FREP Mission To be a world leader in resource stewardship monitoring and effectiveness evaluations; communicating science- based information to enhance the knowledge of resource professionals and inform balanced decision making and continuous improvement of British Columbia’s forest and range practices, policies and legislation.
FREP Objectives Long-term commitment by government to: •Assess the effectiveness of forest and range legislation •Determine whether forest and range practices are achieving government’s objectives •Resource value status and trends, and •Opportunities for continued improvement
Results-based Model Policy Realm FRPA Compliance Plan & and Practice Objectives Enforcement Requirements Professional Reliance Effectiveness Evaluation
How the Program Works 5
FREP Context • Under FRPA, – the forest industry is responsible for developing results and strategies for the sustainable management of resources. – the government is to ensure compliance with established results and strategies and other practice requirements, and evaluate the effectiveness of forest and range practices in achieving management objectives. 6
What is FREP and what are FREP goals? • Assess whether forest and range practices under FRPA are effectively maintaining the 11 FRPA resource values • Determine whether these practices, and the legislation itself, meet the government’s broader commitment to sustainable resource management in B.C. • Implement continuous improvement of forest management . 7
How does FREP work? • Protocols guide the collection of data • Ministry staff collect the field data on randomly selected blocks • Provincial staff analyze the data • Results from the data collection are communicated 8
•4000 samples •plus 1000 additional forage and soils •Random selection – follows harvest
FREP Values, Information & Results – Biodiversity – Fish/Riparian – Water Quality – Visual Quality – Timber – Cultural Heritage – Forage – Soils – Visit our website. http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/frep/index.htm
Communicating FREP Results 1. Chief Forester’s Report 2. Individual resource value reports 3. Extension notes 4. Presentations 5. YouTube
FREP RESULTS – Opportunities Biodiversity Leaving large trees (live and dead), long CWD, mix of dispersed and patch retention Fish/Riparian Leaving full retention within first 10m of all S4 and perennial S5-6 streams that deliver water, nutrients and invertebrates downstream to FBS and/or drinking water Water Quality Shorter ditchlines, filtering suspended sediment and avoid ditchlines ending at creeks Visual Quality Leaving higher levels of in-block retention and design Timber Planting species densities and mixes that account for pest, disease and abiotic factors Forage Retaining natural range barriers and following well established BMPs Soils Avoiding compaction on very wet soils and thick layers of slash Cultural Heritage Engaging First Nations through proactive pre- planning/communications
Okanagan Shuswap District Forest & Range Evaluation Program results from field seasons 2006-2010 13
Okanagan Shuswap Forest District FREP Program • Starting in 2006 the District has implemented the biodiversity, riparian, water quality and visuals protocols. 14
Stand Level Biodiversity Evaluation Question Is stand-level retention providing the range of habitat with the structural attributes understood as necessary for maintaining the species dependent on wildlife trees and coarse woody debris (CWD)? 15
Stand Level Biodiversity Indicators •% of cutblock retained •Patch size & location •Ecological Anchors (Cavity nests, active wildlife trails, hollow trees,…) •Veteran trees •Large snags •Tree species •Large diameter trees (>= to 50 cm dbh) 16
Stand Level Biodiversity Indicators cont. • CWD volume • CWD long pieces • Windthrow • Invasive Species 17
Stand Level Biodiversity Results 2006 to 2010 BEC # of FREP # of Baseline Subzone sampled Cruise Blocks Blocks ESSFdc 8 21 ESSFwc 10 5 ESSFxc 2 0 ICHmk 5 31 ICHmw 11 42 ICHwk 1 0 IDFdk 4 0 IDFmw 5 0 IDFxh 1 0 MSdm 14 72 MSxk 3 0 Total 64 171 18
Stand Level Biodiversity Results • 64 blocks sampled, 1,833 ha gross area • 56 blocks with retention • 6 blocks with no retention • 156.9 ha in patch retention • 62.6 ha of dispersed retention • 72 patches <= 2 ha (78%) • 20 patches > 2 ha (22%) • Windthrow : 5 blocks = 0%, 40 blocks <5%, 5% < 9 blocks < 10%, 10 blocks >10% • 25 patches internal to cutblock boundary (27%) • 61 patches on the edge of the cutblock (66%) • 6 patches external to cutblock (7%). • 36% of the blocks contained invasive species after harvest. 19
