloops (research projects include Upper Penticton Creek and Mason Lake); P. Teti, MoFR, Williams Lake (research projects in various pine stands in the Cariboo), /26106/January 2008 Page 3 of 12

6 consultants and the Faculty of Forestry at UBC. Until the results from these research projects are available to better define how snow accumulates and melts in dead pine stands, the application of a 50 adjustment factor for the s from live stands to dead stands is the recommended for the Okanagan. [The decision to apply a factor to adjust the s from those of a clear-cut evolved from a review of the limited data available for both the southern and northern interior and from discussions with R. Winkler and P. Teti, Research Hydrologists with the MoFR.] Data on the pine stands by polygon was provided by the licensees including a percentage of mature pine for polygons <40 pine, 40-50, 51-60, and >70 pine. For the purposes of the assessment, those stands with <40 mature pine were not considered in the proposed rvesting since even if all the mature pine was killed by the beetle, it was assumed tt there was no hydrologic impact due to the extent of nonpine species. For those polygons where the mature pine ranged from of the stand, the effective area of the polygon was adjusted using a factor based on the analysis undertaken for the Watershed Assessment Guidebook, 1999 version, Appendix 2 4 to compensate for the hydrologic value of the non-pine species. A summary of the gross pine distribution is provided in Tables 3 and 4 and Figures 1-4. The gross pine distribution is the gross area of polygons with mature pine >40 including all species. These values are important from a forest planning perspective as they represent the actual areas tt might be salvaged and include all the species as identified in the MoFR forest cover database. North Powers sub-basin A review of Figure 1 indicates tt for the SSZ past rvesting s occurred on 49 of the area, the mature pine >40 accounts for a further 34.1 of the area. Stands with pine <40 plus the non-pine types account for a total of only 17 of the area. The total area tt will impact the hydrology will total ~83 of the entire snow sensitive zone area. For the total sub-basin, referring to Figure 2, past logging plus the pine leading stands account for approximately 73 of the sub-basin with the stands with <40 mature pine plus the non-pine stands accounting for ~27 of the sub-basin. The effective s assuming all the mature pine dies would be ~83 for the SSZ and ~73 for the entire sub-basin. The potential peak flow impacts ve been assessed with consideration for the results of the research carried out in the Upper Penticton Creek watershed by the research staff with the Southern Interior Forest Region and reported in Extension Note 67 5, as well as known cnnel conditions. Based on the results reported in the extension note, an of 83 would increase the 50-year peak flow by approximately 39 for the SSZ tt would represent a high peak flow zard. 4 Interior Watershed Assessment Procedure Guidebook (IWAP), Ministry of Forests, Second edition, version 2.1, Extension Note 67, Schnorbus et al, Ministry of Forests, Forest Sciences Program, /26106/January 2008 Page 4 of 12

7 Table 3. Distribution of Mature Lodgepole Pine in the North Powers Sub-basin BAND PL_BAND Gross Net Area < > Above Log No Pine < Below > Log No Pine Forest Cover Distribution in Watershed - Above, Retained Data Figure 1. Distribution of Mature Pine in North Powers Sub-basin 4 12 <40 > Logged Non-Pine Above Only Range Gross of Total < > Logged Non-Pine , /26106/January 2008 Page 5 of 12

8 Figure 2. Distribution of Mature Pine in North Powers Sub-basin Forest Cover Distribution in Watershed - Total, Retained Data <40 > Logged Non-Pine Above & Below Range Gross of Total < > Logged 1, Non-Pine , /26106/January 2008 Page 6 of 12

