Prioritizing Areas Burnt in the 2003 Wildfires for Rehabilitation Under the FFT Program

Transcription

1 Prioritizing Areas Burnt in the 2003 Wildfires for Rehabilitation Under the FFT Program Prepared for Ed Collen, RPF Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd. Okanagan Falls, BC Project: WCF-045 October 4, 2005 J.S. Thrower & Associates Ltd. Vancouver Kamloops Hinton Consulting Foresters

2

3 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page i Executive Summary Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd. (Weyco) received approval for a five-year program of funding under the BC Ministry of Forests and Range (MOFR) Forests for Tomorrow (FFT) program to help reforest their interior operating areas burned in the wildfires of This project addresses the first year of the program to complete the strategic planning phase, and includes identifying all FFT-eligible stands that pass a minimum 2% return on investment (ROI), defining potential treatments and costs, and prioritizing stands and treatments to those that potentially return the highest value relative to treatment cost. Approximately 94% of the FFT-eligible treatment area (1,505 ha) passed the MOFR 2% ROI threshold. Of these stands, the treatments estimated as returning the best value include; planting (35% of the area), snag falling plus planting (34%), snag falling plus spacing (17%), and fill planting (14%). Planting is recommended only in post-harvest regenerated (PHR) stands, fill planting in naturally open stand types, and snag falling with planting or spacing on forested stands with varying degrees of burn intensity. The next phases of Weyco s program (not addressed in this project) will include surveying target areas, making stand-specific treatment recommendations, and re-evaluating the ROI using the stand-level survey information.

4 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page ii This page is intentionally left blank.

5 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page iii Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION TERMS OF REFERENCE BACKGROUND OPERATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT GOALS & OBJECTIVES LANDBASE INFORMATION OVERVIEW FIRE BOUNDARIES FOREST-COVER INVENTORY ECOLOGICAL MAPPING STAND TYPE & FIRE INTENSITY DISTANCE FROM ROADS SLOPE CLASS AREA NET-DOWN TREATMENTS DESIGN OF TREATMENTS TREATMENT COST ASSIGNMENT OF TREATMENTS GAIN FROM TREATMENT RETURN ON INVESTMENT RESULTS PRIORITIZING STAND SELECTION LANDBASE SUMMARIES APPENDIX 1 AREA NET-DOWNS APPENDIX 2 VOLUME REDUCTION FACTORS APPENDIX 3 FUTURE DATA ENHANCEMENTS APPENDIX 4 NON-FFT ELIGBLE CUTBLOCK EXCLUSIONS... 15

6 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page iv List of Tables Table 1. Total area (ha) and net-downs (ha). The net-downs were done in the order listed....5 Table 2. Treatments, activities, and stand types to which they are potentially applicable (PHR or Natural)....6 Table 3. Cost ($/ha) for the base treatments and multipliers...6 Table 4. Possible treatments and costs (without multipliers) by stand type....7 Table 5. Summary of area and total cost (estimated by the cost ($/ha) of lowest treatment X polygon area) for both FL and TFL, where ROI both passes and fails 2%....9 Table 6. Summary of Area (ha), average treatment rank ($/m3), and average treatment cost ($/ha) by stand type, for both FL and TFL combined where ROI > 2% List of Figures Figure 1. Example of areas burnt in the 2003 fires...2 Figure 2. BEC area distribution by license Figure 3. Stand type area distribution by license...10

