Dual Benefits of Intensification From Possible to Practical
Objective Put a question before you Is it time for a serious examination of intensifying forest management to meet wood supply and conservation goals?
Some context Recap a success story NB possibilities Implementation realities Pre-requisites for success
Some Context 3 Constants We want more wood & more forest conservation More wood supply = less conservation forest More conservation forest = less wood supply True only if Wood Production Conservation
Some Context 3 Constants We want more wood & more forest conservation More wood supply = less conservation forest True only if More conservation forest = less wood supply Growing stock 1 constraint exists Growth rates 2 are fixed Volume 2040 2000 2020 1980
Some Context 3 Constants We want more wood & more forest conservation More wood supply = less conservation forest More conservation forest = less wood supply How to Change? Wood Production Conservation
Some Context Increase growth rate More wood supply on fixed area Wood Supply from Fixed Area Mean Annual Increment
Some Context Increase growth rate More wood supply on fixed area Less area for a fixed wood supply Opportunity Area Needed to Increase To Produce Conservation Fixed Volume or PNA Area Mean Annual Increment
Some Context Potential solution If growth rates are significantly increased More wood supply More conservation/PNA forest Dual Benefit Wood Production Conservation
Some context Recap a success story NB possibilities Implementation realities Pre-requisites for success
New Zealand 45 o N 45 o S
New Zealand Forest = 9.5 million ha % of Forest % of Harvest Area Volume 100 ~18% 80 Plantation Forest 60 ~82% 40 Natural Forest (conservation) 20 0
New Zealand Plantation Forest = 1.7 million ha Intensive management 100% exotic species (P. radiate) improved stock Site prep with (3x generation) herbicides
New Zealand Plantation Forest = 1.7 million ha Intensive management 8m Intermediate treatments both thinning pruning Ultra-high
New Zealand Plantation Forest = 1.7 million ha Intensive management Rapid growth High yields (20-25 m3/ha/yr) Short rotations
Quid Pro Quo
Quid Pro Quo
Quid Pro Quo
New Zealand Peaceful (& productive) Co-existence Conserved native forest Vibrant forest economy > 4x production forest (on 18% of forest) NZ is a tourism mecca (largely Very aggressive timber because of its environment) management regimes Tourism = #2 $ contributor Forestry = #3 $ contributor to economy to economy
Some context Recap a success story NB possibilities Implementation realities Pre-requisites for success
NB Possibilities But can we capture the dual benefit of intensification?
NB Possibilities Crown AAC Current AACs (million m 3 /yr) Cedar 0.15 0.16 White Pine 1.90 Hardwood SFjP 3.95
NB Possibilities Site selection Intensification Potential Site prep Improved stock Density/stocking control Competition control High Potential To Increase Growth Low Hardwood Cedar SFjP White Pine
NB Possibilities Growth vs Area for Wood Production To produce 4 million m 3 /yr (current SFjP AAC) 60 50 40 % Forest Area for Wood Production 30 20 10 0 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Annual Increment (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities Growth vs Area for Wood Production To produce 4 million m 3 /yr (current SFjP AAC) 60 50 38 40 % Forest Area for Wood Production 29 30 23 19 20 16 14 13 10 0 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Annual Increment (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities Black Spruce Intensification Potential JDI Plantation Data
NB Possibilities Black Spruce White spruce Intensification Potential JDI Plantation Data
NB Possibilities Black Spruce White spruce Intensification Potential Norway Spruce JDI Plantation 7 Data
NB Possibilities Growth vs Area for Wood Production Wood Supply 80 (million m 3 /yr) 70 4 60 50 % Forest Area for Wood Production 40 30 20 10 0 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Annual Increment (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities Growth vs Area for Wood Production Wood Supply 80 (million m 3 /yr) 70 4 60 6 50 % Forest Area for Wood Production 40 30 20 10 0 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Annual Increment (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities Growth vs Area for Wood Production Wood Supply 80 (million m 3 /yr) 70 4 60 6 50 % Forest Area for 8 Wood Production 40 30 20 10 0 Jaakko Poyry 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Annual Increment (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities Some Scenarios & Assumptions Cedar No intensification for these species Realize MAI of 2.5 m 3 /ha/yr ( Extensive ) White Pine 0.88 million ha to meet combined AAC Hardwood ( 26% of Crown forest) Maintain at 4 million m 3 /yr (current) SFjP Increase to 6 million m 3 /yr Increase to 8 million m 3 /yr
