Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
FOREST STEWARDSHIP PLAN: Background Information Material that supports the FSP but is not part of the FSP (FSP Extension)
North Vancouver Island Forest Operations of Western Forest Products Inc.
Port McNeill, Holberg, Jeune Landing, and Englewood Forest Operations. Licences: TFL 6, TFL 37, TFL 39 (Block 4), FL A19244, and associated TL’s
1
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
PREAMBLE This is an amendment to the May 22, 2007 Forest Stewardship Plan. The FSP was submitted for extension in 2012 in accordance with FRPA s.6 and FPPR s.28. The May 22, 2007 Forest Stewardship Plan (FSP) was the first FSP under BC’s new Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA), and related government regulations, for the forest tenures identified in this FSP, which are located on Northern Vancouver Island, in the vicinity of Port McNeill, Woss, Port Alice, Telegraph Cove, Port Hardy, Coal Harbour, Quatsino, Holberg, Winter Harbour, and Alert Bay. The FSP applies to the tenures identified in Section 3.0 of the FSP. FSPs are a key operational plan under FRPA, replacing Forest Development Plans under the Forest Practices Code. FSPs identify where timber harvesting and road construction may occur, are subject to public review and comment, and must be approved by government before taking effect. FSPs differ from FDPs in that they can apply to broad areas called Forest Development Units (FDUs), do not show cutblocks and roads for approval, and are in effect for longer terms. For each of the 11 FRPA values and their Objectives set by government, such as wildlife and biodiversity, the FSP identifies legally binding results and strategies, forest practices, measures, and standards, that will be required to be implemented by the licensee in the forest development units. Results and strategies must be consistent with government Objectives, and must be measurable and verifiable. The FSP also must be consistent with government Objectives set in Land-Use Plans, such as the Vancouver Island Land Use Plan, and sub-unit plans such as approved Landscape Unit Plans. This FSP has been divided into 11 FDUs as shown on the overview map in this FSP. The FDU boundaries correspond with Landscape Unit boundaries, and one FDU corresponds with Bill 28 takeback areas and TL’s that were sold, to address outstanding silviculture obligations. An overview map (fig. 1) in this FSP shows the location of all FDU’s. More detailed FSP maps are available on the WFP website, and at the below address. Forest Stewardship initiatives by WFP do not end at the FSP. The FSP forms only one part of the overall forest stewardship and due diligence process. Examples of other sustainability initiatives by WFP include ISO 14001 Environmental Management System, Standard Operating Procedures, CSA Z809-08 Sustainable Forest Management Plans, CSA public advisory group, LBIR administration, and TFL Management Plans. In addition to the legal framework in the FSP, other regulatory requirements are outside the FSP, such as the Heritage Conservation Act, Wildlife Act, Foresters Act, Land Act, Federal Species at Risk Act, Federal Fisheries Act, and First Nations case law. The WFP North Vancouver Island FSP with maps and appendices can be found at: www.westernforest.com/fstew/fplanning.html More information on FSPs and the public and First Nations input process is available at: http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/code/training/frpa/FSP_brochure.pdf Comments should be directed to: Western Forest Products Inc. Bag 5000 1921 South West Main Port McNeill, BC V0N 2R0 Attn: Jon Flintoft, RPF
[email protected] 250-956-5245
2
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Figure 1. NVIR FSP Forest Development Units
3
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
PREAMBLE ................................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 1. NVIR FSP Forest Development Units ......................................................................... 3
1.0
Date of Submission .................................................................................. 7
2.0
Interpretation ............................................................................................ 7
3.0
Application of This FSP ........................................................................... 7
3.1 Licensee(s) and Licence(s) (FRPA Act s.3(4)) ............................................................. 7 3.2 Application of This FSP to FPC Obligations (FRPA Act ss.197 (4) (5) and (7) and FPPR s.14(1)(d) and (e)) ............................................................................................................ 8
4.0
Term of This FSP (FRPA ss.6(1)(a) and (b)) ........................................... 9
5.0 FSP Map and Forest Development Units (FDUs) (FRPA Act s.5(1)(a), FPPR s.14) ........................................................................................................... 9 5.1 Boundaries of FDU ......................................................................................................... 9 5.2 New Forest Development Units (FRPA s.5(1)(a) and FPPR s.14(1)(a)) ..................... 10 5.3 Forest Development Units in Effect on Date of Submission of This FSP (FRPA ss.7(1.1) and (2) and 5(1)(a) and FPPR s.14(1)(b)) ................................................................ 10 5.4 Areas to Which s.196(1) of the Act Apply (FRPA s.196(1); FPPR s.14(1)(c) .............. 10 5.5 Designations in Effect Four Months Before Submission of This FSP (FPPR s.14(2)) 10 5.6 Areas within FDU’s considered to be approved (FRPA ss.196(1) and (2) and FPPR ss.14(1)(c) and 110) .................................................................................................................. 10 5.7 Areas within FDU Subject to Cutting Permit or Road Permit (FPPR s.14(3) and FRPA s.196 (transition from FDP)) ...................................................................................................... 10 5.8 Declared Areas (FPPR s.14(4)) ................................................................................... 10
6.0 6.1
FRPA Values and Results or Strategies ............................................... 11 FRPA Value: Soil .................................................................................... 13 Table 1.1: Soils .................................................................................................................... 13
6.2
FRPA Value: Timber ............................................................................... 19 Table 2.1: Objective Set by Government for Timber ............................................................ 19
6.3 FRPA Value: Water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within riparian areas 19 Table 3.1: Water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within riparian areas ................................... 20 Table 3.2: Water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within riparian areas: alternative for windthrow management ........................................................................................................ 36 Table 3.3: Silviculture treatments in a riparian reserve zone............................................... 47 Table 3.4: Retention of trees in a riparian management zone............................................. 49
6.4
FRPA Value: Fish habitat in fisheries sensitive watersheds .............. 56 Table 4.1: Fisheries sensitive watersheds ........................................................................... 57
6.5
FRPA Value: Water in Community Watersheds ................................... 59 Table 5.1: Community Watersheds ..................................................................................... 59
6.6
FRPA Value: Wildlife and Biodiversity at Landscape level ................ 63 Table 6.1: Cutblock size and green-up generally ................................................................ 63 Table 6.2: Cutblock size and green-up – Enhanced Forestry Zones .................................. 79
4
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Table 6.3: Cutblock size and silviculture systems – Special Management Zones .............. 79 Table 6.4: Mature and old seral stages – Special Management Zones .............................. 85 Table 6.5: Late successional habitat elements and attributes of biodiversity – Special Management Zones .............................................................................................................. 87 Table 6.6: Non-spatial Old Growth ...................................................................................... 89 Table 6.7: Old Growth Management Areas approved in Landscape Unit Plans ................. 94
6.7
FRPA Value: Wildlife and Biodiversity Stand level ............................ 96 Table 7.1: Wildlife trees ........................................................................................................ 96
6.8
FRPA Value: Wildlife ............................................................................ 100 Table 8.1: Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus).............................................. 101 Table 8.2: “Queen Charlotte” Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis laingi) ....................... 108 Table 8.3: “Queen Charlotte” Northern Goshawk in Nimpkish FDUs ................................ 111 Table 8.4: Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias fannini) ...................................................... 114 Table 8.5: Coastal Tailed Frog (Ascaphus truie) ............................................................... 116 Table 8.6: TFL 6 and TFL 39 Black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) ..... 117 Table 8.7: TFL 37 Black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) and Roosevelt Elk (Cervus elephus roosevelti) ................................................................................................ 118 Table 8.8: Kingcome TSA (FL A19244, and TL’s): Black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) and Roosevelt Elk (Cervus elephus roosevelti) ........................................... 121 Table 8.9: Other General wildlife measures ...................................................................... 121
6.9
FRPA Value: Visual Quality ................................................................. 122 Table 9.1: Visual quality ..................................................................................................... 122
6.10
FRPA Value: Cultural Heritage Resources......................................... 126 Table 10.1: Cultural Heritage Resources ........................................................................... 126
6.11
FRPA value: recreation ........................................................................ 131 Table 11.1: Recreation sites and trails .............................................................................. 131
6.12
FRPA Values: Resource Features ...................................................... 131 Table 12.1: Resource features .......................................................................................... 131
7.0
FRPA Measures: invasive plants ........................................................ 132 Table 13.1: Invasive Plants ................................................................................................ 132 Table 13.2: Natural Range Barriers ................................................................................... 142
8.0
STOCKING STANDARDS ..................................................................... 142
8.1 Application .................................................................................................................. 142 8.2 Application to Cutblocks Where Harvesting Began Before Term Commences (Act s.197(5)) and declaration was not received by MoFR within RESULTS ................................ 142 8.3 Situation or Circumstances that Determine Whether Free Growing is Assessed on a Block Basis (FPPR s.44(1) or Across Blocks (FPPR ss.45(1) and (2)) (FPPR s.16(1) .......... 143 8.4 Stocking and Related Standards for Stands to which Free Growing Obligations Apply 143 8.4.1 Species ....................................................................................................................... 143 8.4.2 Stocking ...................................................................................................................... 143 8.4.3 Regeneration Date ..................................................................................................... 144 8.4.4 Minimum Free Growing Height .................................................................................. 144 8.5 Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management ............................................. 144 8.6 Intermediate Cutting and Other Partial Cutting (FPPR s.16(4) and s.44(4)) ............. 144
5
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
9.0
Signature(s) (FRPA Act s.5(3)) ............................................................ 148
Appendix 1: Stocking Standards ................................................................... 149 Stocking Standards: Background Information (not part of the result or strategy): ......................................................................................................... 170 1.0 STOCKING AND RELATED STANDARDS FOR STANDS TO WHICH FREE GROWING OBLIGATIONS APPLY ............................................................................................................... 170
1.1 Introduction: .............................................................................................. 170 1.2 Mosaics: .................................................................................................... 170 1.3 Process: ..................................................................................................... 171 1.3.1 SU stratification at the Site Plan stage: .......................................................................... 172 1.3.2 Assessment Approach Envisioned for the Standard: .................................................... 172 1.3.3 Audit: .............................................................................................................................. 173 1.3.4 Site Series: ..................................................................................................................... 174
1.4 Elements of the stocking standard ......................................................... 174 1.4.1 Species: .......................................................................................................................... 174 1.4.2 Preferred vs. Acceptable ................................................................................................ 175 1.4.3 Target Stocking Standard (TSS): ................................................................................... 176 1.4.4 Minimum Stocking Standards (MSS): ............................................................................ 176 1.4.5 Regeneration Date: ........................................................................................................ 176 1.4.6 Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance ....................................................................... 177 1.4.7 Minimum Free Growing Height: ..................................................................................... 178
1.5 Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management ......................... 179 2.0 INTERMEDIATE AND PARTIAL CUT: ................................................................................ 180
Appendix 2: SMZ Analysis and Non Spatial Old Growth Data .................... 182 Appendix 3: Cultural Heritage Resources Data (Confidential).................... 184 Appendix 4 List of CP, 196(1), and 196(2)B cutblocks. ................................ 196
6
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
1.0
Date of Submission
May 22, 2007. FSP extension requested January 18, 2012
2.0
Interpretation
In this Forest Stewardship Plan (FSP): Licensee refers to licensees or agreement holders that have prepared and obtained the minister's approval of the forest stewardship plan or are party to the Forest Stewardship Plan as described in FRPA s.3 and FRPA s.5, and are “Holders of the Forest Stewardship Plan” or “Co-Holders of the Forest Stewardship Plan” as described in FRPA s.21 and FPPR s.106.3. Results or Strategies in this FSP are proposed pursuant to Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA) Section 5. Results or Strategies and Undertakings in this FSP refer to the Forest and Range Practices Act, Forest Planning and Practices Regulation (FPPR), and/or Government Actions Regulation (GAR) as they were on the date the FSP was submitted for approval; results and strategies apply within the specified FDUs, during the term of the plan, for the primary forest activity by the licensees holding the FSP, subject to any qualifications or limitations in the Results or Strategies. The word “section” or “subsection” or the abbreviations “s.” or “ss.” is used to indicate a numbered section or sections of the indicated Act, Regulation, or Order. FSP sections may also be referred to with “s.” in reference to numbered subsections in the Tables. The FSP Measures and Stocking Standards may apply in the Bill 28 FDU; results and strategies do not apply in the Bill 28 FDU unless otherwise noted. Bill 28 FDU areas taken from TFL 6 and FL A19240 are now in the Pacific TSA. The “Bill 28” FDU has been amended to include portions of former WFP areas from licences that have been sold since the original plan was approved: T0596, T0615, T0626, T0326, T0632, T0306, T0293, T0860, T0216, T0592, T0611, T0629, and Portions TFL 6 and 39(4) now in North Island Community Forest K3Z. Sections of Orders, Notices, and Objectives are quoted in italics in this FSP for convenience only; if there is a discrepancy between the FSP text and a quoted section, the text in the Act, Regulation, Order, or Notice prevails, and should be used in preference to the FSP text. The term “Enactment” in this FSP, has the same meaning as it has in the Forest and Range Practices Act. The abbreviation “R/S” in this FSP means “result or strategy”. Background Information where contained in this FSP, is not part of the FSP or the FSP results and strategies.
3.0
Application of This FSP
3.1
Licensee(s) and Licence(s) (FRPA Act s.3(4))
7
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
This FSP applies to each cutting permit and road permit issued or granted to the licensees holding this FSP: (a)
after the FSP term commences;
(b)
within FDUs; and
(c)
under or in respect of the following licences:
Licensee Western Forest Products Inc.
Quatsino First Nation
Atli Resources Limited Partnership Western Forest Products Inc. “Bill 28 FDU”: eg. measures and silviculture obligations only
Licences Tree Farm Licence 6 Tree Farm Licence 37 Tree Farm Licence 39 (Block 4) FL A19244 T0592 (Waukwaas Creek) and T0860 (Lemare Lake) Added TSL A66259, with Amendments #2 January 7, 2008, and subsequent amendments A84672, Amendment 5, April 24, 2009 FL A19240 T0596, T0615, T0626, T0326, T0632, T0306, T0293, T0216, T0611, T0629, FL A19225, Portions TFL 6 and 39(4) now in North Island Community Forest K3Z
and, for greater certainty, applies to the obligations of the licensee in respect of these permits under section 29(1) of the Act (FRPA) regarding the establishment of free growing stands, unless, and to the extent, the licensee makes application to add a licence, or gives written notice to remove a licence from this FSP.
3.2
Application of This FSP to FPC Obligations (FRPA Act ss.197 (4) (5) and (7) and FPPR s.14(1)(d) and (e))
This FSP applies to the following areas: (a) all cutblocks and roads subject to cutting permits issued to the licensee under the licences referred to in Paragraph 3.1 on or after the date approval of this FSP, or in accordance with an amendment that provided for a licence or agreement holder to become party to the FSP; (b) a cutblock or road subject to a cutting permit issued to the licensee under a licence referred to in Paragraph 3.1 before the FSP term commences, whether the cutting permit is still in effect or not, for which the licensee gives written notice to the Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO) after the FSP term commences, effective the date, and to the extent, specified in the notice; (c) a road, or portion thereof, subject to a road permit in effect before the FSP term commences for which the licensee gives written notice to the Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO) after the FSP term commences, effective the date, and to the extent, specified in the written notice; and (d) a Cutblock: (i) that is within the Bill 28 FDU;
8
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
(ii) for licensee cutblocks where stocking standards set out in the Forest Practices Code, Forest Development Plan, or in a pre-FRPA prescription would otherwise apply (including a site plan, silviculture prescription or pre-harvest silviculture prescription); (iii) for which: (A) the commencement date occurred; and (B) a free growing declaration was not received by the Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO) within RESULTS, before the FSP term commenced; and (iv) the Licensee may elect to, for the purposes of otherwise specifying stocking standards under FRPA s. 197(4, 5 or 7) within an FDU as specified by FPPR s. 14(1)(d or e) and where ecologically appropriate, to have stocking standards approved under this plan apply to standards units within such cutblocks. For each standards unit, this election is to be made prior to the previously specified late free growing date by electronically providing notice using the Ministry’s RESULTS system to indicate the replacement FSP standard.
4.0
Term of This FSP (FRPA ss.6(1)(a) and (b))
The term of this FSP is 5 years. The FSP may be terminated earlier if the licensee elects to replace it with another approved FSP; or may be extended pursuant to the Act and regulations. The term of this FSP commences on the date the FSP is approved by the DDM. The FSP is requested for extension per FRPA s.6 and FPPR s.28.
5.0 FSP Map and Forest Development Units (FDUs) (FRPA Act s.5(1)(a), FPPR s.14) 5.1
Boundaries of FDU
The boundaries of the FDU’s under this FSP are shown on the FSP map. The FDU boundaries include, despite any inconsistency between the FSP Map and the boundaries of a tree farm licence or timber licence referred to in Paragraph 3.1, the full area of such licence, except any area shown on the map as excluded. The following FDU’s are intended to follow Landscape Unit boundaries as they overlap the licensee tenures: 1) San Josef FDU 2) Holberg FDU 3) Keogh FDU 4) Bonanza FDU 5) Marble FDU 6) Neroutsos FDU 7) Mahatta FDU 8) Klaskish FDU 9) Lower Nimpkish FDU 10) Upper Nimpkish FDU Note that LU boundaries and RMZ boundaries do not necessarily coincide.
9
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
The Bill 28 FDU encompasses WFP areas under Bill 28 takeback (now generally within the Pacific TSA, and also includes licences sold, eg. TL's 293, 306, 326, 596, 611, 615, 626, 629 (not all the TL’s are mapped), portions of North Island Community Forest K3Z, for which there are outstanding silviculture obligations.
5.2
New Forest Development Units (FRPA s.5(1)(a) and FPPR s.14(1)(a))
The FSP map shows the boundaries of all FDUs in the approved FSP. (note: there are no new FDU’s in the FSP extension)
5.3
Forest Development Units in Effect on Date of Submission of This FSP (FRPA ss.7(1.1) and (2) and 5(1)(a) and FPPR s.14(1)(b))
A transition FSP was approved that showed the FRPA s.196 blocks and roads as FDU’s. There were no other FDU’s in effect on the date of original FSP submission.
