NEBIE Petawawa Research Forest Dryden Mixed Conifer

Transcription

1 NEBIE Petawawa Research Forest Dryden Mixed Conifer F. Wayne Bell & Partners Science & Information Resources Division Applied Research and Development Ontario Forest Research Institute (OFRI) Ministry of Natural Resources

2 Partners/Advisors NEBIE Principles Definitions and framework Neil Stocker, Dennis Joyce, John Parton, Doug Reid, Al Stinson, Bill Towill, Gordon Kayahara Silvicultural standards Thom McDonough, Gordon Kayahara, John Parton, Doug Reid, NEBIE Plot Network Experimental design Doug Pitt Installation Sets Tembec, Abitibi-Bowater (Bowater), Buchanan, Clergue, Domtar (Weyerhaeuser), Nipissing FRM, NRCan-CFS PRF Pw silviculture prescriptions - Steve D Eon, Al Stinson, Andre Morneault, Janet Lane, Jason NEBIE Data Collections for PW installations Floral diversity Steve Newmaster Timber John Parton and Jim Hayden Regeneration - John Winters Coarse woody material John Winters Line transects John Winters Soils Jim McLaughlin Pathology John McLaughlin and Sylvia Greifenhagen Knowledge transfer and extension Lisa Buse, Al Stinson, Andree Morneault, Steve D Eon,

3 Sustainable Management of Forest Ecosystems in Ontario

4

5 En travaillant avec les instruments progressif The long term health and vigour of Crown forests should be provided for by using forest practices that, within the limits of silvicultural requirements, emulate natural disturbances and landscape patterns while minimizing adverse effects on plant life, animal life, water, soil, air and social and economic values, including recreational values and heritage values. 1994, c. 25, s. 2 (3).

6 Global warming and Invasive species are NOT NEW Pine Spruce Birch Prairie Source: l

7 1999 IFM Workshop 204 participants: industry and both levels of govt. Identify education, training, and research needs relating to intensifying forest management. Focus: forest practices and applications; social, economic, and environmental concerns. Outputs: Bell et al. (2000)

8 FRP - Adaptive Management Approach Source: Bell et al. (2000)

9 Need for a Framework There are no constants in Forest Management. Forest managers will need to work within a system that is both flexible and complex enough to give them the capacity to encompass change, but yet simple enough that they can communicate their intentions to their stakeholders.

10 NEBIE Framework Site Productivity and Time Silviculture Stand composition (species and genetic makeup of a stand) Resource use (light, water and nutrients) Protection Natural disturbances fire, mammalian herbivores, insects, diseases, and severe weather (FhIDS factor) and man caused stressors (e.g., pollution) Utilization Top diameter and cull standards

11 NEBIE Framework Primary Forests Natural Forest Systems Secondary Forests (via Reforestation) Extensive Basic Intensive Elite Silviculture None Low Stand Composition (Species/genetics) High None Low Resources (allocation/amelioration) High Low Low Tree Protection (FhIDS factors) High None Low Harvesting Utilization High Range of managed systems and the degree of manipulation on the factors influencing forest productivity (Adapted from Richardson et al. 2002).

12

13 Species/Genetic Management Conifers balsam fir black spruce jack pine white spruce White pine w. red cedar Douglas fir Hardwoods white birch trembling aspen sugar maple Gross total stand volume Ave Max Ontario Non Ontario m 3 /ha

14 Location and Experimental Design Petawawa Research Forest South of Chalk River, Ontario B1 Randomized complete block design (RCBD) B2 B3 B4-4 blocks - 5 treatments

15

16 Objectives INTENSITY: Management Objective (at age to operability/ cutting cycle i.e. within specified timelines) Extensive Acceptable species and composition, threshold volume and quality requirements Basic Medium value, some quality improvement Intensive Elite Preferred species composition and volume High value Maximize wood value Specific wood volume and qualities expected Age to operability/ cutting cycle the same (considerable variability tolerated) < 80% < 60% < 50% of the natural rotation age

17 Stand Level Objectives INTENSITY: Extensive Basic Intensive Elite Harvest Scheduling Options: Low flexibility (area-based drivers) High flexibility (to maximize return on investment and capitalize on current market values) Biodiversity basis for consideration: Stand level Landscape (within limits of silviculture) Stand Yield predictability (at planning): Very Variable Variable Consistent

18 Silviculture (Species/Genotypes) INTENSITY: Extensive Basic Intensive Elite Allowable species g Genotypes Density range 1 at FTG 3 (well-spaced stems/ha) Pw, Pr, Sw, Bf, Pw, Sw, Pr, Pot, Or, Mr Bf Qualities maintained (highgrading not tolerated) 1,200+ Stand quality remains the same or is improved 1,600+ (800+ Pw) Uniformly high genetic quality 1,600 3,000 4 (1200+ Pw) Pw, Sw, Pr, Or Highest genetic quality 2 1, (1200+ Pw) Notes: 1. Acceptable growing stock; 2. May include exotics/ genetically modified trees and clonal deployment; 3. Exclusive of inhospitable areas (those that can t support tree survival -e.g. poorly drained shallow soils); 4. Excess trees to be removed (thinned), stand de-intensifies; or stand to be declared stagnant.