7 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 1 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 TERMS OF REFERENCE This project was completed by J.S. Thrower and Associates Ltd. (JST) for Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd. (Weyco), Okanagan Falls (OK) division. The Weyco project manager was Ed Collen, RPF of OK Falls with assistance from Steve Jones, RPF. The JST project team was Jim Thrower, PhD, RPF (project manager), Rene dejong, RPF (analytical support), Frits Nijholt, RPF (GIS and inventory support), and Mary Lester, RPF (silviculture support). This project was funded under Weyco s allocation from the Ministry of Forests and Range (MOFR), Forests for Tomorrow (FFT) fund allocation for TFL 15 and the south Okanagan Forest Licence (FL) areas. 1.2 BACKGROUND Wildfires in the summer of 2003 burned large areas in the BC southern interior including productive forestland in Weyco s south OK operating area. That was the worst fire season in BC s history with over 265,000 hectares (ha) burned. The MOFR subsequently created the Forest for Tomorrow (FFT) program to help replant and rehabilitate areas burned in these (and other) fires and areas impacted by the mountain pine beetle (MPB). 1 The three fires impacting Weyco s southern OK operating areas were the OK Mountain Park fire, Vas (Vaseaux Lake) fire, and Chaps (Chapman) fire. These fires burned about 39,800 ha with about 6,950 ha in Weyco s operating area. Weyco submitted a five-year proposal to FFT to help reforest the areas burned in their BC interior operating areas. The proposal was accepted with Year 1 funding of $810,000 for the south OK operating area ($200,000 for TFL 15 and $610,000 for FL areas). Weyco s five-year program includes $930,000 for TFL 15 and $1,700,000 for FL areas. 1.3 OPERATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION Weyco s goal is to grow the most timber from the areas rehabilitated under the FFT program. This cannot be fully achieved, as there are many operational, logistic, and environmental factors that must be considered (Figure 1). However, in an effort to work toward that goal, Weyco s idea is to allocate the funds and treatments in a three-stage process that is repeated each year of this program: 1. Strategic planning (this project). a. Collate landbase information on the fire area, forest inventory, ecology mapping, etc. b. Net-down the area to identify where funding can be allocated. c. Identify treatments that are biologically and logistically possible in specific areas. d. Estimate costs of each treatment and stand type. e. Estimate the volume gain associated with each treatment and stand type. 1 The goal of the FFT program is to address NSR lands outside industry obligation, with initial focus on areas affected by the MPB and large wildfires. The FFT program is described at:

8 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 2 Figure 1. Example of areas burnt in the 2003 fires. Left Photo: Stand of small pine with large Douglas-fir vets in the Vas fire (TFL 15). The high level of regeneration in this stand will likely require juvenile spacing to avoid heightgrowth repression. Right Photo: Open stand of large Douglas-fir in the Vas fire (TFL 15). There is almost no natural regeneration in this area and will likely require planting. Mechanical site preparation may be required to control brush and increase survival. Photos taken May f. Estimate the return on investment (ROI) for each treatment and stand. g. Produce a map and database showing the highest priority areas for treatment. 2. Operational Application (not addressed in this project). a. Check target areas to ensure that Non-replaceable forest licenses (NRFLs) have not been allocated by the MOFR. b. Survey target areas to collect information on actual stand and site conditions. c. Make stand-specific treatments using the survey information. d. Check that the treatment passes the MOFR 2% minimum ROI requirement. e. Complete the treatments. 3. Update the information process prior to the beginning of each new year of the program. a. Update the data to include newly treated areas. b. Update all other data to reflect new information gained during the year. c. Update the analytical process to reflect new information gained during the year. 1.4 PROJECT GOALS & OBJECTIVES The goal of this project is to provide the strategic information for Step 1 of the Weyco process. The specific objectives to achieve that goal are to: 1. Collate the most recent and readily available landbase information for the fire areas. 2. Identify the net landbase within the fire areas where FFT funds can be applied. 3. List potential treatments for the sites and stand types in the fire areas. 4. Estimate the ROI for each treatment and stand type to ensure they pass the MOFR 2% minimum. 5. Rank stands by ROI to identify areas where operational activity should concentrate.

9 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 3 2. LANDBASE INFORMATION 2.1 OVERVIEW We collated landbase information for the three fire areas from a variety of sources including Weyco, MOF, and OK TSA Innovative Forest Practices Agreement (IFPA). We also added attributes to this existing information to help refine our estimates of treatment costs and ultimately help identify areas of highest priority for operational treatment. 2.2 FIRE BOUNDARIES The fire boundaries of all three fires were defined from coverages that we received from Weyco s GIS department in June We visually checked these boundaries with Weyco staff to ensure they were complete and accurate. 2.3 FOREST-COVER INVENTORY The TFL 15 forest-cover inventory data are based on Weyco s VRI Phase I inventory completed in 2003 with attributes updated to The FL forest-cover inventory data are based on the MOFR s TSR2 spatial coverage completed in 2002 with attributes updated to ECOLOGICAL MAPPING We used the potential site index associated with BEC subzones and site series to estimate the potential growth in the fire areas. This BEC information was received from Weyco s GIS department from the TEM and SIA project 2 completed on the TFL, and from the PEM / SIBEC project 3 completed by the Okanagan IFPA in 2003 for the FL areas. 2.5 STAND TYPE & FIRE INTENSITY We supplemented the inventory and ecological information by using heads-up digitizing information from orthos created from aerial photos taken in 2004 (i.e., after the fires). We delineated areas within the fire boundaries into five stand types reflecting different burn intensities and stand types including: 1. Natural stands - partially burned (approx. < 50% of trees killed). 2. Natural stands - mostly burned (approx % killed). 3. Natural stands - totally burned (approx % killed). 4. Natural stands - open (we could not assess level of burn from the few residual trees in these areas). 5. Post-harvest regenerated (PHR) stands. We could not assess the level of burn in these stands from the orthophotos. 2 J.S. Thrower and Associates Ltd Potential site index estimates for the major commercial tree species on TFL 15 version 2.0. Contract report to Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd., OK Falls Division dated November 9, JST Project WCF pp. 3 JMJ Holdings Inc Okanagan TSA dry belt predictive ecosystem mapping (PEM) final report. Contract report to Okanagan IFPA dated December 31, pp.