5.4
Areas to Which s.196(1) of the Act Apply (FRPA s.196(1); FPPR s.14(1)(c)
The FSP map shows the areas to which FRPA s.196(1) applies.
5.5
Designations in Effect Four Months Before Submission of This FSP (FPPR s.14(2))
The FSP map shows the designations and other areas listed in FPPRs.14(2) that were in effect 4 months before the FSP was submitted for approval.
5.6
Areas within FDU’s considered to be approved (FRPA ss.196(1) and (2) and FPPR ss.14(1)(c) and 110)
The areas to which section 196(1) or (2) of the Act applies as of the Date of Submission and that are within one of the FDU’s are identified on the FSP Map.
5.7
Areas within FDU Subject to Cutting Permit or Road Permit (FPPR s.14(3) and FRPA s.196 (transition from FDP))
The FSP map shows the areas within the FDUs that are subject to a cutting permit or road permit: a) held by the licensee, and b) in effect 4 months before the submission of the FSP for approval. (note: can include any CPs/RPs in effect up to submission date). Blanket CPs issued for the purposes of salvage are listed below: WFP Jeune Landing TFL6 CP92 6/92, TFL6 CP97 6/97 WFP Port McNeill TFL6 CP93 6/93, TFL6 CP98 6/98 WFP Holberg TFL6 CP90 6/90, TFL6 CP91 6/91 WFP Englewood TFL37 CP94, CP96, and CP97 WFP Port McNeill TFL39 Block 4 CP494
5.8
Declared Areas (FPPR s.14(4))
The FSP map shows the areas within the FDUs, if any, that are declared areas under FPPR s.14(4). FSP Sections 1-5: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
10
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Background information is not part of the FSP, but is provided to the Delegated Decision Maker (DDM), plan implementers, and interested parties, to show the rationale. 2012 FSP Extension and Minor Amendment Some minor changes were made to update the licences now included in the “Bill 28” FDU, and clarify certain language. Note that the FSP overview map has been updated herein to show the changes to licences sold, but the detailed maps with CPs and s.196 blocks, on the website continue to be those from the original plan, as this is an extension of the plan.
6.0
FRPA Values and Results or Strategies
FRPA s.5 (1) A forest stewardship plan must (b) specify intended results or strategies, each in relation to (i) objectives set by government, and (ii) other objectives that are established under this Act or the regulations and that pertain to all or part of the area subject to the plan, and (c) conform to prescribed requirements. (1.1) The results and strategies referred to in subsection (1) (b) must be consistent to the prescribed extent with objectives set by government and with the other objectives referred to in section 5 (1) (b). Results and strategies or Undertakings in this section are proposed in accordance with the qualifications and limitations described in Section 2.0 Interpretation, of this FSP, and in accordance the Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA) and Forest Planning and Practices Regulation (FPPR), as they were on the date of FSP submission:
Background Information (this material is not part of the FSP but supports the Plan) This section is a guide to how the Background Information is structured under each Table of results or strategies in the FSP. This checklist below, shows how the background information that follows in this document under each FSP result or strategy, has been based on the current MoFR FSP content checklist. Background information is not part of the FSP, but is provided to the Delegated Decision Maker (DDM), plan implementers, and interested parties, to show the rationale and supporting information that were considered in proposing intended results and strategies. The non-default review was also completed for the results or strategies that adopted defaults. In these cases less information was provided, as the defaults are considered consistent with objectives set by government. Non-Default Result and Comments Strategy review 1. Has the objective to which the The Objectives are identified in the Tables alternative R/S applies to been for each result or strategy in the FSP. identified? These identify the “Requirement” or source of the objective, and the specific objective to which the result or strategy applies.
11
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
2.
If the result or strategy deals with a Section 7 objective set for wildlife, have any exemptions or partial exemptions been granted under section 7(3) of the FPPR?
3.
Has the result or strategy been referenced to a FDU in an acceptable manner? Has this been done within the text or shown on a map?
4.
Does the proposed result or strategy meet the definition of measurable and verifiable? Suggested that you use the guidance provided in C&E bulletin #12 to assist in answering this question. (hot link below) Has there been any guidelines, or other expert information used or should have been used to develop the R/S and have they been referenced in the plan or supporting documentation?
5.
6.
Have any milestones been added that will make this verifiable or measurable?
7.
Have any factors been used from the Schedule or other factors used?
These apply to objectives set for a wildlife habitat area, UWR, general wildlife measure or a wildlife habitat feature. The WLAP order itself will have a clause that sets out the exemption for the purposes of section 7(3), and where needed, describes the extent that the exemption applies. No 7(3) exemptions have been granted to date, but the process will be addressed by the R/S. The results or strategies contain a description “The Forest Development Units applicable to the results or strategies”. The “situations or circumstances” in which R/S apply are identified. The R/S Tables also contain a section “Apply to these Forest Development Units”, which check off the FDU’s to which the results or strategies apply. The FDU map shows the FDUs. For each result or strategy, the Background Information document contains a section titled, “Rationale that the proposed result or strategy meets the definition of measurable or verifiable outcomes, steps, or practices in respect of an established objective”
For each result or strategy, the Background Information document contains a section titled, “Existing Practices, Guidelines, and/or Expert Information considered for non-default results or strategies (where the risk or degree of departure from existing practice requirements and/or standards is high, it may be appropriate to provide more information, or consult specialists)” For each result or strategy, the Background Information document contains a section titled, “Milestones to assist making the result or strategy measurable or verifiable, for non-default results or strategies” For some of the non-default result or strategy, the Background Information document contains a section titled, “Factors that may have been considered in specifying non-default results or strategies for the objective (eg. per FPPR ss.12(1), 24, 25(1)).”
12
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
8.
Does the result or strategy address the 4 W’s? What will be done?; Who will do it?; Where it will be done or apply to?; When it will be done? Ask the question: Can you visualize a C&E person being able to use this result or strategy during a field inspection to measure/assess the result or strategy on the ground, (relates to the 4 W’s above) Has the Consistency test been met in terms of the requirements of Section 25 of the FPPR (1 to 1 test)?
9.
6.1
10.
Has the consistency test been met in terms of the result or strategy being consistent with the referenced objective but also with all other objectives per section 25.1 of the FPPR (1 to many test)?
11.
Has the Reasonableness test been met?
The background information for each result or strategy is intended to address this question.
For each result or strategy, the Background Information document contains a section titled, “Rationale for the proposed result or strategy being consistent to the prescribed extent with objectives (FRPA s.5, FPPR ss.25 and 25.1)” For each result or strategy, the Background Information document contains a section titled, “Rationale for the proposed result or strategy being consistent to the prescribed extent with objectives (FRPA s.5, FPPR ss.25 and 25.1)” This section includes a description of how other related or overlapping objectives will be addressed in the R/S. Eg. if the Land Use HLP and/or Enacted Order and/or Objective Set by Government contain similar subject matter. The background information for the Nondefault results or strategies indicates the degree of departure from past practice or standards under the FPC, contains a risk assessment, and includes other data and supporting information.
FRPA Value: Soil
FPPR Section 5 The objective set by government for soils is, without unduly reducing the supply of timber from British Columbia's forests, to conserve the productivity and the hydrologic function of soils.
Table 1.1: Soils Objective FPPR s.5 FPPR Practices The Practice is repeated here for convenience, but if differences exist between the text of the FPPR and the text herein, the text of the FPPR as it was at time of FSP submission prevails: Soil disturbance limits 35 (1) In this section: "roadside work area" means the area adjacent to a road where one or
13
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
both of the following are carried out: (a) decking, processing or loading timber; (b) piling or disposing of logging debris; "sensitive soils" means soils that, because of their slope gradient, texture class, moisture regime, or organic matter content have the following risk of displacement, surface erosion or compaction: (a) for the Interior, a very high hazard; (b) for the Coast, a high or very high hazard. (2) Repealed [B.C. Reg. 580/04] (3) An agreement holder other than a holder of a minor tenure who is carrying out timber harvesting must not cause the amount of soil disturbance on the net area to be reforested to exceed the following limits: (a) if the standards unit is predominantly comprised of sensitive soils, 5% of the area covered by the standards unit, excluding any area covered by a roadside work area; (b) if the standards unit not is not predominantly comprised of sensitive soils, 10% of the area covered by the standards unit, excluding any area covered by a roadside work area; (c) 25% of the area covered by a roadside work area. (4) An agreement holder may cause soil disturbance that exceeds the limits specified in subsection (3) if the holder (a) is removing infected stumps or salvaging windthrow and the additional disturbance is the minimum necessary, or (b) is constructing a temporary access structure and both of the following apply: (i) the limit set out in subsection (3) (a) or (b), as applicable, is not exceeded by more than 5% of the area covered by the standards unit, excluding the area covered by a roadside work area; (ii) before the regeneration date, a sufficient amount of the area within the standards unit is rehabilitated such that the agreement holder is in compliance with the limits set out in subsection (3). (5) The minister may require an agreement holder to rehabilitate an area of compacted soil if all of the following apply: (a) the area of compacted soil (i) was created by activities of the holder, (ii) is within the net area to be reforested, and (iii) is a minimum of 1 ha in size; (b) the holder has not exceeded the limits described in subsection (3); (c) rehabilitation would, in the opinion of the minister, (i) materially improve the productivity and the hydrologic function of the soil within the area, and (ii) not create an unacceptable risk of further damage or harm to, or impairment of, forest resource values related to one or more of the subjects listed in section 149 (1) of the Act. (6) An agreement holder who rehabilitates an area under subsection (4) or (5) must
14
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
(a) remove or redistribute woody materials that are exposed on the surface of the area and are concentrating subsurface moisture, to the extent necessary to limit the concentration of subsurface moisture on the area, (b) de-compact compacted soils, and (c) return displaced surface soils, retrievable side-cast and berm materials. (7) If an agreement holder rehabilitates an area under subsection (4) or (5) and erosion of exposed soil from the area would cause sediment to enter a stream, wetland or lake, or a material adverse effect in relation to one or more of the subjects listed in section 149 (1) of the Act, the agreement holder, unless placing debris or revegetation would not materially reduce the likelihood of erosion, must (a) place woody debris on the exposed soils, or (b) revegetate the exposed mineral soils.
Permanent access structure limits 36 (1) An agreement holder must ensure that the area in a cutblock that is occupied by permanent access structures built by the holder or used by the holder does not exceed 7% of the cutblock, unless (a) there is no other practicable option on that cutblock, having regard to (i) the size, topography and engineering constraints of the cutblock, (ii) in the case of a road, the safety of road users, or (iii) the requirement in selection harvesting systems for excavated or bladed trails or other logging trails, or (b) additional permanent access structures are necessary to provide access beyond the cutblock. (2) If an agreement holder exceeds the limit for permanent access structures described in subsection (1) for either of the reasons set out in that subsection, the holder must ensure that the limit is exceeded as little as practicable. (3) An agreement holder may rehabilitate an area occupied by permanent access structures in accordance with the results or strategies specified in the forest stewardship plan or by (a) removing or redistributing woody materials that are exposed on the surface of the area and are concentrating subsurface moisture, as necessary to limit the concentration of subsurface moisture on the area, (b) de-compacting compacted soils, and (c) returning displaced surface soils, retrievable side-cast and berm materials. (4) If an agreement holder rehabilitates an area under subsection (3) (a) and erosion of exposed soil from the area would cause sediment to enter a stream, wetland or lake, or a material adverse effect in relation to one or more of the subjects listed in section 149 (1) of the Act, the agreement holder, unless placing debris or revegetation would not materially reduce the likelihood of erosion, must (a) place woody debris on the exposed soils, or
15
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
(b) revegetate the exposed mineral soils.
Undertaking
Results or Strategies pursuant to FRPA s.5
Apply to these Forest Development Units:
Undertaking: 1) The holder of the FSP undertakes to comply with section 36 of the FPPR, as it was at the time of submission. The licensee is exempt from the requirement to specify Results or Strategies for FPPR section 36 on the basis of the undertaking. Result: 1 1) In accordance with FPPR s.12.2(1) , the licensee adopts FPPR s.35, as it was at the time of submission, as a result in all FDUs. 2) Definitions for purposes of this result: Standards units for the purposes of FPPR s.1, ss.35(3)(a) and (b), and s.35(4), means: a) standards units defined based on homogeneous soil disturbance limits including groups of standard units within a cutblock with the same soil disturbance limit, or b) groups of standard units or the entire cutblock, if the most restrictive soil disturbance limit for the standards units or cutblock is applied. Keogh Mahatta Marble Neroutsos Holberg Klaskish San Josef Bonanza Lower Nimpkish Upper Nimpkish
Table 1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Background information is not part of the FSP, but is provided to the Delegated Decision Maker (DDM), plan implementers, and interested parties, to show the rationale and supporting information that were considered in proposing intended results and strategies. A) RATIONALE FOR PLAN APPROVAL The structure of this information is described in Section 6.0 of this FSP (p.11). Rationale that the proposed result or strategy meets the definition of measurable or verifiable outcomes, steps, or practices in respect of an established objective: Undertaking s.1: The undertaking is to comply with section 36 for permanent access. Section 12.1 of the FPPR specifies that a person is exempt from specifying a result or strategy for specific objectives if the FSP includes in it “an undertaking to comply with” specified practice requirements. R/S ss.1 and 2: The R/S adopts the FRPA default practice (FPPR s.35) for soil disturbance limits, and the default is considered to contain measurable and verifiable steps. The modification to the default focuses on the definition of standards units. The changes are measurable or verifiable because they are related to the FPPR definition of standards unit, and the application is to groups of standards units assigning the same measurable soil disturbance 1
FPPR s.12.2 (1) A person required to prepare a forest stewardship plan is exempt from section 35 if the person (a) prepares and submits to the minister the proposed plan, including an intended result or strategy for the objective for soils that is set out in section 5, in relation to the areas of primary forest activity under the plan, and (b) receives the minister's approval to the plan.
16
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
limits. The adopted FRPA default practice defines soil disturbance limits, sensitive soils, and displacement, surface erosion, or compaction risk and hazard, and procedures for determining these exist in guidebooks, etc. Therefore the R/S should be verifiable. Rationale for the proposed result or strategy being consistent to the prescribed extent with objectives (FRPA s.5, FPPR ss.25 and 25.1): The result is consistent with objectives because it adopts the FRPA default practice, with only minor modifications. The definitions added to the default are justified as follows: FPPR s.1 defines an SU as follows: "standards unit" means one or more parts of a cutblock for which part or parts there is only one of each of the following: (a) soil disturbance limit. The exception added to the result and strategy clarifies that for the purposes of the soils objective, the standards units should be stratified on the basis of soils. This is consistent with the discussion in Soil Conservation Guidebook 5.1, and with procedures in FPC Compliance Bulletin #6. Soil Conservation Guidebook 5.1 Recommended allowable soil disturbance within the net area to be reforested (NAR): “Where soil sensitivity to disturbance varies significantly, the NAR should be stratified into homogenous standards units with separate limits established for each. Where the assessed soil sensitivity to disturbance varies significantly within any portion of the NAR and it is not possible to establish separate homogeneous strata, the most restrictive hazard should be used to determine the sensitivity for that area. This conservative approach will minimize the risk of harvest operations or silvicultural treatments that cause excessive or concentrated soil disturbance in the more sensitive areas.” The default FRPA practice focuses on disturbance hazard, an assumption being that disturbance is detrimental and creates risk. However, the Soil Conservation Guidebook mentions situations, such as salal sites or site preparation, where disturbance exceeding the limits may be beneficial to productivity. 2012 FSP Extension and Table 1.1 Minor Amendment No changes made to the result or strategy; however, the background information has been updated and expanded. Risk assessment for non-default results or strategies, degree of departure from existing practice, and consideration of milestones or scope and scale limitations to limit risk Undertaking s.1 (adopts FPPR s. 36 Permanent Access Structure Limits): The R/S makes no modifications to the default FRPA practice. R/S s.1 (adopts FPPR s. 35 Soil Disturbance Limits, with a modified definition): FPPR practice requirements that the agreement-holder elects to use as a result or strategy are deemed to have met the approval tests—measurable or verifiable and consistent with government objectives. The modification to the FRPA default relates to the definition of standards unit for the purposes of the R/S, and is consistent with past principles about stratification from guidebooks and Ministry notices. Therefore, the departure from existing practice and risk to government objectives is assessed as low. Also, soil disturbance has primarily been more of an interior BC issue and its scope and scale of application is expected to be low at a landscape level. Existing Practices, Guidelines, and/or Expert Information considered for non-default results or strategies (eg. where the risk or degree of departure from existing practice requirements and/or standards is high, it may be appropriate to provide more information, or consult specialists). Expert information was not necessary to justify the proposed result or strategy given the minor changes.
