tree species harvested in areas affected by mountain pine ... · with little pure pine. other...
TRANSCRIPT
Tree Species Harvested in Areas Affected by Mountain Pine Beetles
Marvin EngManager, Special Investigations
British Columbia’s independent watchdog
for sound forest practices
Audits of forest and range practices
Complaint investigations
Special investigations and reports
Alberta
Yukon Territory Northwest Territories
Washington
Alaska
MontanaIdaho2000
Alberta
Yukon Territory Northwest Territories
Washington
Alaska
MontanaIdaho2001
Alberta
Yukon Territory Northwest Territories
Washington
Alaska
MontanaIdaho2002
Alberta
Yukon Territory Northwest Territories
Washington
Alaska
MontanaIdaho2003
Alberta
Yukon Territory Northwest Territories
Washington
Alaska
MontanaIdaho2004
Alberta
Yukon Territory Northwest Territories
Washington
Alaska
MontanaIdaho2005
Alberta
Yukon Territory Northwest Territories
Washington
Alaska
MontanaIdaho2006
20 34
Million m3
Increases in the AAC
Increases in the AAC
Alberta
Yukon Territory Northwest Territories
Washington
Alaska
MontanaIdaho2008
76
Million m3
50
Over the entire interior of BC
Objective for this report
Does the profile of species harvested meet MoFR expectations?
Why are species other than pine being harvested?
Does it make any difference?
Methods
Examination of Harvest Billing System records:
Volume
Species
License (type)
Interviews with MoFR staff and licensees.
“to the extent possible, the [harvest] is completely dedicated to removing, as a first priority, timber that has already been affected” by MPB.
Pedersen, L. 2004.
“it is essential to ensure in the wake of this epidemic that non-pine stands are reserved for future timber supply.”
Benskin, H. 2005.
Does the harvest meet MoFR expectations?
-
10
20
30
40
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Volu
me
harv
este
d (m
illio
ns o
f met
ers3
)
Year
Pine
Other
Spruce
BalsamDouglas Fir
Allowable Annual
Cut
Allowable Annual
Cut
Does the harvest meet MoFR expectations?
-
10
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Volu
me
harv
este
d (m
illio
ns o
f met
ers3
)
Year
Other
Spruce
Balsam
Douglas Fir
-
10
20
30
40
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Volu
me
harv
este
d (m
illio
ns o
f met
ers3
)
Year
Pine
Other
Spruce
BalsamDouglas Fir
Allowable Annual
Cut
Allowable Annual
Cut
Does the harvest meet MoFR expectations?
Why are non-pine species harvested?
Not all wood products can be made from pine.
Why are non-pine species harvested?
Pine often occurs in mixed stands
Why are non-pine species harvested?
0%
50%
0% 50% 100%Percent Pine on Landbase
Perc
ent P
ine
in H
arve
st100% -
“Expected”% in harvest = %
on landbase
“Observed” Trend
Quesnel
Vanderhoof
Lakes
Merritt
Prince George
Fort St. James
Kamloops
Okanagan
Why are non-pine species harvested?
Replaceable Forest Licences
BC Timber Sales
Non-Replaceable
Forest Licences
Other
Volume Harvested by Licence Type
Why are non-pine species harvested?
-
2.5
5.0
0-19% 20-39% 40-59% 60-79% 80-100%
Percent Pine Category
Volu
me
(mill
ions
of c
ubic
met
res)
Replaceable Forest Licence
BC Timber Sales
Non-Replaceable Forest Licence
Other In areas where theinventory is:
> 60% “pure pine”
Vanderhoof&
Quesnel
Percent Pine in Cutting Permit-
4
8
12
0-19% 20-39% 40-59% 60-79% 80-100%Percent Pine Category
Volu
me
(mill
ions
of c
ubic
met
res)
Replaceable Forest Licence
BC Timber Sales
Non-Replaceable Forest Licence
Other
Inventory is:< 50% “pure pine”
Percent Pine in Cutting Permit
Vol
ume
Har
vest
ed (M
illio
ns M
3 )
-
2.5
5.0
0-19% 20-39% 40-59% 60-79% 80-100%
Percent Pine Category
Volume (millions of cubic metres)
Replaceable Forest Licence
BC Timber Sales
Non-Replaceable Forest Licence
Other
5
Inventory is:> 60% “pure pine”
Why are non-pine species harvested?Licensees are constrained to operating areas with little pure pine.
Other forest health issues (spruce bark beetle).AAC partitions for cedar/hemlock & deciduous.Infestation is in low % pine stands.High priority stands for regeneration are high site index (not pure pine).Pure pine stands are past shelf life.Administrative impediments (now resolved)
Does it make any difference?
-
200
400
600
0 -19% 20 -39% 40 -59% 60 -79% 80 -100%Percent Pine Categories
On the Landbase
Harvest (Actual salvage to date)
Harvest (10 years at Full AAC)
Vol
ume
(Mill
ions
m3 )
Does it make any difference?
H
#*
#*
!.
!.!(
!(
LAKEBURNS
Stuart
Lake
L
GEORGE
PRINCE
VE
RS A L M O N
RST U
A R T
R
ST JAMES
FraserLake
VANDERHOOF
NE
C
HA
KO
R I V E Rncois Lake,
QUESNEL
Nazko
C H I L A K O
RI
VE
R
R I V E R
W E S T
R O A D
A N
RI
V
huckL
F
RA
S
FORT
Conclusions
All of the increased AAC has been devoted to harvesting pine.
Non-pine trees are harvested because:Not all wood products can be made from pine.
Pine often occurs in mixed stand and we clearcut.
If we continue with the current harvest profile:At least 1.5 million ha of dead pine will not be harvested.
Up to 80% of the “mixed stands” will be harvested.
Concerns –
about monitoring harvest
The cutting permit is the finest level of spatial resolution in the Harvest Billing System.
CP 12345 CP 54321
Concerns –
about monitoring harvestThe Harvest Billing System records volumes brought to mills – there is no record of much of the volume that is harvested but left on site.
Summary
The harvest profile is meeting MoFRexpectations.Non-pine trees are harvested because of:
Economic imperatives.Physical constraints.
The current harvest profile may have negative consequences in the future.There are concerns about our ability to monitor harvesting.