Looking at the retention level What are the benchmarks? • FRPA states 7% as a default. • Biodiversity Guidebook (range of retention depending on emphasis). • Studies (Huggard 2006- synthesis of 51 bird studies) have shown that retention between 15-20% may be – sufficient to maintain abundance of low sensitivity bird species (Black-capped chickadee, downy woodpecker). – More sensitive bird species (mountain chickadee, brown creeper) would require at least 35-40% retention. 20
Looking at the retention level 21
Retention compared to the baseline Snags ≥ 30cm DBH and ≥ 10m tall Large dead trees are important habitat for wildlife tree users. ICHmw 1.0 • ICHmw zone: The density of large, tall snags in the 11 0.8 Cumulative Distribution sampled FREP blocks is lower than the density of 0.6 large, tall snags in the baseline (i.e., cruise) blocks 0.4 approximately 90% of the Baseline Retention time . 0.2 0.0 0 50 100 Large snags (sph) 22
Retention compared to the baseline Snags ≥ 30cm DBH and ≥ 10m tall Large dead trees are important habitat for wildlife tree users. MSdm 1.0 • MSdm zone: The density 0.8 Cumulative Distribution of large, tall snags in the 14 sampled FREP blocks is 0.6 lower than the density of large, tall snags in the 0.4 baseline blocks Baseline Retention approximately 70% of the 0.2 time . •Note the high percentage of 0.0 FREP blocks with zero large 0 50 100 150 snags compared to the baseline. Large snags (sph) 23
Retention compared to the baseline Large trees >= 50 cm DBH Large size is one of the main considerations for determining a high value wildlife tree. ICHmw MSdm 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 Cumulative Distribution Cumulative Distribution 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 Baseline Baseline Retention Retention 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150 200 50cm and larger trees/ha 50cm and larger trees/ha No significant difference between baseline and FREP samples. 24
Retention compared to the baseline Number of Tree Species The maintenance of the diversity of naturally occurring plant species is key to the maintenance of biological diversity within landscape units ICHmw MSdm 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 Cumulative Distribution Cumulative Distribution 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 Baseline Retention Baseline 0.2 0.2 Retention 0.0 0.0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Number of Tree Species Number of Tree Species Marginally significant difference. No significant difference. 25
Retention compared to the baseline Coarse Woody Debris – big pieces/ha Long pieces of coarse woody debris are more valuable than short pieces of similar diameter. They last longer before they decay into the soil. ICHmw MSdm 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 Cumulative Distribution Cumulative Distribution 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 Patch Patch 0.2 0.2 Harvest Harvest 0.0 0.0 0 50 100 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 CWD big pieces/ha CWD big pieces/ha No Significant difference. Highly significant difference. 26
Retention compared to the baseline Coarse Woody Debris 1.00 • All BEC zones: CWD 0.75 volume in the wildlife tree Cum Prob patches seems to be very 0.50 similar to the harvest areas in the first 60% of the blocks 0.25 0.00 0 100 200 300 400 CWD Volume 27
Stand Level Biodiversity Conclusion • More blocks need to retain functional tall snags. • More blocks need to retain long CWD piece size (>= 10 m) • Tree species retention is acceptable. • All blocks should have retention (8 samples, 12% have <1%). • Patch size need to increase (76% <=2 ha) • 81% of the blocks have less than 15% retention (min retention for low sensitivity bird from Huggard research paper). (64% of the samples have > 7% retention) • Retention of large trees for ICHmw and MSdm is comparable to the baseline. (not enough samples for other BEC zones) • There is a good windthrow management strategy in place : 70% of blocks <= 5% windthrow. 28
Riparian Evaluation Question Are riparian forestry and range practices effective in maintaining the structural integrity and functions of stream ecosystems and other aquatic resource features over both short and long terms? 29
Riparian Indicators 1. Channel bed disturbance 2. Channel bank disturbance 3. LWD characteristics 4. Channel morphology 5. Aquatic connectivity 6. Fish cover diversity 7. Moss abundance & condition 8. Fine sediments 30
Recommend
More recommend