17
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
B) SUGGESTED GUIDELINES AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO PLAN IMPLEMENTERS Some sources of existing guidelines are listed below. The existing FPC Guidebooks may remain relevant; however, in some instances they may be out of date or specific to a Forest Practices Code context, and may need to be updated for “new science” and/or FRPA policies. These are listed here as a source of information on the pre-FSP practices, that may be useful in developing site plan procedures. Licensee guidelines, SOPs, or site plans under the FSP may be prepared by qualified persons in relation to the best information available. General Guidelines: The Soil Conservation Guidebook, 2nd Edition, 2001 – available on MFLNRO website. FPC C&E Advice Bulletin Number 6, August 2000, “Measuring Compliance with Soil Disturbance Limits” – available on MFLNRO website. FIA-FSP Project Number Y07-1284: Soil disturbance effects of hoe-forwarding on tree growth and site productivity, Mary Jane Douglas. WFP has supported long term ground based equipment (hoe forwarding) monitoring trials at Holberg (established 1991) in CWHvh1, Woss (early 1990’s) in CWH mm1, and Jordan River (established 2001) in CWH xm2 – available on FIA website. For the soils related practices of FRRP ss. 37 and 38 that are outside the R/S: WFP Terrain Risk Management Strategy (TRMS), September 2010, G. Horel, P.Eng.—available on WFP intranet site. TRMS Map Atlas for WFP tenures – available on WFP intranet site (Certification) Map Set 1 - Regional landslide frequency Map Set 2 - Terrain vulnerable to landslides C) SUGGESTED PROCESS FOR PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Site Plan Preparers 1) Include soil disturbance limit in site plans per regulation. 2) Follow Soil Conservation Guidebook, or develop other acceptable methods based on best available information, if measurement of soil disturbance limits is necessary. 3) WFP Site Plan preparers to follow the WFP Terrain Risk Management Strategy to address practices for landslides and gullies related to the soils objective (note that these practice requirements are not part of the FSP result or strategy). 4) Soil revegetation is a soils related practice to be aware of not part of the results and strategies. Coordination with other FSP Holders for landscape level results Not anticipated as necessary for cutblock soil disturbance limits. D) FRPA PRACTICE REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER LEGISLATION ASSOCIATED WITH THIS FRPA OBJECTIVE This section notes some other FPPR practices or legislation that also may be relevant in addition to the result or strategy. This is provided to help interested parties or plan preparers better understand all the planning requirements in relation to the objective. It is not intended to be a complete list; the WFP Site Plans and FRPA checklists will have more complete information: FPPR s.34 Content of site plans: (1) A person who prepares a site plan for an area referred to in section ss.29 (1) or (2) [free growing stands] of the Act must ensure that the plan identifies (a) the standards units for the area, and (b) the stocking standards and soil disturbance limits that apply to those standards units. s.37: Must not cause landslides,
18
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
s.38: Must not cause gully processes, s.39: Must maintain natural surface drainage, s.40: Must revegetate soils.
6.2
FRPA Value: Timber
FPPR Section 6. The objectives set by government for timber are to: (a) maintain or enhance an economically valuable supply of commercial timber from British Columbia's forests, (b) ensure that delivered wood costs, generally, after taking into account the effect on them of the relevant provisions of this regulation and of the Act, are competitive in relation to equivalent costs in relation to regulated primary forest activities in other jurisdictions, and (c) ensure that the provisions of this regulation and of the Act that pertain to primary forest activities do not unduly constrain the ability of a holder of an agreement under the Forest Act to exercise the holder's rights under the agreement. Table 2.1: Objective Set by Government for Timber Objective FPPR s.6 Results or Exemption: strategies Results or strategies are not specified in this FSP under the FPPR 6 Objective, pursuant to per the FPPR s.12(8) exemption for results or strategies for Timber, except as FRPA s.5 provided for the VILUP Land-Use Objectives 7 and 8 which are addressed in FSP Table 6.1. Table 1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Background information is not part of the FSP, but is provided to the Delegated Decision Maker (DDM), plan implementers, and interested parties, to show the rationale and supporting information that were considered in proposing intended results and strategies. A) RATIONALE FOR PLAN APPROVAL 2012 FSP Extension and Table 2.1 Minor Amendment The FSP amendment of 2011 combines the results and strategies that were formerly in FSP Table 2.1 with those that were in Table 6.1. This was done, because the two tables contained similar subject matter (cutblock size and green-up), and having the results and strategies combined into one Table makes it easier to follow the entire scope of options for cutblock size and green-up. As is described in the background information for Table 6.1, the intent in combining these tables was to combine the Land Use Order Objectives and the FPPR Objectives, and clarify how they work together with as little change as possible to each of the objectives. Therefore, as no change is made with respect to FRPA and accepted practice the amendment is proposed as minor.
6.3 FRPA Value: Water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within riparian areas FPPR Section 8 The objective set by government for water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within riparian areas is, without unduly reducing the supply of timber from British Columbia's forests, to conserve, at the landscape level, the water quality, fish habitat, wildlife habitat and biodiversity associated with those riparian areas.
19
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Table 3.1: Water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within riparian areas Requirement Objective set by government Objective Objectives: FPPR Section 8 The objective set by government for water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within riparian areas is, without unduly reducing the supply of timber from British Columbia’s forests, to conserve, at the landscape level, the water quality, fish habitat, wildlife habitat and biodiversity associated with those riparian areas. The Practice is repeated here for convenience, but if differences exist between the text of the Order and the text herein, the text of the FPPR as it was at time of FSP submission prevails: FPPR Part 4: Division 3 – Riparian Areas Stream riparian classes 47. (1) In this section, “active flood plain” means the level area with alluvial soils, adjacent to streams, that is flooded by stream water on a periodic basis and is at the same elevation as areas showing evidence of (a) flood channels free of terrestrial vegetation, (b) rafted debris or fluvial sediments, recently deposited on the surface of the forest floor or suspended on trees or vegetation, or (c) recent scarring of trees by material moved by flood waters. (2) A stream that is a fish stream or is located in a community watershed has the following riparian class: (a) S1-A, if the stream averages, over a 1 km length, either a stream width or an active flood plain width of 100 m or greater; (b) S1-B, if the stream width is greater than 20 m but the stream does not have a riparian class of S1-A; (c) S2, if the stream width is not less than 5 m but not more than 20 m; (d) S3, if the stream width is not less than 1.5 m but is less than 5 m; (e) S4, if the stream width is less than 1.5 m. (3) A stream that is not a fish stream and is located outside of a community watershed has the following riparian class: (a) S5, if the stream width is greater than 3 m; (b) S6, if the stream width is 3 m or less. (4) Subject to subsections (5) or (6), for each riparian class of stream, the minimum riparian management area width, riparian reserve zone width and riparian management zone width, on each side of the stream, are as follows: Riparian Class Riparian Management Area (metres) Riparian Reserve Zone (metres) Riparian Management Zone (metres) S1-A 100 0 100 S1-B 70 50 20 S2 50 30 20 S3 40 20 20 S4 30 0 30 S5 30 0 30 S6 20 0 20 (5) If the width of the active flood plain of a stream exceeds the specified width for the riparian management zone, the width of the riparian management zone extends to the outer edge of the active flood plain.
20
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
(6) The minister may specify a riparian reserve zone for a stream with a riparian class of S1-A if the minister considers that a riparian reserve zone is required. (7) The riparian reserve zone for a stream begins at the edge of the stream channel bank and extends to the width described in subsection (4) or (6). (8) The riparian management zone for a stream begins at (a) the outer edge of the riparian reserve zone, or (b) if there is no riparian reserve zone, the edge of the stream channel bank, and extends to the width described in subsection (4) or (5). Wetland riparian classes 48. (1) Wetlands have the following riparian classes: (a) W1, if the wetland is greater than 5 ha in size; (b) W2, if the wetland is not less than 1 ha and not more than 5 ha in size and is in one of the following biogeoclimatic zones or subzones: (i) Ponderosa Pine; (ii) Bunch Grass; (iii) Interior Douglas-fir, very dry hot, very dry warm or very dry mild; (iv) Coastal Douglas-fir; (v) Coastal Western Hemlock, very dry maritime, dry maritime or dry submaritime; (c) W3, if the wetland is not less than 1 ha and not more than 5 ha in size and is in a biogeoclimatic zone or subzone other than one referred to in paragraph (b); (d) W4, if the wetland is (i) not less than 0.25 ha and less than 1 ha in size and is in a biogeoclimatic zone or subzone referred to in paragraph (b) (i), (ii) or (iii), or (ii) not less than 0.5 ha and less than 1 ha in size and is in a biogeoclimatic zone or subzone referred to in paragraph (b) (iv) or (v). (2) Despite subsection (1), an area is to be treated as a single wetland with a riparian class of W5 if (a) the area contains (i) two or more W1 wetlands located within 100 m of each other, (ii) a W1 wetland and one or more non-W1 wetlands, all of which are within 80 m of each other, or (iii) two or more non-W1 wetlands located within 60 m of each other, and (b) the combined size of the wetlands, excluding the upland areas, is 5 ha or larger. (3) Subject to subsections (4) and (5), for each riparian class of wetland, the minimum riparian management area width, riparian reserve zone width and riparian management zone width for the wetland are as follows: Riparian Class Riparian Management Area (metres) Riparian Reserve Zone (metres) Riparian Management Zone (metres) W1 50 10 40 W2 30 10 20 W3 30 0 30
21
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
W4 30 0 30 W5 50 10 40 (4) No riparian reserve zone or riparian management zone extends onto any enclosed upland areas in a W1 wetland if the wetland is (a) located in a boreal, subboreal or hyper-maritime climate, and (b) greater than 1 000 ha in size. (5) If the minister considers it necessary for a riparian reserve zone or riparian management zone to extend onto an enclosed upland area, the minister may require either or both of the following: (a) a riparian reserve zone of a width of 10 m or less; (b) a riparian management zone of a width of 40 m or less. (6) The riparian reserve zone for a wetland begins at the edge of the wetland and extends to the width described in subsection (3) or (5). (7) The riparian management zone for a wetland begins at (a) the outer edge of the riparian reserve zone, or (b) if there is no riparian reserve zone, the edge of the wetland, and extends to the width described in subsection (3) or (5). Lake riparian classes 49. (1) Lakes have the following riparian classes: (a) L1-A, if the lake is 1 000 ha or greater in size; (b) L1-B, if (i) the lake is greater than 5 ha but less than 1 000 ha in size, or (ii) the minister designates the lake as L1-B; (c) L2, if the lake is not less than 1 ha and not more than 5 ha in size and is located in a biogeoclimatic zones or subzone that is (i) Ponderosa Pine, (ii) Bunch Grass, (iii) Interior Douglas-fir, very dry hot, very dry warm or very dry mild, (iv) Coastal Douglas-fir, or (v) Coastal Western Hemlock, very dry maritime, dry maritime or dry submaritime; (d) L3, if the lake is not less than 1 ha and not more than 5 ha in size and is in a biogeoclimatic zone or subzone other than one referred to in paragraph (c); (e) L4, if the lake is (i) not less than 0.25 ha and not more than 1 ha in size and is in a biogeoclimatic zone or subzone referred to in paragraph (c) (i), (ii) or (iii), or (ii) not less than 0.5 ha and not more than 1 ha in size and is in a biogeoclimatic zone or subzone referred to in paragraph (c) (iv) or (v). (2) Subject to subsection (3), for each riparian class of lake, the minimum riparian management area width, riparian reserve zone width and riparian management zone width are as follows: Riparian Class Riparian Management Area (metres) Riparian Reserve Zone (metres) Riparian Management Zone (metres) L1-A 0 0 0 L1-B 10 10 0 L2 30 10 20 L3 30 0 30 L4 30 0 30
22
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
(3) If the minister considers it necessary, the minister may specify a riparian management area and a riparian reserve zone for a lake with a riparian class of L1-A. (4) The riparian reserve zone for a lake begins at the edge of the lake and extends to the width described in subsection (2) or (3). (5) The riparian management zone for a lake begins at (a) the outer edge of the riparian reserve zone, or (b) if there is no riparian reserve zone, the edge of the lake, and extends to the width described in subsection (2) or (3). Restrictions in a riparian management area 50. (1) A person must not construct a road in a riparian management area, unless one of the following applies: (a) locating the road outside the riparian management area would create a higher risk of sediment delivery to the stream, wetland or lake to which the riparian management area applies; (b) there is no other practicable option for locating the road; (c) the road is required as part of a stream crossing. (2) If a road is constructed within a riparian management area, a person must not carry out road maintenance activities beyond the clearing width of the road, except as necessary to maintain a stream crossing. (3) A person who is authorized in respect of a road must not remove gravel or other fill from within a riparian management area in the process of constructing, maintaining or deactivating a road, unless (a) the gravel or fill is within a road prism, (b) the gravel or fill is at a stream crossing, or (c) there is no other practicable option. 51. (1) An agreement holder must not cut, modify or remove trees in a riparian reserve zone, except for the following purposes: (a) felling or modifying a tree that is a safety hazard, if there is no other practicable option for addressing the safety hazard; (b) topping or pruning a tree that is not wind firm; (c) constructing a stream crossing; (d) creating a corridor for full suspension yarding; (e) creating guyline tiebacks; (f) carrying out a sanitation treatment; (g) felling or modifying a tree that has been windthrown or has been damaged by fire, insects, disease or other causes, if the felling or modifying will not have a material adverse impact on the riparian reserve zone; (h) felling or modifying a tree under an occupant licence to cut, master licence to cut or free use permit issued in respect of an area that is subject to a licence, permit, or other form of tenure issued under the Land Act, Coal Act, Geothermal Resources Act, Mines Act, Mineral Tenure Act, Mining Right of Way Act, Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing Act or Petroleum and Natural Gas Act, if the felling or modification is for a purpose expressly authorized under that licence, permit or tenure; (i) felling or modifying a tree for the purpose of establishing or maintaining an interpretative forest site, recreation site, recreation facility or recreation trail. (2) An agreement holder who fells, tops, prunes or modifies a tree under subsection (1) may remove the tree only if the removal will not have a material adverse effect on the riparian reserve zone.
23
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
(3) An agreement holder must not carry out the following silviculture treatments in a riparian reserve zone: (a) grazing or broadcast herbicide applications for the purpose of brushing; (b) mechanized site preparation or broadcast burning for the purpose of site preparation; (c) spacing or thinning. Restrictions in a riparian management zone 52. (1) A holder of a minor tenure who fells trees in a cutblock within a riparian management zone of a class described in Column 1 must ensure that (a) the percentage of the total basal area within the riparian management zone specified in Column 2 is left as standing trees, and (b) the standing trees are reasonably representative of the physical structure of the riparian management zone, as it was before harvesting: Column 1Riparian Class Column 2 Basal Area to be Retained Within Riparian Management Zone (%) S1-A or S1-B stream greater than or equal to 20 S2 stream greater than or equal to 20 S3 stream greater than or equal to 20 S4 stream greater than or equal to 10 S5 stream greater than or equal to 10 S6 stream Not applicable All classes of wetlands or lakes greater than or equal to 10 (2) An authorized person who cuts, modifies or removes trees in a riparian management zone for an S4, S5 or S6 stream that has trees that contribute significantly to the maintenance of stream bank or channel stability must retain enough trees adjacent to the stream to maintain the stream bank or channel stability, if the stream (a) is a direct tributary to an S1, S2 or S3 stream, (b) flows directly into the ocean, at a point near to or where one or more of the following is located: (i) a herring spawning area; (ii) a shellfish bed; (iii) a saltwater marsh area; (iv) an aquaculture site; (v) a juvenile salmonid rearing area or an adult salmon holding area, or (c) flows directly into the ocean at a point near to the location of an area referred to in paragraph (b) and failure to maintain stream bank or channel stability will have a material adverse impact on that area. Temperature sensitive streams 53. An authorized person who fells, modifies or removes trees in a riparian management area adjacent to a temperature sensitive stream, or a stream that is a direct tributary to a temperature sensitive stream, must retain either or both of the following in an amount sufficient to prevent the temperature of the temperature sensitive stream from increasing to an extent that would have a material adverse impact on fish: (a) streamside trees whose crowns provide shade to the stream; (b) understory vegetation that provides shade to the stream. Fan destabilization 54. An authorized person who carries out a primary forest activity on the
24
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Coast must ensure that the primary forest activity does not cause fan destabilization that has a material adverse effect in relation to one or more of the subjects listed in section 149 (1) of the Act. Results or Strategies pursuant to FRPA s.5
The forest development units applicable to the result or strategy: Applies to all FDUs. The FDUs affected are identified below. Result or strategy: 3 1) In accordance with FPPR s.12.3 : a) the licensee adopts FPPR sections 47 to 53 as results and strategies in this FSP, b) except for those sections that will/will not apply as follows: For the purposes of this FSP, the width of riparian management zones, riparian reserve zones, and the riparian management areas as under FPPR s.47(4) streams, s.48(3) wetlands, or s.49(2) lakes, individually or in any combination, will not apply if the licensee specifies, other riparian width or widths in a riparian variance prescription, provided that: i. such other width or widths is in accordance with a riparian variance prescription; ii. the width of the riparian reserve zone is specified in the riparian variance prescription; iii. the width and retention levels of the riparian management zone are specified in the riparian variance prescription; iv. the stream channel sensitivity assessment and the management regime required for the riparian area having regard to FPPR Schedule 1 s.2 Factors relating to the Objective set by government for water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity in riparian areas are included in the riparian variance prescription; v. the applicability of any other results or strategies in this FSP in relation to Fisheries Sensitive Watersheds, or Community Watersheds is considered in the riparian variance prescription; vi. the licensee will notify Fisheries and Oceans Canada prior to harvesting if the minimum width specified in the riparian RRZ variance differs by more than 50% when potentially affecting fish habitat from what would have been achieved under ss.47(4), 48(3), 49(2)); and vii. the prescribed width or widths is consistent with no net change in total riparian reserve zones and retention in riparian management zones as would have been achieved under ss.47(4), 48(3), 49(2)) associated with the same cutblock or stream, or along the same road and stream. c) Subsection (b) of this result or strategy does not apply if the licensee implements the riparian reserve strategy for S3 streams
3
Conditional exemption - from one or more of sections 47 to 53
25
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
per Table 3.2 in this FSP. 2) With respect to FPPR s.50(1), these criteria will also apply in a decision to rebuild versus relocate an existing non-status road, in which case the FPPR Schedule 1 s.2 Factors will be considered. 3) For clarity, FPPR s.52(1) does not apply.