NB Possibilities SF AAC @ 4 million m 3 /yr Growth vs Land Allocation 100 Protected 80 % of Triad 60 Forest Intensive Concept 40 (plantations) 20 Extensive (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 2.5 5 7 9 MAI of Plantations (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities SF AAC @ 4 million m 3 /yr Growth vs Land Allocation 100 Protected 24 80 % of Triad 60 49 Forest Intensive Concept 40 (plantations) 20 Extensive 26 (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 2.5 5 7 9 MAI of Plantations (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities SF AAC @ 4 million m 3 /yr Growth vs Land Allocation 100 Protected 24 80 49 % of 60 49 Forest Intensive 40 (plantations) 24 20 Extensive 26 26 (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 2.5 5 7 9 MAI of Plantations (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities SF AAC @ 4 million m 3 /yr Growth vs Land Allocation 100 Protected 24 80 49 56 % of 60 49 Forest Intensive 40 (plantations) 24 17 20 Extensive 26 26 26 (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 2.5 5 7 9 MAI of Plantations (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities SF AAC @ 4 million m 3 /yr Growth vs Land Allocation 100 Protected 24 80 49 56 % of 60 49 60 Forest Intensive 40 (plantations) 24 17 14 20 Extensive 26 26 26 26 (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 2.5 5 7 9 MAI of Plantations (m 3 /ha/yr)
NB Possibilities Intensive: growth at 7m 3 /ha/yr Land Allocation at Different AACs Protected 100 80 56 % of 60 Forest Intensive (plantations) 40 17 20 Extensive 26 (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 4 4 6 8 SF Wood Supply (million m 3 /yr)
NB Possibilities Intensive: growth at 7m 3 /ha/yr Land Allocation at Different AACs Protected 100 80 56 47 % of 60 Forest Intensive (plantations) 40 26 17 20 Extensive 26 26 (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 4 6 4 6 8 SF Wood Supply (million m 3 /yr)
NB Possibilities Intensive: growth at 7m 3 /ha/yr Land Allocation at Different AACs Protected 100 80 39 56 47 % of 60 Forest Intensive 35 (plantations) 40 26 17 20 Extensive 26 26 26 (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 8 4 6 4 6 8 SF Wood Supply (million m 3 /yr)
Some context Recap a success story NB possibilities Implementation realities Pre-requisites for success
Implementation Realities Some Problems/Challenges to Consider timing transition space (location) collateral impacts performance
Implementation Realities Problem of Timing Increase Gain PNA Loss = Gain Wood * Loss Supply Gain from Intensification Time Intensify Mgmt * If growing stock is limiting
Implementation Realities Problem of Timing how to increase PNA & maintain wood supply? Protected Area Wood Supply Time
Implementation Realities Problem of Timing harvest some area then assign to PNA gradual increase in PNA Protected Area Wood mitigate wood supply loss Supply Time
Implementation Realities Problem of Transition if plantations can fully provide SF supply how to source supply until full reliance on plantations? Protected 100 80 39 56 47 % of 60 Forest Intensive 35 (plantations) 40 26 17 20 Extensive 26 26 26 (2.5 m 3 /ha/yr) 0 4 6 8 SF Wood Supply (million m 3 /yr)
Implementation Realities Problem of Transition 7 m 3 /ha/yr MAI 40 year rotation to sustain 4.2 mill m 3 /yr 600 000 ha (17%) plant 15 000 ha/yr Required plantation age structure 80 70 60 50 ha 40 1000s 30 20 10 - 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Stand Age
Implementation Realities Problem of Transition 7 m 3 /ha/yr MAI 40 year rotation to sustain 4.2 mill m 3 /yr 600 000 ha (17%) plant 15 000 ha/yr Required plantation Current plantation age structure age structure 80 80 70 70 60 60 50 50 ha 40 ha 40 1000s 1000s 30 30 20 20 10 10 - 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Stand Age Stand Age
Implementation Realities Problem of Transition 7 m 3 /ha/yr MAI 40 year rotation to sustain 4.2 mill m 3 /yr 600 000 ha (17%) plant 15 000 ha/yr Structural Required plantation Current plantation deficit age structure age structure 80 80 70 70 60 60 50 50 ha 40 ha 40 1000s 1000s 30 30 20 20 10 10 - 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Stand Age Stand Age
Recommend
More recommend