9 West Powers sub-basin A review of Figure 3 indicates tt for the SSZ past rvesting s occurred on 34.3 of the area, the mature pine >40 accounts for a further 38.5 of the area. Stands with pine <40 plus the non-pine types account for a total of only 27.5 of the area. The total area tt will impact the hydrology will total ~73 of the entire snow sensitive zone area. For the total watershed, referring to Figure 4, past logging plus the pine leading stands account for approximately 63 of the sub-basin with the stands with <40 mature pine plus the non-pine stands accounting for ~37 of the sub-basin. The effective s for the watershed assuming all the mature pine dies would be ~73 for the SSZ and ~63 for the entire sub-basin. The potential peak flow impacts ve been assessed with consideration for the results of the research carried out in the Upper Penticton Creek watershed by the research staff with the Southern Interior Forest Region and reported in Extension Note 67 6, as well as known cnnel conditions. Based on the results reported in the extension note, an of 73 would increase the 50-year peak flow by approximately 34 for the SSZ tt would represent a high peak flow zard. Table 5 summarizes the s for Tolko s past rvesting and for the areas with pine leading within the snow sensitive zone. The area of mature pine is the actual combined areas for polygons with mature pine >40. The associated percentage value s a 50 reduction factor applied to compensate for the standing timber plus any secondary structure. The data in Table 5 s been extracted from Figures 1 and 3. To appreciate the potential hydrologic impacts of salvage rvesting, if for example 50 of the area of mature pine in the SSZ was salvaged in the North Powers sub-basin, the post rvesting would increase to approximately 59. This could result in the 50-year peak flow increasing by ~28 tt would result in the peak flow zard increasing to high. For the West Powers sub-basin the would increase to approximately 52 and the 50-year peak flow would increase by approximately 24 tt would increase the peak flow zard rating to high for this sub-basin. In both sub-basins there is storage reservoirs tt would provide some attenuation of the peak flows as well. The impact of storing some of the runoff could reduce the increase in peak flow from the loss of the pine above the reservoirs on the flows downstream. 6 Extension Note 67, Schnorbus et al, Ministry of Forests, Forest Sciences Program, /26106/January 2008 Page 7 of 12

10 Table 4. Distribution of Mature Lodgepole Pine in the West Powers Sub-basin BAND PL_BAND Gross Net Area < > Above Log No Pine < Below > Log No Pine Figure 3. Distribution of Mature Pine in West Powers Sub-basin Forest Cover Distribution in Watershed - Above, Retained Data <40 > Logged Non-Pine Above Only Range Gross of Total < > Logged Non-Pine , /26106/January 2008 Page 8 of 12

11 Figure 4. Distribution of Mature Pine in West Powers Sub-basin Forest Cover Distribution in Watershed - Total, Retained Data <40 > Logged Non-Pine Above & Below Range Gross of Total <40 1, > Logged 2, Non-Pine , /26106/January 2008 Page 9 of 12

12 Table 5. for Past Harvesting and for Loss of Mature Pine Drainage Area above snowline () Current above snowline 1 ()/() Effective due to Pine Mortality 2 (Gross Area) ()/() Combined () North Powers sub-basin West Powers sub-basin 1, / / , /23.3 1,033.7/ includes only past rvesting. 2. The area value here is the gross area of all polygons with mature pine >40 only and the value is based on a 50 reduction of the area to account for the hydrologic effects of a mixed stand + the standing dead pine + secondary structure. 2.4 Hydrologic Impacts of Proposed Retention Plan Assumptions: The following assumptions ve been made when considering the hydrologic impacts of the proposed retention plan: 1. Grey attack stands ve a similar impact on the hydrology as a clear-cut with regards to snow accumulation and rates of melt. This differs from the approach used in section 2.3 and is the result of preliminary research for the Okanagan in 2007.l 2. Tt the guidance in the 1999 IWAP Guidebook (Appendix 2) regarding the of partial cuts is a reasonable approach to represent the hydrologic value of non-pine species in a pine leading stand >40 mature pine. 3. Tt regenerating stands ve achieved full hydrologic recovery with regards to snow accumulation at a height of 12 m. 4. Extension Note 67 (Figure 2, page 3) should only be considered as a general guide to illustrate the potential impacts of rvesting and loss of forest cover on peak flows. Tolko s completed a retention plan for the sub-basins tt is summarized on the Retention Plan (Appendix A Map 2). For additional information the reader is referred to the Retention Plan available from Tolko. This portion of the hydrologic review focuses on the impact of the areas proposed for rvesting combined with those areas of pine tt will not be rvested and compares the results to the loss of the pine with no rvesting summarized in section 2.3. Detailed summaries of the retention plan are provided in Appendix B. Table 6 summarizes the proposed salvage rvesting plan illustrating wt the would be for the areas proposed to be rvested plus past rvesting but excluding the pine tt will die but will not be rvested. It also summarizes the considering all past and proposed rvesting as well as the pine tt will die but not be salvaged. It is apparent from Table 6 is tt for the SSZ, in the North Powers sub-basin there are ~ 507 of mature pine and for the West Powers sub-basin there are ~810 of mature pine (column 4 minus column 3). It is proposed to salvage ~222 or ~44 of the stands in North Powers and 695 or ~86 of the stands in West Powers (column 5 minus column 3). The final for the SSZ in North Powers after rvesting is estimated to be /26106/January 2008 Page 10 of 12