Apply to these Forest Development Units:
4) For the purpose that is identified as an allowable exception in FSP 51(1) (e), creating guyline tiebacks, creating tailhold tiebacks is also an allowable exemption for tiebacks in this FSP. Keogh Mahatta Marble Neroutsos Holberg Klaskish San Josef Bonanza Lower Nimpkish Upper Nimpkish
Table 3.1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION Background information is not part of the FSP, but is provided to the Delegated Decision Maker (DDM), plan implementers, and interested parties, to show the rationale and supporting information that were considered in proposing intended results and strategies. A) RATIONALE FOR PLAN APPROVAL The structure of this information is described in Section 6.0 of this FSP (P.11). Rationale that the proposed result or strategy meets the definition of measurable or verifiable, for outcomes, steps, or practices in respect of an established objective: 5 The result or strategy is measurable or verifiable per FPPR s.25.1(2) because it adopts the default FRPA practices such as riparian zone classes and widths which are measurable and verifiable. For the exception under R/S s.1(b), it sets out a process that will allow verification of measurable practices that will be set out in a Riparian Variance Prescription as defined in the R/S to meet the objectives. The practices in s.1(b)vii provides for riparian area equivalency to the FRPA defaults at the cutblock or stream level, not at the landscape level, and therefore should be field verifiable without tracking spreadsheets. Note that the R/S exemption under R/S s.1(b) only applies in the situation or circumstance that a Riparian Variance Prescription is prepared that meets the factors that the R/S outlines; if other types of exemptions are needed for the FRPA default practices when adopted in R/S s.1(a), an exemption may be available under FPPR s.91(1) if the default practice is “not practicable” in the situation or circumstance. Rationale for the proposed result or strategy being consistent to the prescribed extent with objectives (FRPA s.5, FPPR ss.25 and 25.1): The following sections of the FPPR are adopted as results or strategies under 1(a): s.47: Stream riparian classes and widths (subject to the possibility of variance as described) s.48: Wetland riparian classes (subject to the possibility of variance as described) s.49: Lake riparian classes (subject to the possibility of variance as described) 5
FPPR s.25.1 (2) If an established objective is comprised of measurable or verifiable steps, processes or outcomes, an intended result or strategy that (a) is specified in a forest stewardship plan for that objective, (b) restates the same measurable or verifiable steps, practices or outcomes, and (c) describes the circumstances in which those measurable or verifiable steps, practices or outcomes are to be achieved or carried out, is to be considered to be consistent with objectives set by government and with the other established objectives to the extent practicable, as described in subsection (1) of this section.
26
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
s.50: Restrictions within riparian areas s.51: Restrictions in a riparian reserve zone FPPR s.51 (1) An agreement holder must not cut, modify or remove trees in a riparian reserve zone, except for the following purposes: per FPPR 51 list. s.52: Restrictions within a riparian management zone s.53: Temperature-sensitive streams The R/S is consistent with government objectives per FPPR s.25.1(2) because it adopts these FRPA practices which are measurable and verifiable, and the exception in R/S s.1(b) provides that an equivalent area will be maintained. 2012 FSP Extension and Table 3.1 Minor Amendment The changes are to s.1(b)(vii) and add roads in addition to cutblocks. This is because the examples of where this needed to be used have involved “strip” left on the uphill side of preexisting roads, and because it is consistent with the intent to apply it to primary forest activity (cutblocks and roads). The language for cutblocks has been changed from “in cutblocks” to “associated with cutblocks” as some prescriptions may involve the TAUP or the stream immediately adjacent to the blocks. The other change relates to tiebacks, which just clarifies that tailholds are a form of tieback. These changes are proposed as minor amendments, on the basis that they are clarifications that do not constitute a material change to previous intent or outcomes. Note that the background information for this result or strategy was significantly updated to provide clearer guidance to site plan implementers, clearer risk assessment, and to update it for the latest supporting documents and assessments available. The DFO notification was increased for a 20% variation from defaults, to 50% (generally of RRZ width). This ensures notification takes place for potentially higher risks. The original 20% level was arbitrarily selected to provide for this, so this is a minor change. Risk assessment for non-default results or strategies, degree of departure from existing practice, and consideration of milestones or scope and scale limitations to limit risk The risk to riparian objectives and fish habitat associated with significantly varying riparian widths is potentially high; however, the result or strategy requires that the risk be evaluated, and that the sensitivity of the stream to the practice be considered, in order to apply varied widths only in appropriate situations or where there is lower stream sensitivity. The option of prescribing an alternative width to one of ss.47-49 under R/S s.1(b), requires that a rationale addresses consistency with each element of the FPPR s.8 objective in riparian areas, ie. water, fish habitat, wildlife habitat, and biodiversity. WFP has developed considerable stream and watershed information for the plan area that can help guide the prescription process (see Guidelines and Suggested Process sections below). The following reviews the alternative under R/S s.1(b) with respect to the R/S limitations, risk and degree of departure from existing practices, for each element of the government objective for fish, water, wildlife, and biodiversity in riparian areas: Scope and scale limitations: The variance in R/S s.1(b) can only be applied if a variance prescription is prepared that addresses factors, and the variance is constrained by s.1(b)(vii) which limits it to no net change as measured only in the same cutblock or road, or on the same stream. This is as opposed to the windthrow strategy in Table 3.2 which is limited to only S3 streams (not S2) until further experience is gained, but its s.4 allows maintaining an equivalent RRZ that can apply to other streams at landscape scales over a 5 year period. Milestones to assist making the result or strategy measurable or verifiable The R/S allows for a departure from FRPA default practices for riparian reserve zone widths if the 47(4), 48(3), or 49(2) variances are specified by the licensee in a prescription. The determination will be at a site level (R/S s.1(b)(vi)), and longer timeframes requiring milestones are not involved
27
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
for tracking the verification because subsection s.1(a)vi applies at the cutblock, road, or stream rather than broader landscape level or multi year periods. Water Quality In the R/S, the riparian prescription is required to consider relevant FPPR Schedule 1 s.2 Factors which include water quality. The FPPR practice requirements for maintaining water quality near licensed intakes and CWS are not altered by the FSP. The Drinking Water Act may also apply where there are intakes. Fish Habitat In the R/S, the riparian variance must consider the FPPR Schedule 2 factors, which include stream sensitivity, bank and channel stability, and the role played by trees in conserving fish habitat requirements. The definitions of stream channel type provided below in the background information (eg. alluvial, semi-alluvial, non-alluvial) are an example of an approach that may be used to assess channel sensitivity to proposed practices. For example, large woody debris (LWD) functionality in the channel, and the LWD supply, are factors in the suggested stream channel sensitivity classification system (below). Qualified professionals or experts may refine this approach or propose other methods to address channel sensitivity. TFL 6 and other tenures under the plan streams are not expected to be temperature sensitive, and temperature sensitivity likely will not be a driver of the strategy in this area. FPPR s.57 for protection of fish and fish habitat is a practice that applies and cannot be altered by the FSP. The Federal Fisheries Act also may apply. FPPR s.57 An authorized person who carries out a primary forest activity must conduct the primary forest activity at a time and in a manner that is unlikely to harm fish or destroy, damage or harmfully alter fish habitat. Wildlife Habitat The FPPR Schedule 2 factors need to be considered in a variance, and include wildlife habitat for different riparian classes of streams, wetlands, and lakes. Biodiversity The Objective for biodiversity is to “conserve at the landscape level”. The R/S s.1(b)vi requires equivalency to FRPA default areas to be maintained within the same cutblock, road, or stream. R/S 1(b)vi “equivalency” will be tracked in site plans or associated documents. Factors considered in specifying non-default results or strategies for the objective (eg. per FPPR ss.12(1), 24, 25(1)): The result or strategy section 1(b)(iv) refers to the FPPR Schedule 1 s.2 Factors as they were at the time of submission (where the text of the FPPR differs from the text below, the FPPR text shall prevail). Factors relating to objective set by government for water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity in riparian areas 2
The following factors apply to a result or strategy for the objective set out in section 8 [objectives set by government for water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within riparian areas]: (a) the type of management regime that is required for a riparian area, having regard to (i) the need to buffer the aquatic ecosystem of a stream, wetland or lake from the introduction of materials that are deleterious to water quality or
28
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
fish habitat, (ii) the role played by trees and understory vegetation in conserving water quality, fish habitat, wildlife habitat and biodiversity, (iii) the need to maintain stream bank and stream channel integrity, and (iv) the relative importance and sensitivity of different riparian classes of streams, wetlands, and lakes in conserving water quality, fish habitat, wildlife habitat and biodiversity; (b) the type, timing or intensity of forest practices that can be carried out within the context of a management regime referred to in paragraph (a); (c) the role of forest shading in controlling an increase in temperature within a temperature sensitive stream, if the increase might have a deleterious effect on fish or fish habitat.
Existing Practices, Guidelines, and/or Expert Information considered for non-default results or strategies (ie. where the risk or the degree of departure from existing practice requirements and/or standards is high, it may be appropriate to provide more information, or consult specialists). The WFP guidelines provided under the section “Suggested Process for Plan Implementation” were prepared by stream channel and fish experts for use by Western Forest Professionals, and provide risk assessment considerations regarding the role of riparian forest and LWD and hydrology in stream function. The suggested WFP guidelines and map folio’s include considerable overview expert information for the plan area and stream typing that could be used as a starting point to help develop a site specific prescription. Determining when there is a need for site level expert information: A qualified Forest Professional may prepare the Riparian Variance Prescription. To determine their level of qualifications, the Forest Professional makes a self-assessment of their level of experience and training on stream issues (eg. if have they been to the WFP or other equivalent training session of stream channel types and appropriate management strategies), as compared to the risk of the particular practice at the site (eg. channel sensitivity), and degree of departure from current practice. The risk assessment criteria identified in the WFP Guidelines include: the degree of variance from the default, the stream channel type (channel sensitivity) and the width of the stream (surrogate for stream power), and depending on the stream classes the local stream impact and potential downstream stream impact. Riparian variance prescriptions may be prepared by Forest Professionals if their level of training is commensurate with the site risk of varying a default practice, but this may need to be prepared based on the recommendations of a qualified stream specialist, if there is a significant departure from the FRPA defaults and if there is a significant potential risk (eg. higher channel sensitivity and/or wider width) identified. Eg. It may not be the best place to vary far from defaults or past practices if there are sensitive values potentially affected, and if the variance is new, untested, and/or not well supported in literature or by specialist review. The minimum levels of retention by stream channel type identified in the result or strategy in Table 3.2 will be useful to consider as potential minimum levels on reaches of S3 streams.
29
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
B) SUGGESTED GUIDELINES AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO PLAN IMPLEMENTERS WFP Guidelines: The WFP guidelines considered the FRPA and FPC guidelines, and other best available information in their development. The existing FPC Guidebooks may remain relevant, especially to other licensee’s plan preparers; however, in some instances they may be out of date or specific to a Forest Practices Code context.
The suggested guidelines are listed below under each step in the suggested process for site plan preparers.
See below for the “suggested stream channel types and determination of channel and fish habitat sensitivity in this result or strategy”.
C) SUGGESTED PROCESS FOR PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Outline of a suggested FSP Process for Professional quality rationales in Site Plans or FRPA Planning Checklists is as follows (Professionals may use other or equivalent process): Site Plan Preparers 1) Determine stream class using relevant guidelines or specialist input. FPC Riparian Management Area Guidebook, 1995. Available on the Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resources Operations (MFLNRO) website. Fish Stream ID Guidebook, 1998. Available on the MFLNRO website. Stream class assessments may need to be conducted by specialists. 2) Assess the windthrow risk to the RRZ or RMZ using the WFP Windthrow Management System, or similar procedure. WFP windthrow management system and a windthrow assessment procedure designed with input from Dr. Steve Mitchell – located on WFP intranet site.. BCTS Windthrow Manual, 2010. Available on the Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resources Operations website. 3) Where relevant, review the terrain stability or gully status of the stream using relevant guidelines (eg. TRMS and Gully Management Guidebook) and obtain specialist input where needed. For the soils related practices of FRRP ss. 37 and 38 (slides/gullies) that are outside the R/S: WFP Terrain Risk Management Strategy, September 2010, G. Horel, P.Eng (contains the below description of stream channel types and stream channel sensitivity) – located on WFP intranet site. TRMS Map Atlas For WFP tenures – available on WFP intranet site (Certification) Map Set 1 - Regional landslide frequency Map Set 2 - Terrain vulnerable to landslides 4) Review the WFP Watershed Management Strategies and the overview of issues identified by watershed. Assess the stream channel type on the ground using the classes in the tables below, or similar methods. Consider the availability of
30
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
the WFP stream channel type overview mapping (Map Atlas) that was completed with the Watershed Inventory Projects (FIA reports). Horel, G. 2007. Tree Farm Licence 6 and Tree Farm Licence 39 Block 4, Watershed Indicators. Prepared for Western Forest Products Inc., North Vancouver Island Region. Forest Investment Account Projects #6549006 and 6561023. Horel, G. 2007. Tree Farm Licence 6, Tree Farm Licence 39 Block 4, and Tree Farm Licence 37, Watershed Management Strategies. Internal report, Western Forest Products Inc., North Vancouver Island Region. NVIR Watershed Indicators Map Atlas (2007) for WFP tenures: Map set 5: Road Stability Hazard, Sediment Delivery Potential to Fish, Landslides Map set 6: Road Stability Hazard and Deactivation Status Map set 7: Stream Channel Types Horel, G. 2007. Tree Farm Licence 37, Watershed Indicators. Prepared for Western Forest Products Inc., North Vancouver Island Region. Forest Investment Account Project #6654004. TFL 37 map atlas: Map set 5 - Road Stability Hazard, Deactivation Status, Landslides Map set 6 - Stream Channel Types Horel, G. 2006. Rationale for Proposed Schedules for Maintenance Inspections, Wilderness and Industrial Roads. Internal report, Western Forest Products Inc., North Vancouver Island Region (includes map atlas) General: FPC Channel Assessment Guidebook – available on MFLNRO website – but uses a different channel classification than suggested in WFP documents. 5) Consider any special site factors, or any new information from relevant monitoring reports. Western’s guidelines have incorporated and considered the latest information from available sources to the date the Western Guidelines were produced. The Watershed Indicators reports contain current landscape level monitoring information specific to the plan area, and the WFP Watershed Strategies reports list factors to consider by watershed. This would be the primary source of current monitoring information at time of plan preparation. Forest and Range Evaluation Program (FREP) also produces monitoring reports on riparian values which are available on the MFLNRO website, and are more general in nature. 6) Review the WFP Stream Management Guidelines or equivalent information to assist in selecting amount of retention with the RMA. If making a Riparian Variance Prescription, refer to the section above. WFP Guidelines: WFP Stream Management Guidelines -- contains a decision making flowchart that indicates the factors to consider in designing riparian management zone retention levels– located on WFP intranet site. WFP powerpoint presentations on riparian management and reserve zone strategies for windthrow management – located on WFP intranet site.
31
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
General: FPC Riparian Management Area Guidebook, 1995. Available on the MFLNRO website. 7) Consider whether DFO needs to be notified. Note that notification is not the same as approval. This clause was intended to provide DFO the option to have awareness of the application of an alternative strategy rather than be a requirement for pre-approval. Although, seeking DFO input prior to prescribing the strategy might be desirable in some cases at the discretion of the prescribing Forest Professional. The 50% threshold is an arbitrary number – the intent was to allow DFO the opportunity of awareness where there are significant or material changes from FRPA defaults and the ability to contact Western and discuss periodically. If in doubt document why DFO not contacted if it is viewed as not likely of significant interest or risk, or notify them. It may be acceptable to notify them annually as an alternative to case by case, but if doing so should track this in Cengea or tracking system. 8) Complete prescription and rationale. The option of prescribing an alternative width to one of ss.47-49 under R/S s.1(b), requires that a rationale addresses consistency with each element of the FPPR s.8 objective in riparian areas, ie. water, fish habitat, wildlife habitat, and biodiversity. WFP has developed considerable stream and watershed information for the plan area that can help guide the prescription process (see Guidelines and Suggested Process sections herein). In preparing the prescription consider the sensitivity of the stream to the practice being considered, in order to apply varied widths only in appropriate situations or where there is lower stream sensitivity. Note that the R/S exemption under s.1(b) only applies to the width of the RRZ in the situation or circumstance that a Riparian Variance Prescription is prepared that addresses R/S s.1(b) and the factors that it outlines; if other types of exemptions are required, and the licensee is adopting R/S s. 1(a) without altering the FRPA default practices, exemptions under FPPR s.91 (1) from default FRPA practices may be available if the default practice is “not practicable”: In this event, the site plan preparer should refer to FRPA Guidelines available on MFLNRO website on the use of the term not practicable and submit an exemption request to the DDM. Examples of how the strategy might be applied: some stream channel types are less sensitive and likely may be varied to a degree and still meet the practice requirements and objectives. These may include rock controlled channels, and non-alluvial channels. More sensitive channels would likely be able to be varied to a lesser degree before expert/specialist advice was sought in any significant departure from FRPA default practices. In a significant departure qualified expertise and use of appropriate guidelines will be needed. Identify in the site plan where any “equivalent” RRZ per R/S s.1(b)(vi) is reserved. 9) Water intakes generally: Despite a “result or strategy” not being required without legal objectives, the practices for licensed water works described in Division 4, Sections 59 & 60 of Forest Planning and Practices Regulation should be applied even in instances where objectives for community watersheds have not been legally established. As such, WFP may develop standard operating procedures for addressing water quality and accommodating water use. In their absence, the SOP procedures would probably be similar to the following:
32
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Any known licensed domestic water intakes and related infrastructure, which may directly or indirectly be impacted by proposed harvest activities should be shown on future planning maps. Harvesting activities which may directly or indirectly impact water quality associated with known domestic water intakes, either licensed or unlicensed, will be preceded by seeking consultation with the water user(s), prior to the completion of the site plan. The objective of consultation will be to: confirm accurate location of water intakes and related infrastructure plan and schedule harvest activities with respect to water quality or water supply consider sediment delivery potential and connectivity Strategies to be considered include: maintenance of a timbered buffer around the intake and the upstream watercourse, with the need for and size of the buffer dependent on side slope, potential for blow down, soils, etc consideration of sediment control measures from roads and streams with connectivity consideration in terrain risk management relocation of the intake where mutually agreeable 10) Track where R/S s.1(b) Riparian Variance Prescription is applied. WE may be asked for the next FSP, or during the term of trhe plan, about the number of times and circumstances in which the strategy was applied. Table 3.1.1: Suggested stream channel types and determination of channel and fish habitat sensitivity in this result or strategy Guidelines on habitat and channel sensitivity were developed for this result or strategy by consultants, and are found in the above documents. These stream channel type criteria are intended to be an acceptable system under the R/S, and may be updated from time to time. Systems developed by other qualified persons may also be acceptable to achieve results. The stream and fan components of the EBM training could be a useful part of training for this result or strategy. Stream sensitivity refers to an assessment of fish habitat and channel sensitivity to disturbance. For the purposes of this result or strategy, assessment of streams as alluvial (high sensitivity), semi-alluvial (moderate sensitivity), or non-alluvial (low sensitivity) will be an acceptable system. There is more information available on these on the WFP intranet site.