10 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page DISTANCE FROM ROADS We created a GIS coverage of distance from existing roads to help refine treatment costs. This coverage was based only on roads that could be seen and digitized from the orthophotos). The road distance classes were: < 200 m, m, and > 400 m. Areas > 400 m from roads were excluded from the analysis because of the high cost of treating those areas. The cost of treating areas m from roads was increased to reflect higher access cost. This is described in more detail later in this report. 2.7 SLOPE CLASS We created three slope classes in GIS to also help estimate treatment costs including: < 35%, 36-55%, and >56%. Areas >56% slope were excluded from the analysis because of the high cost of treating those areas. The cost of treating areas with slopes 35-55% was increased to reflect higher cost of operating in those areas. This is described in more detail later in this report.

11 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 5 3. AREA NET-DOWN We netted-down the total fire area to identify the area eligible for FFT funding and is not considered unproductive or too costly to treat. This resulted in about 76% of the total area being removed from consideration in this analysis (Table 1). The proportion of area removed for different factors varied among the fires, but overall the largest removals were for Protected Areas (27%), areas not eligible for FFT funding (16%), non-productive areas (9%), and areas > 400 m from roads (10%). A more detailed description of these net-down factors is given in Appendix 1. Table 1. Total area (ha) and net-downs (ha). The net-downs were done in the order listed. Chaps Fire OK Mtn Fire Vas Fire Total Total Area 1, % 3, % 2, % 6, % Protected areas (PAS) % 1,042 34% % 1,883 27% Non-forest 0 0% 11 0% 0 0% 11 0% Non-productive % 24 1% % 648 9% Problem forest types (PFTs) % 82 3% 223 8% 444 6% Site codes 0 0% 0 0% % 507 7% > 56% slope 7 1% 4 0% 28 1% 38 1% > 400 m from road % % 218 8% % Fire codes 0 0% 2 0% 1 0% 3 0% Deciduous leading 0 0% 61 2% 5 0% 66 1% Wildlife Tree Patches 3 0% 15 0% 36 1% 55 1% Non-FFT eligible 77 6% % 181 7% 1,079 16% Total Reductions % 2,368 76% 2,169 82% 5,445 78% Net area % % % 1,505 22%

12 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 6 4. TREATMENTS 4.1 DESIGN OF TREATMENTS We identified eight treatments that could be applied to the natural and PHR stand types in the three fire areas. These treatments were combinations of two base regeneration activities (planting, and fill planting), and three base mechanical activities (snag falling, mechanical site preparation (MSP), and juvenile spacing) (Table 2). The option of no-treatment will be very viable in some areas, but was not considered here because it has no cost. This option will be considered after operational survey are completed to assess the level of natural regeneration that has occurred in these areas. Table 2. Treatments, activities, and stand types to which they are potentially applicable (PHR or Natural). Treatment Stand Type PHR NAT PHR NAT PHR NAT PHR PHR NAT PHR NAT PHR NAT PHR NAT Activity Plant X X X X Fill Plant X X X Snag Falling X X X X X Mech Site Prep X X X Spacing (future) X 4.2 TREATMENT COST We estimated an average base cost for each activity with multipliers to increase costs on steeper slopes and areas farther from roads (Table 3). The cost of each treatment was then the sum of the base components. When applied to a given stand, treatment cost was then multiplied by these factors to reflect the specific conditions and location of each stand. We considered the cost of spacing for ranking of treatments and assessing ROI in this analysis, although the cost of spacing would not occur for 5-10 years and would not come from the current FFT budget allocation. Table 3. Cost ($/ha) for the base treatments and multipliers. Treatment Base Cost ($/ha) Cost Multipliers Slope 36-55% m from Road Surveys $ Plant (assume 100% of area is planted) $ Fill Plant (assume 50% of area is planted) $ Snag Falling PHR Stands $ Natural Stands < 10% Crown Closure $ Natural Stands 11-40% Crown Closure $ Natural Stands > 40% Crown Closure $ Mechanical Site Preparation (MSP) $ Spacing $1, ASSIGNMENT OF TREATMENTS We assigned a range of possible treatments to each stand type. We developed the stand types using our photo interpreted assessment of stand type, fire intensity, and inventory crown closure classes from the forest-cover inventory estimates. We considered a more detailed analysis of inventory attributes but