13 ~68 as compared to an of 63 if there was no salvage logging, and West Powers it would be ~61 versus 53 if there was no salvaging (column 6 vs. 4). Wt is evident from the recovery data for North Powers is tt the although the initial for the log scenario is 6 greater tn for the no log scenario (68 vs. 62), at the end of 30 years the recovery for the log scenario s declined to 28 whereas the recovery for the no log scenario is 33. For West Powers the log and plant scenario is initially 8 higher tn the no log scenario (61 vs. 53), in 30 years it s recovered to 17 versus 32 for the no log option. The 30-year hydrologic recovery curves are provided in Appendix C. For both sub-basins there is a significant area of mature pine forest in North Powers the stands with mature pine >40 account for ~63 of the remaining unlogged area and for West Powers 42 of the unlogged stands ve mature pine >40. The difference between the two options is tt for the no log option the will increase gradually over several years as the pine dies. However where there is salvage rvesting the increases for the area logged as soon as the logging is completed. Regardless of the scenario the peak flow zard will be high. The benefit of the logging and planting is tt the hydrologic recover occurs more quickly tn for areas left to regenerate naturally, and this reduces the peak flow zard sooner. Table 6. Comparison at December 31, 2006 for no beetle, loss of all mature pine, and proposed retention plan for the Snow Sensitive Zone 1 Basin 2 Area Above Snowline () 3 assuming no beetle () 4 Assuming all Mature Pl Dies 5 For Proposed Harvesting (/) 6 For Retention Plan (/) North Powers Creek subbasin 1, , , West Powers Creek subbasin 2, , , , CONCLUSIONS - The current peak flow zard for the snow sensitive zone (as of December 31, 2006), assuming tt there were no beetle impacts, is estimated to be moderate for the North sub-basin and low for the West Powers sub-basin based on the recovery of past rvesting. - The peak flow zard for the snow sensitive zone if all the mature pine was to die would increase to high for both sub-basins where the projected increase in the 50-year peak flows may be in the range of The proposed salvage rvesting would increase the for the snow sensitive zone in the North Powers sub-basin to ~68 from 62 if there was no salvage rvesting and to ~61 from 53 for West Powers. The increase in for the rvesting scenario is /26106/January 2008 Page 11 of 12

14 - due to the loss of non-pine species in the logged blocks. The peak flow zards associated with the proposed rvesting would remain the same (high) as for the loss of all mature pine scenario. - The retention plan was revised by Tolko to focus on stands with pine >70 with clearcut salvage rvesting focused on stands with >50 stand damage. - Areas tt are rvested and replanted would recover faster tn areas left to natural regeneration. For North Powers at the end of 30 years the would be ~28 for the combined areas salvaged + past logging versus 33 if there was no salvage logging suggesting tt for this sub-basin there are limited benefits from rvesting and planting. However for the West Powers sub-basin the in 30 years would ve declined to ~17 versus 32 indicating a positive benefit from rvesting and planting. 4. RECOMMENDATIONS - Based on the comparison of the hydrologic impacts on peak flows of the proposed retention plan versus no salvage logging, it is recommended tt the proposed retention plan proceed for the West Powers sub-basin since the potential benefits to reducing peak flow impacts and water quality impacts tt will occur from associated sediment transport over the 30-year recovery period are significantly better for the proposed retention plan tn if there was no salvage logging. - Additional care and attention needs to given to the design and layout of new roads and skid trails to minimize disturbance to the natural drainage patterns and sediment transport. - New roads required for salvage logging, with the exception of permanent mainline roads, should be constructed as temporary roads and rebilitated as soon as practical following rvesting and returned to productive forest. - Stream crossings capacities on existing roads downstream from areas with significant loss of forest cover from the beetle should be reviewed to confirm tt the peak flow capacity will be adequate to safely convey anticipated increased peak flows. Where structures are undersized they should be replaced with appropriately sized structures. - If salvage rvesting is considered within the lakeshore management zone or buffers where the pine component is >70, the risks to all resources must be considered and a decision made based on balancing these risks. Original signed by: D.A. Dobson, PEng, Project Engineer Original signed by: Reviewed by: M.E. Noseworthy, P.Geo, Eng.L This page revised February 12, /26106/January 2008 Page 12 of 12