Stream Channel Types for FSP Tables 3.1 and 3.2 Channel Type Alluvial
Description Channel has at least one unconfined erodible bank in alluvial deposits, and a definable channel migration zone. Alluvial deposits are material that was deposited by the stream under the contemporary flow regime. Large alluvial streams may have fluvial terraces that are rarely inundated; or may have glaciofluvial terraces that are no longer inundated. Streams confined by glaciofluvial terraces usually have stable positions and are not susceptible to channel migration. When channel types are identified by airphoto interpretation, streams with glaciofluvial terraces are identified as alluvial channels if the deposits cannot be distinguished with certainty. These larger alluvial streams with rarely inundated or dry terraces typically have stable channel positions. LWD may be sparse or absent; or have minimal influence on channel structure. Where streamflow is against the rooting zone in alluvial stream banks, riparian vegetation is critical to limit bank erosion. In severe flood events
33
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Stream Channel Types for FSP Tables 3.1 and 3.2 Channel Type
Semi-alluvial
Nonalluvial
Wetland
Description or if the riparian zone is logged, the stream may erode its bank(s) and widen its channel. If there is a significant channel migration zone the stream position may change within this zone, triggered by disturbance or a large flood event. Abandoned channels or flood channels may be present. LWD is critical to structure of small channels; and important in large channels, forming jams, pools and flow diversions. These alluvial channels are often sensitive to disturbance such as logging of riparian forest, increased sediment, removal of LWD from the channel, or loss of LWD supply. Alluvial channels are often reaches of highly productive fish habitat. Channel is typically riffle-pool or cascade-pool. Gradient typically 0.1 ha will be restocked as part of the adjacent Standards Unit. Therefore, no new stocking standards are set out in this FSP for feathered
Single entry, or uneven aged management (eg. Increasing Timber Availability from THLB) Partial Cutting with Regeneration Obligation, where non-timber values and objectives are primary management focus (eg. visuals, recreation) to help balance the objectives indicated in the Site Plan, or where uneven aged silviculture systems are applied. Application of Single Entry Dispersed Retention System consistent with SEDRSS Discussion Paper, CRIT November 5, 2009, and 75% of the minimum heights in the FSP even aged stocking standards. SEDRSS includes: stratification, overstory, understory, survey methodology, and stocking decision requirements (2 alternatives). Appropriate DFP table to be developed for site indexes > 30. Results reporting as suggested in SEDRSS.
Economic Opportunity, Partial [1] Harvesting
Habitat Improvement
Needs to be amended on a case by case basis in accordance with the RMT January 21, 2011 Opportunity Harvest Options Paper Decision.
Uneven aged or Selection Systems, or may vary in response to wildlife objectives.
Case by case approval needed.
Application of Single Entry Dispersed Retention System consistent with SEDRSS Discussion Paper November 5, 2009 -- as described adjacent under “increasing timber availability”.
Per the January 21, 2011 Opportunity Harvest Options Decision, and parameters of Sept 23, 2010 Options Paper. The decision says the proposal must be based on: limited circumstance site specific basis and stocking standard proposal will include a rationale.
145
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Situations or Circumstances
Intermediate cuts (eg. pre-poling, single stem, windfirming edge)
Single entry, or uneven aged management (eg. Increasing Timber Availability from THLB)
Economic Opportunity, Partial [1] Harvesting
Habitat Improvement
As above, and as per Appendix 1 SEDRSS are to be applied where the residual basal area (RBA) within a selected harvest area is 5 – 40 m2/ha, and per the stratification guidelines. Per SEDRS guidelines, or selection group sizes Ecological suitability. Leave tree form, health, and vigour will be representative or minimally impacted compared to the original stand condition per SEDRSS Discussion Paper November 5, 2009.
As per Appendix 1
As above, and as per Appendix 1 As above
All FDU’s -- if single entry SEDRSS stocking standards used. Specific SEDRSS standards to be amended into FSP.
No FDUs -- unless amended in on case by case basis.
edges. Species to be retained Maximum Basal Area % Reduction (Quantity)
As per Appendix 1
Maximum Opening size (Distribution)
0.1 ha
Characteristics of Retained Trees or Remaining Stand
Retain a stand that contains good leave tree form, health, and vigour and is generally representative of the original stand condition. Retain a stand of ecologically suitable species which will be viable for future harvest opportunities.
Scope
May reduce to 40 m2/ha basal area of pre-harvest stand basal area. Economically viable stand remaining after harvest
In the case of feathered edges, retain a stand that provides protection or meets wind management objectives. All FDUs – single stem or pre-poling stocking standards provided in FSP appendix Based on prepoling cedar/cypress availability and meeting form requirements. Except feathered edges, based on windthrow
Standards for uneven aged silviculture systems (single tree or group selection) will require
May reduce by up to 50 % of preharvest stand 2
basal area (m /ha).
0.1ha
No specific characteristics for retained trees or remaining stand.
Per CF Opportunity Decision: proposal must be based on: limited circumstance and site specific stocking standard.
Per SEDRSS guidelines, or selection group sizes As above
All FDU’s -- if SEDRSS stocking standards used and compatible habitat objectives exist. Specific SEDRSS standards to be amended into FSP. Standards for uneven aged silviculture systems (single tree or group
146
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Situations or Circumstances
Intermediate cuts (eg. pre-poling, single stem, windfirming edge)
objectives.
Scale
< 2% of AAC over term of plan.
Windfirming treatments scale are consistent with previous FPC and FRPA practice.
Single entry, or uneven aged management (eg. Increasing Timber Availability from THLB) amendment into FSP.
Economic Opportunity, Partial [1] Harvesting
< 2% of AAC over term of plan
Case by case approval as discussed above.
There is no experience with SEDRSS so this is an adaptive management proposal that may need to be adjusted during the term of the plan.
Habitat Improvement
selection) will require amendment into FSP. No volume limits
Application is inherently limited to areas with compatible habitat objectives.
Maximum opening size is to be used during the planning stage of the block. Actual size of openings at harvest completion may in some cases be greater than the maximum to address safety concerns. For example, if falling of danger trees was necessary, an opening may end-up larger than planned. At harvest completion, openings greater than the maximum opening size to address safety concerns will not results in a failure to meet the standard. Economic Opportunity Harvesting (Background Information)
Only if a Stocking Standard FSP amendment is approved per the RMT January 21, 2011 Opportunity Harvest Options Paper Decision, whereby the licensee may opt to propose an Economic Opportunity block based on the parameters set out in the September 23, 2010 paper “Opportunity Harvesting in British Columbia’s Coast Forest Region: Options Paper for the Ministry of Forestry and Range”. The decision says the proposal must be based on: o limited circumstance o site specific basis, and o stocking standard proposal will include a rationale.
147
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 1: Stocking Standards Appendix 1.0 Pre Poling and other Intermediate Cut – Min Hts 75% of below, stocking standards consistent with the below will be amended into the FSP for other site series. Note: Stocking Standard ID # will be created through FSP Tracker system. BGC Zone : CWH vm 1 site series 01. Ecologically Suitable Species and Min Ht CW 1.5, BA 1.75, HW 3.0, FDC 3.0, PLC 1.5, PW 2.5, SS 3.0, YC 1.5. FG Early 1, late 2, minimum basal area to be retained 40 m2. Leave tree characteristics: Health, form, vigour of current stand including snags, decaying trees, healthy trees, suppressed trees, multi storied forest canopy containing mature intermediates, co-dominants and dominants. BGC Zone : CWH vm 1 site series 01s. Ecologically Suitable Species and Min Ht CW 1.0, HW 2.0, FDC 2.0, PLC 1.25, PW 2.5, SS 3.0, YC 1.0. FG Early 1, late 2, minimum basal area to be retained 40 m2. Leave tree characteristics: Health, form, vigour of current stand including snags, decaying trees, healthy trees, suppressed trees, multi storied forest canopy containing mature intermediates, co-dominants and dominants. BGC Zone : CWH vm 1 site series 03. Ecologically Suitable Species and Min Ht CW 1.0, HW 2.0, FDC 2.0, PLC 1.25, PW 2.5, SS 3.0, YC 1.0. FG Early 1, late 2, minimum basal area to be retained 40 m2. Leave tree characteristics: Health, form, vigour of current stand including snags, decaying trees, healthy trees, suppressed trees, multi storied forest canopy containing mature intermediates, co-dominants and dominants. BGC Zone : CWH vm 2 site series 01. Ecologically Suitable Species and Min Ht CW 1.5, BA 1.75, HW 2.5, HM 1.0, FDC 2.25, PW 2.5, YC 1.5. FG Early 1, late 2, minimum basal area to be retained 40 m2. Leave tree characteristics: Health, form, vigour of current stand including snags, decaying trees, healthy trees, suppressed trees, multi storied forest canopy containing mature intermediates, co-dominants and dominants. BGC Zone : CWH vm 2 site series 03. Ecologically Suitable Species and Min Ht CW 1.0, BA 1.5, HW 1.75, HM 0.75, FDC 1.5, PW 2.5, YC 1.0. FG Early 1, late 2, minimum basal area to be retained 40 m2. Leave tree characteristics: Health, form, vigour of current stand including snags, decaying trees, healthy trees, suppressed trees, multi storied forest canopy containing mature intermediates, co-dominants and dominants. BGC Zone : CWH xm site series 01. Ecologically Suitable Species and Min Ht CW 1.5, FDC 3.0, HW 2.0, PW 2.5. FG Early 1, late 2, minimum basal area to be retained 40 m2. Leave tree characteristics: Health, form, vigour of current stand including snags, decaying trees, healthy trees, suppressed trees, multi storied forest canopy containing mature intermediates, co-dominants and dominants.
149
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Even-Aged Stocking Standards Tables Appendix 1.1 Species Selection Species selection will occur at the Assessment Area (AA) level based on the AA's dominant site series. Ecologically suitable species for each site series are listed in the table below.
Ecosystem Classification BEC CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm1 CWHvm2 CWHvm2 CWHvm2 CWHvm2 CWHmm1 CWHmm1
14
Site Series 01, 05, S1ha, S13 01s, 06s, S1ch, S1ch-ha, S10 S1ha-ch 03, S2 04, S12ha 06, 07, 08, S3, S15 09 10, S4 5 14 , S6 13, S7, S8 6 14 , S5 S12ch 01, 05, M1, M3 03, 04, M2 06, 07, 08, M5 09, 11, M4 01 03, 04
Deciduous Sp.
Coniferous Species Ba
Bg
Bp
X X
2
17
X X X X
X X X
19
X
4
Cw X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Fdc
Hm
X 4 X 3 X X X X
Hw X X X X X X X X
X 7 X X
13
X 13 X 13 X X
X X
150
X X X X X X X X
Plc
11
Pw
4
X
10
X 4 X
X
10
4
Ss
X X
10
X X
X 4 X 4 X
X
4
X
4
4
X 4 X 4 X 4 X X X
12
2
X X X X
Yc
9
Act
1
X 1 X 1 X 1 X 1 X 1 X
Dr X
X X
X X X
X X X
X X X X X X X
8
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Ecosystem Classification
14
BEC CWHmm1 CWHmm1 CWHmm1 CWHmm1 CWHmm1 CWHmm1 CWHxm CWHxm CWHxm CWHxm CWHxm CWHxm
Site Series 05 06 07 08 09 12 01, 06 03, 04 05, 07 08 09 12
MHmm1 MHmm1
01, 03, 04, 05 02, 09
X
MHmm1
06, 07
X
CWHvh1
H1, H3, H11, H13, CP, 01
CWHvh1
03,11, H4, H5, H6, H7, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09
CWHvh1 CWHvh1
12
Deciduous Sp.
Coniferous Species Ba 19 X X X X X
Bg X X X X X
Bp
X X X
X
18
X
X
Cw X X X X X X X X X X X X
4
Fdc X X X X
Hm
Hw X X X X
Plc
X 15 X
X X X X
X X
X
10
15
11
Pw X X X
X X X X
15
X
16
X 7 X
16
X
X X
X 16 X
X
X
12
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CWHvh1
13
X
X
X
CWHvh1
14, 16
X
X
X
CWHvh1
15, 17
X
X
X
CWHvh1
18
X
X
X
X X X X
18
X X
X
X X
X
X
X X X
151
X X
X
7
9
Act
X X
X X
X 18
Yc
X X X X
7
X
X
Ss X
X
Dr X X X X X X X X X X X
8
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 1.1 Footnotes: 1 Restricted to areas influenced by CWHvm2 or CWHvh1, or to cold air drainage sites. 2 Suitable in the absence of salal in proximity to the tree. 3 Restricted to areas of low to moderate salal competition. 4 Restricted to the Lower Nimpkish and the Upper Nimpkish FDUs, and on warm aspects of the Marble,Keogh, Neroutsos and Holberg (east of Coal Harbor Highway) FDUs. 5 Soil Nutrient Regime (SNR) C-D. 6 Soil Nutrient Regime (SNR) E. 7 Restricted to the Lower Nimpkish, the Upper Nimpkish and the Marble FDUs on lower elevations and/or warm aspects. 8 Restricted to SUs designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer management or Hardwood management; or to conifer leading SUs for root rot management or for rehabilitating disturbed, degraded or unstable sites. 9 Restricted to SUs designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer management or Hardwood management. 10 The use of Plc to meet the MSS is limited to 20%. 11 Pw is to be from seed which has been selected to be resistant to Cronartium ribicola or is to be pruned prior to FG declaration. Pruned means that the lowest live branches have been removed to a height of 1.3 m when trees are greater than or equal to 2.5 m tall. For trees less than 2.5 m tall, at least 40% of tree height will remain as live crown. 12 a) Ss is to be from seed which has been selected for a high resistant to Pissodes strobe in areas of moderate and high spruce weevil areas. If Ss is not from seed sources selected for high resistance to Pissodes strobe, the use of Ss to meet the MSS is limited to 20% in moderate and high spruce weevil risk areas b) In CWH xm and mm1 05 and 07 site series that are transitional to CWHvm1, 20% Ss is allowed. Other CWH xm and mm site series are per footnote 12(a). 13 Restricted to areas influenced by MHmm1 or to cold air drainage sites. 14 Some areas in the Holberg Forest Operation mapped as CWHvh1 can be managed to the CWHvm1 standards using the Lewis Ecosystem Classification due to the transitional nature of the CWHvh1 in this area. 15 Limited to 40% to meet MSS. 16 Restricted to lower elevations. 17 Restricted to the wetter portion of the Holberg Forest Operation on sites that are not distinctly water shedding. 18 19
Restricted to nutrient medium sites Ba is limited to 30% of TSS.
152
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 1.2 Target Stocking Standards Target Stocking Standards (TSS) will be assigned at the SU level as per the table below. The dominant site series or the management regime of the SU will be used to assign the TSS to the SU. TSS
Site Series
1
800 400
CWH vm1 S1ch, S1ch-ha; Dr leading SUs designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer management or Hardwood management. CWHmm1 03, 12; CWHvh1 H3, H11, H13, CP, 03,11, 13; CWHvm1 03, 14, S2, S5, S6, S7; CWHvm2 03, 09, 11, M2, M4; CWHxm 03, 12; MHmm1 02, 06, 09. CWHvm1 13, S8; CWHvh1 12, 14, 16, 18
900
All other site series not listed above in the CWHmm1, vh1, vm1, vm2, xm and MHmm1; Act leading SUs designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer management or Hardwood management.
1200
Footnotes: 1 Some areas in the Holberg Forest Operation mapped as CWHvh1 can be managed to the CWHvm1 standards using the Lewis Ecosystem Classification due to the transitional nature of the CWHvh1 in this area.
153
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 1.3 Minimum Stocking Standards Minimum Stocking Standards (MSS) will be assigned at the SU level as per the table below. The dominant site series or the management regime of the SU will be used to assign the MSS to the SU. MSS can be adjusted as per table footnotes. 3
MSS
1
800 700 400 200
2
500
Site Series
4
CWHvm1 S1ch, S1ch-ha Dr leading SUs designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer management or Hardwood management. CWHmm1 03, 12; CWHvh1 H3, H11, H13, CP, 03,11, 13; CWHvm1 03, 14, S2, S5, S6, S7; CWHvm2 03, 09, 11, M2, M4; CWHxm 03, 12; MHmm1 02, 06, 09. CWHvm1 13, S8. ; CWHvh1 12, 14, 16, 18 All other site series not listed above in the CWHmm1, vh1, vm1, vm2, xm and MHmm1; Act leading SUs designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer management or Hardwood management.
Footnotes: 1 MSS is reduced to 700 if the S2 and/or S5 and/or S6 and/or S7 and/or NPNAT portion of the mosaic
2 3 4
is between 20 and 34%. MSS is reduced to 600 if the S2 and/or S5 and/or S6 and/or S7 and/or NPNAT portion of the mosaic is between 35 and 49%. MSS is reduced to 400 if the NPNAT portion of the mosaic is 20% or greater. MSS is 50% of the amount specified in heavy elk use areas. Some areas in the Holberg Forest Operation mapped as CWHvh1 can be managed to the CWHvm1 standards using the Lewis Ecosystem Classification due to the transitional nature of the CWHvh1 in this area.