19 Silviculture (Resources) INTENSITY: Extensive Basic Intensive Elite Regen delay tolerance 1 : < 10 years 2 < 7 years 2 < 5 years < 5 years Gap (areas > 16m 2 ) tolerance 3 : < 10% 4 < 5% 5 (uniform distribution) Voids 6 : 4 ha 2 ha 0.5 ha Tree removal dbh limits 7 : To CFSA standards > 20 cm > 10 cm > 4 cm Notes: 1. After harvest; does not apply to uneven aged management; 2. Species and site specific; 3. Net area (exclusive of roads landings and inhospitable sites); 4. More than 10% of area in 16m 2 or larger gaps means BRS; 5. More than permissible areas means stand de-intensifies; 6. Definable areas within stands with BRS stocking requiring retreatment/reclassification; failing that, stand de-intensifies; 7. In selection and shelterwood systems

20 Silviculture (Resources) INTENSITY: Extensive Basic Intensive Elite Inter-specific competition: Intra-specific competition: Managed, if needed Not managed Managed (up to Free-to-Grow) Managed as required throughout rotation 1 Pruning: No No For protection purposes For protection and quality purposes Notes: 1. Managed at each cutting cycle in uneven-aged systems;

21

22 Protection INTENSITY: Extensive Basic Intensive Elite Priority (general): Lowest Medium 1 High Highest 2 Fire & Insects: Landscape level operations; outbreaks managed to achieve wood supply High priority sites for prevention and suppression Highest priority sites for prevention and suppression Notes: 1. Losses minimized through better planning and operational practices; treatments discretionary; 2. The same as pproperty for protection purposes; site engineering/ design applied to minimize threats; treatments subject to pre- planned threat assessments; emergency response plans prepared; health h monitoring and mitigation give precedence over other sites

23 Protection INTENSITY: Extensive Basic Intensive Elite Disease: Managed on a stand/ landscape basis Managed on a stand basis high blister rust hazard areas avoided High and medium blister rust hazard areas avoided Individual diseased trees removed prune if required Mammalian Herbivory: e.g. snowshow hare Risks accepted Priority for prevention and suppression High Highest Blowdown/ severe weather: Focus on Salvage Treatment designed to minimize risks,...lop and drop if required

24 Fig. 1 Fig. 3 Fig. 4 Fig. 2 Hodge et al Fig. 5

25 Protection INTENSITY: Extensive Basic Intensive Elite Tolerance for residual stem harvest damage: compaction rutting and erosion: Meet minimum obligation under CFSA Low Low; conservation of nutrient capital fundamental species change: Yes Some None Management failure if: Species shift to other forest unit(s) or value threshold degraded Anything less than that targeted.

26 PRF Installation Set Natural Extensive Basic 2005/ / / Leave unharvested (value of residual trees is in-kind contribution) Self generate to mixedwood forest Harvest - shelterwood method. Harvest only CFSA grade Leave for natural regeneration to achieve > 40 % stocking all species Harvest - shelterwood method. Maintain 15-20% mid-tolerant (birch) species. Mark and cut all trees with a diameter ³10cm Chemical SIP to maintain site till seed year If seed year then proceed with mechanical SIP (blading) Plant Block # 2 and Block # 4 with 800 Pw / hectare to achieve 60% stocking. Block # 1 and Block # 3 will regenerate naturally Vegetation management as required Remove overstory Pw

27 Intensive Elite 2005/ / Harvest - shelterwood method. Maintain 15-20% mid-tolerant species. Chemical SIP to maintain site till seed year If seed year then proceed with mechanical SIP (blading) Plant with 1200 Pw / hectare Pr or Sw / ha to achieve > 80% stocking Vegetation management as required Remove overstory Pw Harvest - shelterwood method. Maintain 15-20% mid-tolerant species. Mark to control disease Lop and drop Chemical SIP to maintain site till seed year If seed year then proceed with mechanical SIP (blading) Plant with 1200 Pw / ha Sw / ha to achieve > 80% stocking Vegetation management as required Pruning - target 200/ha at 8-10 cm dbh deemed on market evaluation at the time Remove overstory Pw and complete a pulp cut of planted Sw (CT)

28 Dryden Installation Set

29 Natural disturbances e.g., spring wildfire followed by natural regeneration Extensive winter cut and let to regenerate to fir and aspen Basic - cut, MSIP, plant 1200 SPH of black spruce and release Intensive - cut, MSIP, plant 2500 SPH of improved stock white and black spruce, release, and commercial thin Elite - cut, MSIP, plant 2500 SPH of improved spruce and white pine stock with preplanned orientation, release, and commercial thin

30 and test them through spatial and temporal analysis prior to implementation Knowledge Synthesis (FRP Year 1) IFM Knowledge 10/10 Objective Complete Basic Inventory Components Sensitivity Modeling of IFM treatments (FRP Years 1 and 2) Wood Supply Formulate Best Management Practices and Implement Operational IFM (FRP Year 2) Technology Transfer and Training (FRP Years 2 and 3) Silvicultural Effectiveness Monitoring Economics Biodiversity FRP Projects IFM Process Critical Uncertainties Focus for New Research Natural Extensive Basic Intensive Elite 28% 12% 5% 22% Plausible High Value Portfolio 33% 1 Gordon Cosens Forest, Kapuskasing 2 Smooth Rock Falls Forest, Smooth Rock Fall 3 Romeo Malette Forest, Timmins 4 Superior/ Martel Forest, Chapleau 5 Big Pic Forest, Marathon 6 Hearst Forest, Hearst 7 Nipissing Forest, North Bay 8 French/ Severn Forest, Parry Sound

31 Simulate Alternative Fibre Production Policies prior to implementation Identify critical uncertainties Set/adjust goals and objectives A, B, C, and/or D Evaluate - compare outcomes to forecasts Assess sustainability - economics - environment -social Transfer &Training Transfer & Training Monitor - silviculture - biodiversity Design plan & formulate best management practices Identify uncertainties A, B, or C A, B, and/or C Identify uncertainties Implement - compliance monitoring Transfer & Training Transfer & Training Identify uncertainties A, B, and/or C Reduce critical uncertainties by: A) Contacting experts B) Reviewing literature C) Supporting new research D) Improving inventories

32 Questions