13 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 7 concluded that it would not add value to this strategic analysis given the known errors and variability of the inventory information, and given that most of these stands would be surveyed on the ground to confirm stand and site conditions. Table 4. Possible treatments and costs (without multipliers) by stand type. Inventory Crown Closure Area (ha) Fill Plant Fall Snags+ Fill Plant Fall Snags + MSP + Fill Plant Plant Fall Snags + Plant Fall Snags + MSP + Plant Fall Snags + Space MSP + Plant Treatment No Natural Stands Totally Burned < 10 % ,345 1, % ,325 1,120 1,595 1,380 > 40 % 120 1,200 1,675 1,730 Mostly Burned < 10 % , ,345 1, % ,325 1,120 1,595 1,380 > 40 % 47 1,200 1,675 1,945 1,730 Partly Burned < 10 % , ,345 1, % ,325 1,120 1,595 1,380 > 40 % 148 1,200 1,675 1,730 Open Stand All ,075 PHR Stands All , ,345 1,130 1,245 Total 1, GAIN FROM TREATMENT Growth Model We estimated the benefit of each treatment as the incremental merchantable volume gain of 70 years after treatment using TIPSY. In TIPSY we used a merchantable limit of 12.5 cm and 17.5 cm DBH for Pl and Fdi, respectively, with 30 cm stump height, 10 cm top diameter, OAF1 of 15%, OAF2 of 5%, planted to 1,600 stems/ha, with a two-year regeneration delay Potential Site Index We assigned a potential site index to each area using the TEM and SIA project completed on the TFL and using the PEM / SIBEC project completed by the Okanagan IFPA in the FL areas. The assignment of site index was based on selecting the leading site series from the TEM / PEM, and applying the potential site index for the species. The PEM on the TSA was not completed for the BGxh1, PPxh1,

14 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 8 IDFxh1, ESSFdc1, IDFmw1, IDFdm1, and MSdm1, thus we assigned zonal site index estimates to all areas in these subzones. The IFPA project used an analytical process that combined inventory site index with potential site index in many areas, thus those site indexes probably under-estimate the actual growth that is expected in those areas. This accounts for the lower site indexes for the same subzone on the FL areas than on the TFL Regenerated Species We estimated volume assuming that the drier site series of the IDFxh1 would be planted with Douglas-fir (Fdi) at 1,600/ha and all other areas planted with lodgepole pine (Pl) at 1,600/ha. The IDFxh1 includes 64% of the TFL area, and only 12% of the FL area. The higher proportion of IDFxh1 in the TFL results in 57% of the TFL area managed to Fdi, and only 8% of the FL managed to Fdi Rotation Age We used 70 years from time of treatment to compare the volume growth estimated to accrue from these treatments. This is close to the age of MAI culmination for Pl and is years older than the age where financial Site Value is maximized. The comparison age of 70 years is lower than the culmination of MAI for Fdi, but is years older than the age where Site Value is maximized Volume Reduction Factor We estimated the volume gain from each treatment in each stand using a proportion of the maximum growth that could be achieved. We assigned the maximum volume at age 70 and then reduced it by a factor that reflects the treatment and stand type. For example, a planted PHR stand would have a multiplier of 1.0 (i.e., it would achieve full growth) as we assume that all trees would reach full growth potential. Conversely, a fill-planted stand would have a multiplier of 0.4 in a natural stand with a high proportion of live residual trees, and a multiplier of 0.5 in another natural stand that had low residual crown closure. These reflect our assumptions that fill planting is done on 50% of the area, with trees attaining full growth in some areas and not in others. These scalars are presented and described in Appendix RETURN ON INVESTMENT The ROI estimates were based on assuming a constant rotation length of 70 years and gross profit of $80/m 3 for Fdi and $70/m 3 for Pl (fixed stumpage rates of $35/m 3 subtracted from total profit, resulting in $45/m 3 net profit for Fdi and $35/m 3 for Pl). Ratios of treatment cost/incremental volume were calculated for all identified treatments within a given polygon. The treatment that resulted in the lowest $/m 3 ratio was selected as the optimal treatment for each polygon. Our ROI calculations followed similar methods as the MOFR, but we used simplifying assumptions that we believe are for the most part conservative. Polygons that did not meet an ROI of 2% were excluded from the area of interest.