154
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 1.4 Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance (MHID) will be assigned at the Assessment Area (AA) level as per the table below. The dominant site series or the site condition of the Assessment Area (AA) will be used to assign the Minimum Horizontal Inter-tree Distance to the SU. MSS can be adjusted as per table footnotes. MHID (m) 1.0
Site Series Within 10 m of roadsides and/or on talus sites and/or on root rot sites where stump avoidance is necessary.
1.5 2.0
CWHmm1 03, 04, 08, 09, 12; CWHvh1 H3, H11, H13, CP 03,11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18; CWHvm1 03, 04, 09, 10, 13, 14, S2, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8; CWHvm2 03, 04, 09, 11, M2, M4; CWHxm 03, 04, 08, 09, 12; MHmm1 02, 06, 07, 09. All site series in helicopter logging areas. All other site series not listed above in the CWHmm1, vh1, vm1, vm2, xm and MHmm1.
1
Footnotes: 1 Some areas in the Holberg Forest Operation mapped as CWHvh1 can be managed to the CWHvm1 standards using the Lewis Ecosystem Classification due to the transitional nature of the CWHvh1 in this area.
155
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 1.5 Minimum Free Growing Heights Minimum free growing height will be assigned at the Assessment Area (AA) level based on the AA's ecosystem classification. The dominant site series of the Assessment Area (AA) will be used to assign the minimum free growing heights for the AA. MSS can be adjusted as per table footnotes. Deciduous 1 Eco. Classification Coniferous Species Sp. BEC Site Series Ba Bg Bp Cw Fdc Hm Hw Plc Pw Ss Yc Act Dr 01, 04, 05, 06, S1ha, S1ha-ch, S12ch, CWHvm1 S12ha, S13, S15, 01s, 06s, S1ch, S1chha, S10 1.75 1.50 3.00 3.00 1.50 2.50 3.00 1.50 3.00 CWHvm1 03, 13, 14, S2, S5, S6, S7, S8 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.25 2.50 3.00 1.00 CWHvm1 07, 08, 09, 10, S3, S4 2.25 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.50 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 CWHvm2 01, 05, 06, M1, M3 1.75 1.25 1.50 2.25 1.00 2.50 2.50 1.50 CWHvm2 03, 04, 09, 11, M2, M4 1.50 1.00 1.50 0.75 1.75 2.50 1.00 CWHvm2 07, 08, M5 2.25 2.00 1.00 3.50 2.50 2.00 CWHmm1 01, 05, 06 0.75 3.00 1.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.00 CWHmm1 03, 04, 12 1.00 2.00 1.75 2.50 CWHmm1 07, 08, 09 1.00 3.50 2.00 4.00 2.50 2.50 4.00 4.00 4.00 CWHxm 01, 04, 06 3.00 1.50 3.00 2.00 1.25 2.50 3.00 CWHxm 03, 12 1.00 2.00 1.25 1.25 2.50 1.50 CWHxm 05, 07, 08, 09 3.50 2.00 4.00 1.75 2.50 4.00 4.00 4.00 CWHvh1 H1, CP, 01, 15, 16 1.75 1.50 2.00 2.00 1.50 3.00 1.50 CWHvh1 H3, H11, H13, 03, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18 1.00 1.25 1.25 1.25 2.00 1.00 H4, H5, H6, H7, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, CWHvh1 10 2.25 2.00 1.75 1.75 1.50 4.00 2.00 MHmm1 01, 03, 04, 05 0.60 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 MHmm1 02, 06, 07, 08, 09 0.60 0.75 0.75 0.75 Footnotes: 1 Some areas in the Holberg Forest Operation mapped as CWHvh1 can be managed to the CWHvm1 standards using the Lewis Ecosystem Classification due to the transitional nature of the CWHvh1 in this area.
156
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 1.6 Revisions to Terrain-Ecosystem Mapping Terrain-ecosystem mapping was undertaken on WFP’s holdings on northern Vancouver Island in the 1980’s. Since that time there have been revisions to the terrain classification system and our understanding of ecosystems has increased based on both operational experience and formal research. The original ecosystem classification (Lewis, 1982; 1985) pre-dated the current version of the biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification (BEC) as outlined in Green and Klinka (1994) and although there are many analogous ecosystems (site series) in both classifications, there are also significant differences. Largely because of the mobility of forestry personnel and the restructuring of the forest industry, it has become increasingly desirable to bring the WFP classification into conformance with that of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO). There is sufficient flexibility within the BEC system to incorporate local differences recognized in the WFP inventory, by the use of various modifiers and phases. Revision to the ecosystem classification, and to both terrain attributes and ecosystem attributes of existing map units (polygons) is underway as part of a separate project. Table 1 is a correlation of old and new ecosystem symbology and its relationship to BEC for the CWHvm subzone. In the new symbology, there is a direct one-to-one relationship to BEC site series, but there are often additional modifiers. This cross-walk table should assist in relating the original and revised classification in relation to silviculture prescriptions and stocking standards. Table A: Relationship between old and new Lewis units with BEC units WFP CLASS’N – (Lewis, 1982, 1985) S1HA
WFP REVISED CLASS’N – (Lewis, 2007) VS01
WFP POTENTIAL MODIFIERS
S1HA-CH and S1CH-HA
VS01 and VS01s
fo, po
vm1/01*
S1CH
VS01s
fo, po
vm1/01s*
S2 S2F
VS03 VS02F
vm1/03 vm1/02
S2P S3 – terraces
VS02P VS09
vm1/02 vm1/09
BEC UNIT (Green & Klinka, 1994) vm1/01*
COMMENTS
Expected to include VS06dr; VH4 where mapped in CWHvh1. S1HA-CH and S1CH-HA were associated with the fo and po modifiers, based on level of “salal risk”. salal phase (long-term salal); expected to include VS06dr;VH4s where mapped in CWHvh1 Douglas-fir phase – locally drier climate shore pine phase
157
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
WFP CLASS’N – (Lewis, 1982, 1985) (‘benches’) S3 – on fans S3B S4 S5
WFP REVISED CLASS’N – (Lewis, 2007)
BEC UNIT (Green & Klinka, 1994)
COMMENTS
VS05F VS04B VS10 VS14F
vm1/05 vm1/04 vm1/10 vm1/14
S6
VS14O
vm1/14
S7 S8 S9
VS14WS VS13 (WB51) WB51, WB52
vm1/14 vm1/13 --
S10
VS06
S11 S12 S13
WF51 VS05L VS05C & VS07C VS07CL VS06, VS06s
also minor VS7, vm1/07 raised beach deposits seral red alder richer skunk cabbage sites; in a fluvial setting poorer skunk cabbage sites; depressional; VH13 in CWHvh1 Pl-Cw swamp forest Pl bog woodland open bog; WB52 in CWHvh1 minor components with S1 were not mapped in earlier work open sedge fen also minor VS04L commonly colluvial
S13L S15
WFP POTENTIAL MODIFIERS
fo, dr & wt
vm1/06
-vm1/05 (/04)
limestone colluvium this ecosystem was not mapped in the earlier work; not expected to include VS06dr *The S1ha and ch ecosystems in Site Plans and Silviculture Prescriptions in the former Lewis system encompassed S1, S10 and S15 as these were not mapped in the 1982 and 1985 classification system, and the primary stratification was into S1HA versus S1CH. In some cases, portions of VS05 may have been included in the S1HA broader units, or stratified as S13. The S1HA sites under the 1982/85 system encompassed CWHvm1 01, 06, and some 05; S1CH encompassed 01s and 06s; S1HA-CH and S1CH-HA potentially encompassed 01s, 06s, 01, and 06. The CH and CH-HA component is now distinguished by the s, fo, and/or po modifiers. fo, dr, wt, mn
In the revised inventory, the original units based on site associations will be replaced by site series. Consequently, the site series attributes will recognize the CWHvm to CWHvh1 subzone boundary. For example, S1 will become VS1 within the CWHvm1 and VH4 within the CWHvh1.
158
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Linkage between Landscape Level Inventory and Site Level Assessment Revision of the landscape level inventory of ecosystems will provide site series, other ecosystem attributes and terrain attributes for all map units (polygons) currently in WFP’s GIS. Original ecosystem attributes, including phases, will be retained in the database to facilitate backwards correlation. Site series and terrain attributes will be consistent with current standards (Green & Klinka, 1994; Howes & Kenk, 1997). Refinement or localization of the BEC system for the Nahwitti Lowland Ecosection involves revisions to the site moisture key and additional guidance for separating poor, medium and richer nutrient regimes. The revised attributes will include the recommended site modifiers where scale of mapping and field-checking allows. However, the primary intent of the recommended modifiers is to improve ecosystem assessment (site diagnosis) at the site level, as during the development of silviculture prescriptions. For example, a map unit attributed as VS1//VS6 may well be found to be consistently Folisolic or contain components of Folisolic when investigated at the site level. Ecosystems of the Montane Very Wet Maritime CWH — CWHvm2 Table B summarizes the site series of the montane CWHvm2 as seen on northern Vancouver Island, including relative soil moisture and soil nutrient regimes.
Table B. Site Series of the CWHvm2 of northern Vancouver Island.
MOF SITE SERIES
NEW WFP MAP UNIT
OLD WFP MAP UNIT
RELATIVE SOIL MOISTURE REGIME
01
HwBa - Blueberry
VM01
M1, M1C
3-5
Medium to Poorer
03
HwCw - Salal
VM03
M2
1-2
Poorer
05
BaCw - Foamflower
VM05
M3, M3C M3F
3-4
08
BaSs – Devil’s club
11 CwSs – Skunk cabbage
RELATIVE SOIL NUTRIENT REGIME
Richer
VM08
M5 M5C
5-6
Richer
VM11
M4
7
Medium to Richer
159
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
CWHvm2 site series are labeled VMn (e.g. the zonal site series is VM01); earlier ecosystem associations were labeled Mn (e.g. the equivalent site was labeled M1). Ecosystems of the Very Wet Hypermaritime CWH — CWHvh1 Table C below summarizes the site series of the CWHvh1 mapped on northern Vancouver Island, including their relative soil moisture and soil nutrient regimes. CWHvh1 site series are labeled VHn (e.g. the zonal site series is VH01); earlier ecosystem associations were labeled Sn and CP, which encompasses areas now mapped as complexes of VH01 and VH11.
Table C: Site Series of the CWHvh1 of northern Vancouver Island
MOF SITE SERIES
NEW WFP MAP UNIT
OLD WFP MAP UNIT
RELATIVE SOIL MOISTURE REGIME
RELATIVE SOIL NUTRIENT REGIME
01
CwHw - Salal
VH01
CP
4-5
Medium to Poorer
03
CwYc - Salal
VH03
S2
3-4
Medium to Poorer
04 HwSs - Lanky moss
VH04
S1HA or S1CH
1-2
Medium
06 CwSs Foamflower
VH06
N/A or S15
2-3
Richer
08 Ss - Lily-ofthe-valley
VH08
S3
2-3
Richer
10 Dr – Lily-ofthe-valley
VH10
S4
2–3
Richer
11 CwYc Goldthread
VH11
CP
6-7
Medium to Poorer
12 PlYc Sphagnum
VH12
--
7-8
Poorer
13 CwSs Skunk cabbage
VH13
S6
6-7
Medium to Richer
160
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
MOF SITE SERIES
NEW WFP MAP UNIT
OLD WFP MAP UNIT
15 Ss Eurhynchium
VH15
--
32
WB52
--
Blanket bog
RELATIVE SOIL MOISTURE REGIME
RELATIVE SOIL NUTRIENT REGIME
Medium 8
Poorer
161
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 1.7 HIGH RETENTION STOCKING STANDARDS Table 14 and the following sets out general principles will be applied when developing standards for non-even-aged management or high retention approaches. Appendix 1.7 Fig.1 provides a conceptual diagram and decision key outlining some situations where high retention of a residual basal area, volume, or stem count would be an acceptable management approach. With the following retention exceptions:
feathering treatments with an average width of 30m or less along timber edges, or special forest products salvage.
1.7.1 Uneven-aged Management The following concepts are for cutblocks and/or standards units where uneven-aged management is practiced and are applicable to the following silviculture systems:
Single Tree Selection
Group Selection, where openings are 0.1 ha
For each BEC site series or phase the Preferred and Acceptable species listed in the Tables for even-aged management may be considered “Preferred”, with the exception that in Layer 4 only, locally shade-intolerant species (Fd, Dr) may be considered “Acceptable”. Hemlock trees in Layer 4 growing within the seed rain area of an overstory tree infected with hemlock dwarfmistletoe should make up no more than 50% of the minimum well-spaced stocking (P+A). The following recommended percentages could be applied to the even-aged stocking targets and minimums to calculate a starting point for the uneven-aged targets and minimums for well-spaced trees in Layers 2-4 within each site series: 25%
Layer 2 Pole (7.5cm to 12.4cm dbh)
70%
Layer 3 Sapling (1.3m to 7.4cm dbh)
100%
Layer 4 Regeneration (0.1 ha will be restocked as part of the adjacent Standards Unit. Therefore, no new stocking standards are set out in this FSP for feathered edges.
Single entry, or uneven aged management (eg. Increasing Timber Availability from THLB) Partial Cutting with Regeneration Obligation, where non-timber values and objectives are primary management focus (eg. visuals, recreation) to help balance the objectives indicated in the Site Plan, or where uneven aged management is applied. Application of Single Entry Dispersed Retention System consistent with SEDRSS Discussion Paper, CRIT November 5, 2009, and 75% of the minimum heights in the FSP even aged stocking standards. SEDRSS includes: stratification, overstory, understory, survey methodology, and stocking decision requirements (2 alternatives). Appropriate DFP table to be developed for site indexes > 30. Results reporting as suggested in SEDRSS.
Economic Opportunity, Partial [1] Harvesting
Habitat Improvement
Needs to be amended on a case by case basis in accordance with the RMT January 21, 2011 Opportunity Harvest Options Paper Decision.
Uneven aged or Selection Systems, or may vary in response to wildlife objectives.
Case by case approval needed.
Application of Single Entry Dispersed Retention System consistent with SEDRSS Discussion Paper November 5, 2009 -- as described adjacent under “increasing timber availability”.
Per the January 21, 2011 Opportunity Harvest Options Decision, and parameters of Sept 23, 2010 Options Paper. The decision says the proposal must be based on: limited circumstance site specific basis and stocking standard proposal will include a rationale.
164
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012 Situations or Circumstances
Intermediate cuts (eg. pre-poling, single stem, windfirming edge)
Single entry, or uneven aged management (eg. Increasing Timber Availability from THLB)
Economic Opportunity, Partial [1] Harvesting
Habitat Improvement
Species to be retained Maximum Basal Area % Reduction (Quantity)
As per Appendix 1
As per Appendix 1
As above, and as per Appendix 1 As above
Maximum Opening size (Distribution)
0.1 ha
Characteristics of Retained Trees or Remaining Stand
Retain a stand that contains good leave tree form, health, and vigour and is generally representative of the original stand condition. Retain a stand of ecologically suitable species which will be viable for future harvest opportunities.
As above, and as per Appendix 1 SEDRSS are to be applied where the residual basal area (RBA) within a selected harvest area is 5 – 40 m2/ha, and per the stratification guidelines. Per SEDRS guidelines, or selection group sizes Ecological suitability. Leave tree form, health, and vigour will be representative or minimally impacted compared to the original stand condition per SEDRSS Discussion Paper November 5, 2009.
All FDU’s -- if single entry SEDRSS stocking standards used. SEDRSS standards to be amended into FSP.
No FDUs -- unless amended in on case by case basis.
Scope
May reduce to 40 m2/ha basal area of pre-harvest stand basal area. Economically viable stand remaining after harvest
In the case of feathered edges, retain a stand that provides protection or meets wind management objectives. All FDUs – single stem or pre-poling stocking standards provided in FSP appendix Based on prepoling cedar/cypress availability and meeting form requirements. Except feathered edges, based on windthrow objectives.
Standards for uneven aged silviculture systems (single tree or group selection) will require amendment into
May reduce by up to 50 % of preharvest stand 2
basal area (m /ha).
0.1ha
No specific characteristics for retained trees or remaining stand.
Per CF Opportunity Decision: proposal must be based on: limited circumstance and site specific stocking standard.
Per SEDRSS guidelines, or selection group sizes As above
All FDU’s -- if SEDRSS stocking standards used and compatible habitat objectives exist. SEDRSS standards to be amended into FSP. Standards for uneven aged silviculture systems (single tree or group selection) will require
165
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012 Situations or Circumstances
Scale
Intermediate cuts (eg. pre-poling, single stem, windfirming edge)
< 2% of AAC over term of plan.
Windfirming treatments are consistent with previous FPC and FRPA practice.
Single entry, or uneven aged management (eg. Increasing Timber Availability from THLB) FSP.
Economic Opportunity, Partial [1] Harvesting
< 2% of AAC over term of plan
Case by case approval as discussed above.
There is no experience with SEDRSS so this is an adaptive management proposal that may need to be adjusted during the term of the plan.
Habitat Improvement
amendment into FSP. No volume limits
Application is inherently limited to areas with compatible habitat objectives.
Maximum opening size is to be used during the planning stage of the block. Actual size of openings at harvest completion may in some cases be greater than the maximum to address safety concerns. For example, if falling of danger trees was necessary, an opening may end-up larger than planned. At harvest completion, openings greater than the maximum opening size to address safety concerns will not results in a failure to meet the standard. Figure 1 illustrates a decision key provided for guidance and to be used when developing standards for high retention proposals. The key outlines some considerations for when high retention harvesting of single trees or small groups are being considered. The diagram presented in Figure 1 presents a simplified version of the key in the form of a flow chart and is provided for general reference. Refer to the decision key following for detail.
166
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Soft constraint violated? NO
1
YES
2
YES
5
3
Reserved timber?
YES
NO
NO
Unproductive, economically inoperable?
YES YES
O T
7
YES
Degrade future options?
NO
8
H
PARTIAL HARVEST
11
A 12
R V E
13
Clearcut strategy?
N NO
10
NO
D O
6
Conditional FSP exemption?
9
NO
Damage or render ineffective?
4
YES
S
14
INTERMEDIATE CUT
T
15
Multiple stand entries?