15 Appendix A Watershed Maps /26106/January 2008

16 Boundaries Watershed Sub-basin H Retention Plan Pse 1 40 Current 0 (<3m) 25 (3-<5m) 50 (5-<7m) 75 (7-<9m) 90 (>9-<12m) Immature (>12m <80 Years) Forest Cover Pine >=40 Non Pine µ Projection: BC Albers Datum: NAD 83 Scale: 1:100, kilometre Water lake wetland creeks_a Oka n nl a ga ak e File: Project:26106Pse1.mxd

17 Boundaries Watershed Sub-basin H 40 Current 0 (<3m) 25 (3-<5m) 50 (5-<7m) 75 (7-<9m) 90 (>9-<12m) Immature (>12m <80 Years) Forest Cover Proposed Harvest Pine >=40 Non Pine Prop Harv/Pine >=40 Retention Plan Pse 2 µ Projection: BC Albers Datum: NAD 83 Scale: 1:100, kilometre Water Lake Wetland Stream Oka n nl a ga ak e File: Project:26106Pse2.mxd

18 Appendix B Data Summaries /26106/January 2008

19 Region: North Powers Sub-basin Retained Data: BASIN BAND PL_BAND Gross Net Area RET_FERGUS Plot 1 Plot 2 Powers Cree < Ret Above Only Above & Below > Ret Range Gross of Total Gross of Total Ret < Above Ret > Ret Log Ret No Pine Ret < Ret Logged , > Ret Non-Pine Ret 1, ,061.5 Below Ret Ret Log Ret No Pine Ret Proposed Logging Data: BASIN BAND PL_BAND Gross Net Area RET_FERGUS Plot 3 Plot 4 Powers Cree < Prop Above Only Above & Below > Prop Range Gross of Total Gross of Total Prop < Above Prop > Prop Log Prop No Pine Prop < Prop Logged > Prop Non-Pine Prop Below Prop Prop Log Prop No Pine Prop

20 Region: West Powers Sub-basin Retained Data: BASIN BAND PL_BAND Gross Net Area RET_FERGUS Plot 1 Plot 2 Powers Cree < Ret Above Only Above & Below > Ret Range Gross of Total Gross of Total Ret < , Above Ret > Ret Log Ret No Pine Ret < Ret Logged , > Ret Non-Pine Ret 2, ,089.4 Below Ret Ret Log Ret No Pine Ret Proposed Logging Data: BASIN BAND PL_BAND Gross Net Area RET_FERGUS Plot 3 Plot 4 Powers Cree < Prop Above Only Above & Below > Prop Range Gross of Total Gross of Total Prop < Above Prop > Prop Log Prop No Pine Prop < Prop Logged > Prop Non-Pine Prop ,082.6 Below Prop Prop Log Prop No Pine Prop

21 Watershed Report Card for 2006* Basin Gross Area () Total Harvested Area below Snowline Area Above Snowline Above Snowline North Powers 3, , , West Powers 6, , , , * Includes all blocks cut or projected to be cut in 2006 Wednesday, December 27, 2006 Page 1 of 1

22 Watershed Report Card for 2006FSP* Basin Gross Area () Total Harvested Area below Snowline Area Above Snowline Above Snowline North Powers 3, , , , West Powers 6, , , , , * Includes all blocks cut or projected to be cut in 2006 and proposed rvest calculated to end 2006 Wednesday, December 05, 2007 Page 1 of 1

23 Watershed Report Card for Total Pine Mortality* Basin Gross Area () Total Harvested Area below Snowline Area Above Snowline Above Snowline North Powers 3, , , , , West Powers 6, , , , , , * Includes all blocks cut or projected to be cut before end 2006 and loss of Pine, calculated to end 2006 Wednesday, December 27, 2006 Page 1 of 1

24 Watershed Report Card for 2006 Retention Plan* Basin Gross Area () Total Harvested Area below Snowline Area Above Snowline Above Snowline North Powers 3, , , , , West Powers 6, , , , , , * Includes all blocks cut or projected to be cut before end 2006, proposed rvest and loss of Pine calculated to end 2006 Wednesday, December 05, 2007 Page 1 of 1

25 Appendix C 30-Year Hydrologic Recovery Tables /26106/January 2008

26 North Powers Above SSZ Recovery Salvage Harvest + Replant No Salvage Harvesting Years Note: The steps in the salvage rvest + replant curve after 17, 22, and 28 years indicate milestones in regenerating stand height, i.e. 3, 5, and 7 metre

27 West Powers Above SSZ Recovery Salvage Harvest + Replant No Salvage Harvesting Years Note: The steps in the salvage rvest + replant curve after 17, 22, and 26 years indicate milestones in regenerating stand height, i.e. 3, 5, and 7 metre