15 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page PRIORITIZING STAND SELECTION 5. RESULTS The FFT-eligible stands were sorted by ROI to separate stands that passed the MOFR minimum 2% ROI threshold. About 1,410 ha (94%) of the potential treatment area (1,505 ha) passed the 2% ROI (Table 5). Stands passing the 2% ROI were further ranked by the ratio of highest expected volume gain for the lowest cost (rank class in units of $/m 3 ) to help prioritize stand selection. Based on this strategic analysis, not all stands can be treated with the limited resources available for each license area, thus stands with the lowest $/m 3 should be treated first. Table 5. Summary of area and total cost (estimated by the cost ($/ha) of lowest treatment X polygon area) for both FL and TFL, where ROI both passes and fails 2%. ROI Passes 2% Rank Area (ha) Cost ($) Class ($/m3) FL TFL15 FL TFL15 Total Area (ha) Total Cost ($) Yes ,023 32, , ,654 45, , ,988 46, , ,761 60, , ,741 51, , ,683 45, , ,885 7, , ,455 19, , ,341 18, , ,386 7, ,446 Total >= 2% ROI , ,901 1,410 1,268,818 No ,381 1, , ,670 13, , , , ,508 7, , , , , , , , , , , ,240 Total < 2% ROI ,222 49, ,343 Grand Total 1, , ,023 1,505 1,363,161

16 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page LANDBASE SUMMARY The MSdm1 and IDFdm1 comprise the majority area of FFT-eligible stands in the FL, while the IDFxh1 and IDFdm1 comprise all of the TFL (Figure 2). Previously harvested and partly burned stands also make up the majority of the area in the FL, while natural open and partly burned stands are most common in the TFL (Figure 3). The different BEC area distributions between licenses impact assigned site productivity and hence future volume estimates, the different stand types impact the selection of available treatments, and together these impact the ROI prioritization of stand selection and treatment assignment between licenses FL TFL15 Area (ha) ESSFdc1 ICHmk1 IDFdm1 IDFmw1 IDFxh1 MSdm1 Figure 2. Area distribution of FFT-eligible stands, by BEC and license FL TFL15 Area (ha) Harvested Totally burned Mostly burned Partly burned Open Stand Figure 3. Area distribution of FFT-eligible stands, by stand type and license.

17 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page POTENTIAL TREATMENT SUMMARY The results of stands passing the 2% ROI show that treatments with the lowest $/m 3 (separately assessed at each polygon) are planting (35% of the area), snag falling plus planting (34%), snag falling plus spacing (17%), and fill planting (14%) (Table 6). Planting has the lowest cost at $3.13/m 3, while snag falling and spacing results in the highest cost at $6.35/m 3. Planting is recommended in only PHR stands, fill planting is recommended in naturally open stand types, and snag falling with either planting or spacing is recommended on forested stands with varying degrees of burn intensity. Table 6. Summary of Area (ha), average treatment rank ($/m3), and average treatment cost ($/ha) by stand type, for both FL and TFL combined where ROI > 2%. Stand type Fire type Crown closure type Plant Treatment with lowest rank $/m3 Snag + plant Snag + space Fill plant NAT Totally burned <=10 Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) 1,207 1, Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) 1,850 1,850 Mostly burned <=10 Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) 1,005 1, Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) 1,266 1, Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) 1,872 1,872 Partly burned <=10 Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) 1,250 1, Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) 1,904 1,904 Open Stand Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) PHR Harvested Area (ha) Rank ($/m3) Treatment cost ($/ha) Total Area (ha) ,410 Average Rank ($/m3) Average Treatment cost ($/ha) 821 1,197 1, ,093 Total