YES
16
NO
17
(Single or Group) SELECTION
SINGLE ENTRY
Figure 1. High Retention Decision Diagram
167
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
DECISION KEY (follow the numbers in sequence until otherwise directed) 1. Will proposed harvesting materially adversely affect the attainment of non-spatial or “soft” constraints such as the Non-Spatial Old Growth Order, a Section 7 wildlife notice, a Visual Quality Objective, or a cover constraint? (if NO skip to “3”) 2. DO NOT HARVEST 3. Is proposed harvesting of or from a spatially-identified, “hard” reserve such as a Riparian Reserve Zone, Wildlife Habitat Area, Old Growth Management Area, Resource Feature, Culturally Modified Tree? (if NO skip to “9”) 4. Will proposed harvesting “damage or render ineffective” the reserve for the purpose(s) for which it was established? (if NO skip to “6”) 5. DO NOT HARVEST. [If currently in TSR as “unconstrained operable”, recommend inventory reclassification] 6. Is a conditional FSP or other exemption applicable that permits the proposed harvest? (If NO, skip to “8”) 7. PARTIAL HARVEST very carefully without or with Document rationale, consult specialists.
28
regeneration objectives.
8. DO NOT HARVEST 9. Would a future rotation be impossible if clearcut; or in other words, is the stand unproductive for future timber crops and economically inoperable? (if NO skip to “11”) 10.
PARTIAL HARVEST without regeneration objectives.
11. [if classified “inoperable” in TSR, recommend reclassification.] Is residual stand unlikely to continue growing to harvestable size and value within reasonable timeframe (30-50 years)? I.e. would partial value removal degrade future harvest potential to the point that future harvest would not be viable? (If NO skip to “13”) 12.
DO NOT HARVEST (High Grading)
13. Could a subsequent stand entry be a profitable clearcut? (if “NO” skip to “15”) 14.
INTERMEDIATE CUT with no regeneration objectives.
15. HIGH RETENTION HARVEST with regeneration objectives. Are multiple stand entries likely within the next century? (if NO skip to “17”) 16.
SELECTION SYSTEM (Single Tree or Group) with continuous regeneration objective.
17. SINGLE
29
ENTRY high retention with regeneration objective.
28
generally natural regenerative processes would be preferred unless specific objectives require otherwise.
168
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Note that line 17 of the key is the residual. Although such stands may be rare, they likely exist nonetheless. As these productive and accessible stands cannot be clearcut due to constraints, and cannot be managed under a selection system due to economic or other impracticalities, they nevertheless harbour timber values. There needs to be a mechanism to allow partial extraction from such stands provided self replacement will occur with modest artificial reforestation efforts or via natural mechanisms.
29
“single” is here used to mean very infrequent entries that for all intents and purposes are unlikely to recur within a human lifetime. Alternatively the regime might be characterized as high retention with very long cutting intervals.
169
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Stocking Standards: Background Information (not part of the result or strategy): This is material accompanying the FSP but not part of the FSP, provided to assist the Delegated Decision Maker in plan approval, and assist plan implementers.
March 21, 2007 Western Forest Products Inc. North Vancouver Island Forest Operations
Forest Stewardship Plan Supporting Document for Stocking and Related Standards 1.0 Stocking and Related Standards for Stands to which Free Growing Obligations Apply 1.1 Introduction: A group of stocking and related standards (species, TSS, MSS, etc) which applies for a particular set of situations or circumstances is commonly referred to as a stocking standard. The set of situations or circumstances normally used is a site series or combination of site series under a particular regime such as even-aged management. Under the current data management system (RESULTS), the group is normally given a stocking standard ID when approved. In this document, to distinguish the group (the stocking standard) from its parts (species, TSS, MSS, etc) which are also stocking standards per se, the parts that makes up a stocking standard will be referred to as elements of the stocking standard.
Traditionally, a plan (FDP or FSP) would have a set of stocking standards, which would hopefully cover all the situations or circumstances, which are expected to be encountered in the area covered under the plan. For example, there would be a stocking standard for CWHvm1 01 sites, which would include all the elements of the stocking standard (species, TSS, MSS, etc). There would be another stocking standard for CWHvm1 03 and so on. There could also be stocking standards for combination of site series to account for mosaic found in the area such as CWHvm1 01/03. Each of these stocking standards would get a unique ID number.
1.2 Mosaics: A common problem with stocking standards is dealing with mosaics (also known as complexes) of different site series. Mosaics can be dealt with in a few different ways. It was common to develop specific stocking standards for particular situations when Silviculture Prescriptions were submitted to the MoFR for approval. These standards comprised of elements from different standards, which were tailored to the site conditions. In theory, under the current regime, it would still be possible to do so and amend the FDP or FSP with the standards of a particular cutblock. However, this is not practical. One solution would be to develop a stocking standard for each site series and allow the prescribing Forester to develop a specific standard for an SU based on those standards within the Site Plan. So far, the MoF has rejected standards that allowed the Forester to modify standards at the Site Plan stage to tailor them to the conditions found on the site. Only
170
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
the standards from the FDP or FSP are enforceable. This precludes tailoring standards in the Site Plan. Under the FPC regime, one of the solutions was to assign more than one stocking standard in an SU if a mosaic was present. On the plus side, only one stocking standard per site series was needed. There were several drawbacks however. Statistics had to be met for each standards of the SU. If a portion of the mosaic was under-represented in the sample (for example, only 2 plots landed in a minor component of the mosaic), additional plot establishment was required in order to reach the 5 plots minimum required to do statistics. This approach also resulted in more than one label per polygon (which is not permitted in RESULTS) or a weighted average of the numbers from the different standards within the SU needed to be done in order to get one label. This solution was not widely used as it created a number of surveying complications. This option is no longer available under FRPA as a Standard Unit (SU) is now limited to a single stocking standard. Another solution is to use the stocking standard of the dominant site series only. On the plus side, only one stocking standard per site series is needed. Each SU would get a single stocking standard. Only one set of statistics is required. This approach results in one label per SU (or portion thereof). There are several drawbacks however. The whole SU has to meet the standard of the dominant site series. Heights of the dominant site series might not be achievable on the related site series (for example, on a mosaic of CWHvm1 01/03, the minimum heights of the 01 would have to be met on the 03). Species of the dominant site series might not be ecologically suitable for the related site series (In the previous example, Ba would be preferred on the 01 which is the dominant site series. However, Ba is not ecologically suitable on the 03 part of the mosaic). MSS of the dominant site series might not be achievable if stocking levels of the related site series are limited due to site conditions. Minimum inter-tree distance of the dominant site series might not be realistic for related site series. Basically, the standard used is not adapted to the site conditions. Another possible solution is to use hybrid (also referred to as blended) stocking standards. On the plus side, only one stocking standard per SU is needed. The stocking standard is adapted to the site conditions (heights set to the limiting site series. Species selection can be limited to a portion of the mosaic with footnotes. MSS can be adjusted to address site-limiting factors that can affect stocking level). Only one set of statistics is required. This approach results in one label per SU (or portion thereof). This option also has a few drawbacks. Stocking standards for each possible mosaic need to be developed (Mosaics with similar standards can be grouped together). In order to limit the number of possible stocking standards to a manageable number, the number of site series allowed in a mosaic may have to be limited. If new mosaic combinations are found, an FSP amendment would be required. In order to address the particularities of some elements of the standards, numerous footnotes are required. Another solution is to apply the same elements of the stocking standard using a new approach.
1.3 Process: There is only a single stocking standard proposed for this FSP which will be suitable for all site conditions found in the area covered by this FSP. The stocking standard includes all the elements of the stocking standard. The stocking standard is a process that leads to measurable and enforceable results rather than individual stocking standards for pre-established sets of situations or circumstances. Through this process, the results to be achieved are adapted to the site conditions found in the SU. As such, only one stocking standard ID will be required. The elements of the standard for each site series or site conditions are found in appendices 1.1 to 1.5. The results to be achieved for a site series and/or site condition is predetermined and not determined after the fact. These results are in appendices 1.1 to 1.5. What is not predetermined is which results apply to a particular piece of ground in advance. When that area is being
171
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
assessed for stocking, the predetermined results of appendices 1.1 to 1.5 are link to the actual site series and/or conditions found on the site. Therefore, what is really new is how and when the results are assigned to the site rather than the results to be achieved themselves. 1.3.1 SU stratification at the Site Plan stage: Although there is a single standard, it does not mean that there will be only a single SU in a cutblock. However, all the SUs will have the same stocking standard ID. Stratification of a cutblock into SUs will be done in the same manner as currently done. Ways to stratify SUs vary somewhat from Forester to Forester but normally follow some similar rules. Mappable distinct site series usually have their own SU. Site series with the same stocking standards may be lumped into the same SU even if they could be mapped separately. Some areas will have more than one distinctly different site series occurring in a mosaic in which individual site series are either too small, too numerous, too inter-mixed or too intricately dispersed to map separately. For these areas, the site series would normally be lumped together to form an SU with a mosaic of site series. The same approach is also used for other site conditions or different soil disturbance limits.
Figure 1 CWHvm1
03 01
-
Clearly mappable. Not a mosaic.
SU2 SU1 UUJ JUU uU1
SU1 = ID#1234 SU2 = ID#1234
Figure 2 CWHvm1 03
01
SU2
SU1 = ID#1234 SU2 = ID#1234 SU1 03 UUJ 03 JUU uU1 Site series 07 is clearly a mappable unit and would form SU1. Site series 01 and 03 are too inter-mixed to map separately. Both would form SU2. 03
07
-
1.3.2 Assessment Approach Envisioned for the Standard: There are several methods to assess stocking standards. They generally can be assessed with the establishment of survey plots, with a walkthrough or a fly-over of the area. Walkthrough and fly-over assessments are a visual assessment of the elements of the stocking standard. Walkthrough assessments are normally used for interim assessments other than the milestone
172
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
assessments (Regeneration delay and Free Growing) but can also be used for the milestone assessments if the elements of the stocking standard can be estimated within the allowance of the Precision Standards for Forest Inventory and Forest Cover Data Submissions to the Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO) from the Chief Forester’s Specifications for Submitting Silviculture Information to the Provincial Government (2006) without the use of formal survey plots. Plots are normally used for milestone assessments (Regeneration delay and Free Growing). Fly-over assessments are some times used for pre-Free Growing or Free Growing assessments if the elements of the stocking standard can be estimated from the air. Since it is sometime necessary or desired to assess the stocking standard without the use of formal plots, the term Assessment Area (AA) will be used instead of plots. The Assessment Area (AA) is an area within an SU with a more or less uniform site series/site condition where the elements of the stocking standard are being assessed. The AA will be the plot when plots are used. If plots are used as AA, the dominant site series or site condition of the plot will be used in that case. It’s important to note that no matter which assessment method is used, the stocking standard has to be met on the whole SU (or portion thereof) within the bounds of any minimum stratification policies that may exist, not just within the Assessment Area (AA). This is no different than with the method of assessing stocking standards presently used. The assessment will start with the determination of the dominant site series or the management regime for the SU. That information may already be available from the SU description completed at the time the Site Plan fieldwork was done or from an overview assessment of the SU. The dominant site series or the management regime is then used to determine the preliminary TSS and MSS for the SU. The TSS and MSS for each site series and management regime are found in Appendix 1.2 and 1.3. This is not set in stone at this stage and can be changed during or after the assessment, based on new information found during the assessment. This is possible because the total well-spaced stems and total well-spaced FG stems are collected during the assessment. Therefore, it is possible to change the TSS and MSS at any time during the assessment as the data collected during the assessment is independent of the TSS and MSS used. This would not be possible if the well-spaced stems and well-spaced FG stems were only collected up to the M-value as in the past. That would preclude the upward adjustment of the TSS without affecting the accuracy of the average well-spaced stems/ha or the average well-spaced FG stems/ha found in the SU. Although this step could be done at the end of the assessment, it should still be done before starting the assessment as the interim TSS and MSS will help in gauging how we are doing as the assessment progresses (especially true when using a device such as an PDA which calculates statistics as you go during the assessment). Once at the Assessment Area (AA), the dominant site series and/or site condition is used to determine which species are ecologically suitable on the AA based on appendix 1.1. The same is done for the Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance using appendix 1.4 and for the Minimum Free Growing Heights using appendix 1.5. The surveyor must document the dominant site series and/or site condition of the AA for quality control purposes. For example, plot #7 is CWHvm1 01 and is within 10 m of roadside. Survey information is then collected as per current procedures. At the end of the assessment, the TSS and MSS can be adjusted based on the actual proportion of the different site series found in the SU or based on the management regime designation (Mixed Hardwood/Conifer Management or Hardwood Management for red alder or block cottonwood). Survey data and statistics are compiled as per current procedures. 1.3.3 Audit: Auditing for enforcement is really no different with this stocking standard. Audits conducted by the MoFR are really a second assessment, totally independent from the first. The goal of such audits is to determine if the stocking of a SU (or portion thereof) meet the approved stocking standard,
173
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
not auditing the Licensee’s plots per se. The elements of the stocking standard for the audit would be determined based on the AAs of the audit. The only information outside of the FSP stocking standard that is required is whether or not the SU was designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer or Hardwood Management, the ledger of which will be kept by the Licensee.
1.3.4 Site Series: When plots are used as Assessment Area (AA) to assess the stocking standards, the area surrounding the plot can be used to help determine the dominant site series for the plot. This is necessary as the information required to determine the site series might not all be found within the plot.
1.4 Elements of the stocking standard 1.4.1 Species: For native species, selection of ecologically suitable species for appendix 1.1 is based on the publication “The Distribution and Synopsis of Ecological and Silvical Characteristics of Tree Species of British Columbia’s Forest” from K. Klinka, J. Worrall, L. Skoda, and P. Varga published in 2000. Ecological amplitudes of each species in the above publication were used to determine ecological suitability of each species for a site series. The range of grand fir was extended outside the CWHxm to the CWHmm1. The natural distribution of grand fir extends into the Upper Nimpkish according to The Distribution and Synopsis of Ecological and Silvical Characteristics of Tree Species of British Columbia’s Forest (2000). The Upper Nimpkish was classified as CWHxm until 2000. The area was reclassified as CWHmm1 by R.N. Green in 2000. This reclassification now puts the CWHmm1 within the natural range of the grand fir. MoFR map dated April 2003 still shows the area as CWHxm. Grand fir is required for fill-planting where shade tolerance is required due to brush and where Cw cannot be used due to elk and deer browsing. Although noble fir does not grow naturally in British Columbia, it has been postulated that its slow migration rate – a result of the species’ poor capacity for long-distance seed dispersal (because of heavy seed) and low competitive ability (because of shade intolerance) rather than of ecological and genetic adaptability – may have effectively limited northward expansion of its natural range (Franklin 1964). Research results from Ying (1992) and Stump (1989) support the view that the failure of noble fir to expand its natural range farther north is not due to environmental constraints or poor biological adaptability, but rather to lack of long-distance seed dispersal capacity and poor competition ability (shade intolerance). One of Ying’s trials was on Mount Cain. According to the Silvics of North America Handbook (1990), noble fir can grow on a wide range of soils if ample moisture is available. According to the Field Guide for Site Identification and Interpretation for the Vancouver Forest Region (1994), noble fir is suitable on nutrient medium to rich sites. This information was used to determine the ecological suitability of noble fir on some of the site series found within the area covered by this FSP. Due to edaphic factors, Yc appears naturally at lower elevation on the wetter site series of the CWHvm1. Soils are colder on site with excess moisture, which explains the occurrence of Yc on those sites rather than elevation. Therefore, no elevation limitations were included for Yc on those sites. Due to edaphic factors, Hm appears naturally at lower elevation on the wetter site series of the CWHvm2. Soils are colder on site with excess moisture, which explains the occurrence of Hm on those sites rather than elevation. Therefore, no elevation limitations were included for Hm on those sites. A significant component of Yc and Hm is naturally found throughout the CWHvh1 in the area covered under this plan. This appears mostly due to climatic factors rather than elevation. High
174
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
annual rainfall in the CWHvh1 creates year-round excess moisture in this subzone which translates to relatively cold soils hence the species shift (T. Lewis, pers. comm., 2006). As per footnote 8 of appendix 1.1, red alder was included as an ecologically suitable species for some site series in conifer leading SUs for root rot management. Alder is immune to laminated root rot (Allen et al. 1996), thus, a rotation of red alder on laminated root rot infected sites can help sanitize the stand (Boateng et al. 2002). It can therefore be a valuable tool in managing that disease. As such, red alder will not be considered a competing species when determining free growing status of conifer trees as red alder is considered a crop tree where laminated root rot is present. 1.4.2 Preferred vs. Acceptable The concept of preferred and acceptable species was not included in the stocking standards as it relates to management options for the future stand rather than ecologically suitable species. Preferred and acceptable species are defined as follows in the Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook: Vancouver Region (2000): “Preferred species are ecologically suited to the site, and management activities are aimed primarily at establishing these species. Acceptable species are also ecologically suited to the site, but management activities are aimed secondarily towards establishing them”. It is clear from this definition that preferred and acceptable species are both ecologically suitable and that the only distinction between the two has to do with management options that we want to manage towards. The MoFR’s concerns with the lack of the preferred/acceptable format in the stocking standards mostly revolve around the use of western hemlock (Hw). The concern appears to be that if Hw is not restricted within the standards that more natural regeneration will be used as a primary mean to reforest obligations, which will to lead an increased proportion of Hw on the Coast. It’s important to note that for the CWHvm1 site series listing Hw as an ecologically suitable species in appendix 1.1, the Reference Guide lists Hw as a preferred species for all these site series with the exception of site series 14. Therefore, Hw is already recognized as a preferred species on over 97% of the CWHvm1 area in TFL 6 and TFL 37 (Data not available for TFL 39, Block 4). The same can be said on the CWHvm2 where the only exception is site series 11. Hw is already recognized as a preferred species on next to 99% of the CWHvm2 area in TFL 6 and TFL 37 (Data not available for TFL 39, Block 4). The CWHvm1 and CWHvm2 accounts for the approximately 85% of the Timber Harvest Land Base (THLB) of the area covered under the plan. Therefore, regardless of if the preferred/acceptable format is used or not, Hw could be a significant proportion of our reforestation efforts if this was our management objective. For information purposes, please note that Hw was used only for 13.6% of our planting stock in the last 3 years for the area covered under this plan. Natural regeneration as a primary mean of reforestation was used on only 10.4% of the Net Area to be Reforested (NAR). Western Hemlock is limited to lower elevations in the MHmm1 and would not normally be planted in that zone. Hw will however come in naturally to some extent. The naturally occurring presence of Hw in the CWHmm1 and CWHxm is significant. This is very apparent in the vegetation tables of the Field Guide for Site Identification and Interpretation for the Vancouver Forest Region (1994) and vegetation tables provided by the MoF: Coast Region. The vegetation tables show that the average western hemlock cover on the CWHmm1 and CWHxm site series where western hemlock is proposed is between 21 to 80% and 20 to 94% respectively. However, the potential for natural regeneration as a primary mean of reforestation in the CWHmm1 and CWHxm within the 6-year timeframe proposed in this FSP is very limited. The broad reliance on natural regeneration on these two subzones within the area covered under this plan will typically fail. As such, sites in these two subzones are generally planted. If the area needs to be planted, the management option would normally be for more valuable species such as Fdc and Cw rather than Hw. To alleviate some of the concerns, the use of Hw was limited to 40% to meet MSS in the CWHxm as suggested by Craig Wickland of the MoFR. For the CWHvh1, Hw is already a preferred species on site series where natural regeneration might be a viable option. The other site series would normally be planted and as such the management option would normally be to use more valuable species such as Cw and Yc.