18 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 12 APPENDIX 1 AREA NET-DOWNS This appendix describes the landbase and site characteristics used to net-down the total fire area to the area considered for treatment under the FFT program. Characteristic Protected areas Non-forest Non-productive Problem forest types Site codes Deciduous stands Description All PAS goal 1 areas identified in TSR2 were excluded (Anarchist, Myra-Belle, and Vaseux). In addition, all identified WTPs were excluded. The following non-forest attributes were excluded: non-commercial brush. The following non-productive attributes were excluded: non-productive areas, open range, rock outcrops, swamps, and urban areas. The following PFTs were excluded : all stands in the BGxh1, PPxh1, plus PEMidentified rock-outcrop types. All site codes = A were excluded. All inventory-based deciduous leading species were excluded (At, Ep) > 56% slope This was done using the GIS coverage we created from the TRIM data. > 400 m from roads This was done using the GIS coverage we created from roads shown in the MOF and Weyco GIS coverages and the roads we digitized from the orthophotos. Not FFT eligible This was for natural stands that were harvested after the fire and for PHR stands that were not yet declared free-to-grow. This was based on GIS coverages provided by Weyco together with a list of non-fft eligible cutting permit and block names, as well as salvage and section162 blocks (Appendix 4).

19 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 13 APPENDIX 2 VOLUME REDUCTION FACTORS Treatment Scalar for PHR Stands Scalar for Nat. Stands Rationale 1. Fill plant 0.50 NA This assumes that fill planting will be done to 50% of the stand area. The actual proportion of area planted will vary with stand conditions and can only be confirmed after site inspection. We assume that the fill planted trees will reach their potential growth in PHR stands, i.e., 50% of the area reaches 100% of potential. 2. Fill plant + fall snags 3. Fill plant + fall snags + MSP Snag falling in PHR stands is for danger trees only (in and adjacent to block). We assume 50% of the area is fill planted and full growth potential is achieved. In natural stands, more snag falling is required and we also assume that 50% of the area is planted. We assume that fill planted areas in natural stands achieve 80% of growth potential This is the same as treatment #2 but mechanical site prep is required for fill planting. We assume the same 50% of the area is fill planted but these areas achieve full growth potential. 4. Plant 1.00 NA This will only be applied in PHR stands where the entire area is replanted. We assume that the area will achieve full growth potential. 5. Plant + fall snags 6. Plant + fall snags + MSP This is potentially applicable to all natural stands. We assume that most or all snags are felled and the entire area is replanted. We assume the area will not achieve full growth potential because of reduced plantable spots from felled snags on the ground. We assume that PHR treated areas would achieve full growth potential This is the same as treatment #5 but mechanical site prep is needed to allow planting. We assume that these trees will achieve full growth potential on both natural and PHR stands, as this is essential for a full site rehabilitation treatment This treatment falls snags now to allow spacing 5-7 years in the future. This would be applied in areas that now have adequate natural regeneration. We assume that these areas will be fully stocked and that height-growth repression is avoided in the future, and thus full growth potential is achieved NA This is the same as treatment #4 but mechanical site prep is required before planting. We assume the replanted stand will achieve full growth potential.

20 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 14 APPENDIX 3 FUTURE DATA ENHANCEMENTS A number of issues arose through the course of this project where improvements could be made. Once the next phase of this project is implemented, the following changes will be included / evaluated: NRFL licenses have not yet been included in the final net-downs. These licenses will need to be spatially identified, and incorporated into the area net-down process. Road exclusion buffers were based on roads that could be visually identified from existing ortho images only. This resulted in approximately 10% of the area being deleted (i.e., further than 400 m from an existing road). For the next phase of this project, road coverage from Weyco s access management plan will need to be included to augment the current road buffers, and ensure that accessible areas are not inadvertently removed. Not all non-fft eligible cutblocks have been identified (per comm. with E.Collen September 22, 2005). Further spatial coverages may be required from Weyco to identify other potential areas for non-fft exclusion.

21 Wildfire Rehab in Weyco s South OK Operating Area Page 15 APPENDIX 4 NON-FFT ELIGBLE CUTBLOCK EXCLUSIONS Mapsheet License CP Block GIS Area (ha) Source / notes 82E S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A B 51.4 S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A L 21.8 S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A HYD S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A HYD M.Lester with Weyco block coverage August 3, E084 A HYD S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage July 11, E074 A Ed Collen, August 31, E074 TFL salvage / section 162 identified 82E074 TFL salvage / section 162 identified 82E074 TFL salvage / section 162 identified 82E074 TFL salvage / section 162 identified 82E074 TFL salvage / section 162 identified 82E074 TFL salvage / section 162 identified 82E074 TFL salvage / section 162 identified 82E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, E074 A S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, E074 A28743 BCTS S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, E074 A28922 BCTS S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, E074 A45159 BCTS S.Jones / M.Lester June 21, 2005 with Weyco block coverage June 30, 2005