175
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
1.4.3 Target Stocking Standard (TSS): With a few exceptions discussed below, the Target Stocking Standards (TSS) of appendix 1.2 are consistent with the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003). TSS for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management are not available in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003). The TSS for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management were taken from the Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook: Vancouver Region (2000). TSS for the CWHvm1 S1ch and S1ch-ha site series was increased to 1200 wss/ha. This TSS is part of a management strategy develop to manage cedar-salal sites on Northern Vancouver Island. The Salal Cedar Hemlock Integrated Research Program (SCHIRP) is the basis for cedarsalal sites management strategy. 1.4.4 Minimum Stocking Standards (MSS): With a few exceptions discussed below, the Minimum Stocking Standards (MSS) of appendix 1.3 are consistent with the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003). MSS for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management are not available in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003). The MSS for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management were taken from the Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook: Vancouver Region (2000). MSS for the CWHvm1 S1ch and S1ch-ha site series was increased to 800 wss/ha. This MSS is part of a management strategy develop to manage cedar-salal sites on Northern Vancouver Island. The Salal Cedar Hemlock Integrated Research Program (SCHIRP) is the basis for cedarsalal sites management strategy.
1.4.5 Regeneration Date: Several distinctions have to be made regarding regeneration date. First, the regeneration date of the stocking standards should not be confused with the regeneration delay used in Timber Supply Review (TSR). The regeneration date of the stocking standards is the date by which certain elements of the stocking standards have to be met. In that sense, it acts as a maximum time to meet those elements. The regeneration delay used in TSR is an average and is used in growth & yield assumptions. A range of values is used to determine an average. In the case of regeneration delay, the range could be 0.5 year to 6 years with an average of 2 years. Making the average the maximum is a mathematical impossibility unless the range itself is the average (i.e. the whole population would have to be 2 years for both the average and the maximum to be 2 years). Second, the regeneration date should not be used as a tool to dictate how the holder of an obligation is to meet that obligation. The Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook: Vancouver Forest Region (2000) makes it clear that under the FPC, short regeneration delay periods were used to indicate that planting is the preferred method of reforestation while longer regeneration delay periods were used to indicate that either planting or natural regeneration may be acceptable methods. FRPA is about results. The “how to get there” is left to the Licensee. The risk in meeting an obligation is clearly to the holder of the obligation and not to the Crown. The holder of this obligation must have control on how best to achieve it. Failure to meet the stocking standards by the regeneration date is possible if reforestation is not carried out within an appropriate time frame on some site series. But the results to be achieved are the stocking standards. The regeneration date is merely a milestone used to evaluate the achievement of certain elements of a stocking standard. A restricting regeneration date, no matter how well intended, can only be seen as a way to dictate treatment options. The FRPA definition of regeneration date in no way implies that it should be used to dictates treatment options.
176
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
A single regeneration date across the board greatly improves operational efficiency. It facilitates effective planning of survey and reduces survey cost. The area covered under this FSP is certified to the CSA standards and as such certain indicators are tracked to communicate our performance to stakeholders. One such indicator is the average regeneration delay. The average regeneration delay for TFL 6 ranges from 1.24 to 1.57 years and 2.3 to 3.4 years in TFL 39, Block 4. This data is not currently tracked for TFL 37. This shows that despite having 6-year regeneration date on most of the area covered under our current FDP stocking standards, that we do achieve the regeneration date milestone a lot sooner on average. 1.4.6 Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance of 2.0 m is used for most site series and site conditions as per the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003). According to the Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook: Vancouver Forest Region (2000), while a 2.0 m minimum inter-tree distance is suitable for most sites, a reduced inter-tree distance may be appropriate for sites where plantable spots are limited by site characteristics, a site condition, or where clumpy stem distribution is a normal and desirable stand characteristic. Examples of situations where a reduced minimum inter-tree distance may be appropriate include hygric or wetter sites, very rocky sites, very harsh sites where protected microsites are critical, riparian areas with high residual component, sites where stump avoidance strategy is employed to manage root rot, cluster planting. The above was the basis to determine site series or site conditions for which lower Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distances were appropriate. Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance was reduced to 1.0 meter within 10 meters of roadsides to account for the generally lower plantability of roadside areas due to unsuitable sidecast material and high slash level. This has been standard practice in many areas in coastal B.C. for several years. Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance was reduced to 1.0 meter on talus sites. Stands on talus sites are naturally clumpy due to lack of suitable growing spots. 1.0 meter Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance is required on talus sites in order to maximize the use of the few plantable spots available on such sites. Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance was reduced to 1.0 meter on root rot sites where stump avoidance is necessary. The strategy is defined as follows in the Root Disease Management Guidebook (1995). The strategy relies on lowering the probability of highly susceptible species contacting inoculum from residual stumps and roots after harvest. The technique employed is termed avoidance planting. Seedlings are deliberately planted some distance away from stumps, or in small clumps at minimum or somewhat less than minimum inter-tree spacing. This reduces the chance of root contact occurring too soon after planting, when residual woody debris is still likely to contain inoculum. Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance was reduced to 1.5 meter on certain site series. These site series listed in appendix 1.4 are naturally clumpy due to lack of suitable growing spots. These site series are characterized either by wet soils with lack of elevated microsites, or by high proportion of rocky or shallow soils sites. Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance was reduced to 1.5 meter in helicopter logging areas. The economics of helicopter logging requires that lower grade logs be left on sites. This can significantly hamper reforest efforts. From a timber supply point of view, the option of eliminating helicopter logging areas from the productive landbase due to reforestation concerns is not a viable option. Although the reduction of the Minimum Horizontal Inter-Tree Distance may produce a stand with less potential yield, it is a way of balancing fiber needs with reforestation needs.
177
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
1.4.7 Minimum Free Growing Height: The Minimum Free Growing Heights of appendix 1.5 are consistent with the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003) except as discussed below. When Yc Minimum Free Growing Heights are not listed for some site series in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003), Cw heights were used. This appears consistent with the Guide’s Minimum Free Growing Heights when both Yc and Cw are listed for a site series. When western white pine is listed in the Guide, 2.5 m is used. This Minimum Free Growing Height was used for all site series where Pw is listed in appendix 1.1 as an ecologically suitable species. This seems reasonable given that cankers on young Pw trees generally occur within 2.5 m of the ground, due to the presence of susceptible small branches and favourable environmental conditions (Allen et al. 1996) As per FPC Guidebook “Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook: Vancouver Region (2000)”, the minimum height for broadleaf trees is based on the minimum height of the tallest conifer for the site series. Noble fir Minimum Free Growing Height for the CWHvm2 is not listed in the Reference Guide (2003). The Minimum Free Growing Height for the MHmm1 of 1.25 m was used for the CWHvm2. This Minimum Free Growing Height was previously approved under the FDP stocking standards of TFL37. This Minimum Free Growing Height should be sufficient to demonstrate that the tree is adapted to the site, and is growing well and can reasonably be expected to do so. Minimum Free Growing Heights on some salal dominated site series (CWHvm1 01s, 06s, S1ch, S1ch-ha and S10) are not specifically addressed in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003). With this FSP, these minimum heights have been combined with the non salal sites because the reference guide does not include them. During the term of the plan WFP may gather data from the SCHIRP studies to certify the following approach: Western Forest Products has a long history of managing these sites on the Northern Vancouver Island and is a major supporter of the Salal Cedar Hemlock Integrated Research Program (SCHIRP). At the early stages of stand development, species such as hemlock and Douglas fir are affected by salal mostly through competition for nutrients. This results in shorter heights in the short term. Once crown closure is achieved, the growth performance of these species is greatly increased as demonstrated in SCHIRP experiments. At the early stage of stand development cedar is not as affected by salal. Because of the increased long term productivity of hemlock and Douglas fir once crown closure is achieved, these species may be appropriate on those sites. However, Minimum Free Growing Heights need to be adjusted to reflect the decreased performance of those species in the short term (crown closure typically occurs after FG is met on these sites). Minimum Free Growing Height of 1.5 m for western hemlock was previously approved under the FDP stocking standards of TFL6. Minimum Free Growing Height of 2.0 m for Douglas fir was previously approved under the FDP stocking standards of TFL37. Note that the use of Douglas fir on those sites is limited to the Lower Nimpkish and the Upper Nimpkish FDUs where salal is not as vigorous as on the other FDUs of this FSP. There is no Minimum Free Growing Height for lodgepole pine on those site series in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003). Minimum Free Growing Height of 1.5 m was included for lodgepole pine and was previously approved under the FDP stocking standards of TFL6. It is our experience that excess moisture is the limiting factor that regulates tree growth on CWHvm1 14 site series. Although the soil nutrient regime spans from medium to very rich for this site series, this does not translate in better growth performance due to the growth-limiting factor, which is excess moisture on this site series. This lower performance is evident when comparing site series 01 and 14 in 1908 blowdown areas of the North Island. Strangely enough, this fact is recognized in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003) for all the other subzones
178
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
covered under this FSP. Minimum Free Growing Heights used in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003) for the same part of the edaphic grid as site series CWHvm1 14 for all the other subzones are the lowest set of heights for those subzones. Accordingly, Minimum Free Growing Heights for Hw, Cw and Plc were reduced on this site series. Grand fir Minimum Free Growing Heights from Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003) of the CWHxm were used for the CWHmm1. These 2 subzones are very similar in the area covered under this FSP. The Minimum Free Growing Height for lodgepole pine on the CWHmm1 04 site series from Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003) was used for the CWHxm 04 site series. These 2 subzones are very similar in the area covered under this FSP. The Minimum Free Growing Height for lodegepole pine on the CWHvh1 H1 (equivalent to 01) site series from Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003) was used for the CWH H4, H5, H6 and H7 (equivalent to 04, 05, 06 and 07) site series. This is the highest Minimum Free Growing Height for lodgepole pine in the CWHvh1 listed in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003). The Minimum Free Growing Heights of western hemlock for the CWHvh1 were used for the mountain hemlock. Where the Minimum Free Growing Heights for mountain hemlock and western hemlock are both listed in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003) for the MHmm1, both have the same Minimum Free Growing Height. Therefore, the Minimum Free Growing Heights of the mountain hemlock was used for the western hemlock when not listed in the Reference Guide to FDP Stocking Standards (2003) for the MHmm1.
1.5 Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management is only proposed on a small scale for the area covered under this FSP. With the limits specified in the FSP, approximately 0.04% of the Timber Harvest Landbase per year could be affected or approximately 0.2% over 5 years. This order of change in the management regime of the landbase is insignificant in term of timber supply and does not put the timber flows projected in the TSR at risk. SUs designated for Hardwood Management will have over 80% red alder or black cottonwood. SUs designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer Management will have 50 to 80% red alder or black cottonwood. This is to clarify the difference between the two. However, this distinction does not have any practical meaning in term of stocking standards as both mixed and hardwood stands will be treated the same way until FG is met. The difference between the two will only matter at rotation when it would be possible to harvest hardwood stands earlier if so desired. Red alder leading stands will be managed for sawlogs. Black cottonwood leading stands will be managed for pulp. Aggressive management regimes for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood stand is only required if management assumptions in the TSR were aggressive to justify the level of AAC. This is not the case for the areas covered under this FSP. As such, harvesting these stands at a later date than under an optimal regime does not pose a treat to the timber supply. Aggressive management regimes for red alder and black cottonwood are therefore not required in this instance. Red alder begins to die after 80 to 100 years (Boateng et al. 2002). Cottonwood normally matures in 60 to 70 years (Boateng et al. 2002b). This is within the rotation range of our conifer stands on the site series where red alder and cottonwood are proposed for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer
179
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Management. Therefore, the harvest of red alder and cottonwood on those stands can wait until the conifers reach maturity. Such stands are currently being harvested economically by Western Forest Products. Standard Units (SU) designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management can include newly harvested areas or stands where the management regime is changed to Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management due to abundance of natural red alder or cottonwood in a stand. If the stocking meets the standards, there are no reasons why a previously harvested SU could not be designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management rather than designating a newly harvested SU. A ledger of the Net Area to be Harvested per management unit designated for Mixed Hardwood/Conifer and Hardwood Management will be kept by the Licensee and be made available to the MoF as requested.
2.0 Intermediate and Partial Cut: As per FSP Appendix 1.7. 3.0 The stocking standards have been created using the following resources for guidance: 1. The Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook – May 2000 Edition 2. Land Management Handbook 50: The Effect of the Silviculture Survey Parameters on the Free-Growing Decision Probabilities and Projected Volume at Rotation (Wendy Bergerud, Ministry of Forests, Forest Science Program, 2002, 23 pages) 3. Draft Common Principles for the Management of Red Alder within the Coast Forest Region (Revised May, 2005) 4. Conversations with Craig Wickland (Regional Silviculture Forester), and Paul Barolet (NICC Tenures Forester), 2007 5. The TFL 6 ecosystem classification, with recommendations for stocking standards, is based on the following reports: 6. Klinka, K. 2006. SCHIRP Literature Review. Forest Investment Account report prepared under direction of WFP. 7. Lewis, T, 1980. Ecosystems of TFL 6, and TFL 25 Block 4. WFP Reports. 8. Lewis, T. Green, B. McWilliams, J. B.A. Blackwell and Associates. 2007. Biogeoclimatic Classification of TFL 6. Forest Investment Account report prepared under direction of WFP. 9. SCHIRP project website, UBC. 10. An Overview Reference for the Evaluation of Stocking Standards under FRPA, Forest Practices Branch, Ministry of Forests and Range, October 2006. 11. Reference Guide for FDP Stocking Standards, Nov 26, 2010 12. Chief Forester Letter: Partial Harvesting Silviculture Standards in Forest Stewardship Plans (Jim Snetsinger, May 13, 2005) 13. Discussion Paper, Silviculture System and Partial Cut Harvesting Issues in the Coast Forest Region. Silviculture Systems Issues Working Group of the Coast Region Implementation Team, May 15, 2006. 14. Opportunity Harvesting in BC’s Coast Forest Region, Options paper for the Ministry of Forests and Range, Silviculture Working Group, CRIT, April 19, 2010, and January 21, 2011 Chief Forester’s Memorandum on decision. 15. (Draft) Roosevelt Elk Impacts on Reforestation: Mitigation Options, Silviculture Working Group Coast Forest Region FRPA Implementation Team November 2010 16. October 19, 2010 Ministry of Forests and Range workshop “Encouraging Deployment of Western White Pine and Sitka Spruce in the Coast Forest Region, A Look at Recent Advances in Pest Resistance”.
180
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
17. MOFR, Forest Science Program Extension Note #95 (January 2010) “User-friendly Web Tool to Support Silviculture for Sitka Spruce on the South Coast” 18. MOFR, Forest Science Program, Technical Report 050 (2009) “Developing Sitka Spruce Populations for Resistance to the White Pine Weevil, Summary of Research and Breeding Program”. 19. Hardwood Management in the Coast Forest Region, and July 8, 2008 CRIT endorsement letter. Literature Cited Allen, E.A., D.J. Morrison, and G.W. Wallis. 1996. Common tree diseases of British Columbia. Canadian Forest Services. Pacific Forestry Centre. Victoria, B.C. Boateng, J.O. and P. Comeau. 2002. Operational summary for red alder – salmonberry complex. B.C. Ministry of Forests. Victoria, B.C. Boateng, J.O. and P. Comeau. 2002b. Operational summary for cottonwood complex. B.C. Ministry of Forests. Victoria, B.C. Burns, Russell M., and Barbara H. Honkala, tech. coords. 1990. Silvics of North America: 1. Conifers; 2. Hardwoods. Agriculture Handbook 654. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC. vol.2, 877 p. Franklin, J.F. 1964. Some notes on the distribution and ecology of noble fir. Northwest Sci. 38:6th 18 In Ying, C.C. 1992. Effect of sites and provenance on 6 -year performance of noble fir in Coastal British Columbia. Forest Science Research Branch. B.C. Ministry of Forest. Victoria, B.C. Green, R.N. and K. Klinka. 1994. A Field Guide for Site Identification and Interpretation for the Vancouver Forest Region. B.C. Ministry of Forests. Victoria, B.C. Land Management Handbook No. 28. Green, R.N. 2000. Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping of Canadian Forest Product’s Tree Farm License 37. Klinka, K., J. Worrall, L. Skoda, and P. Varga. 2000. The Distribution and Synopsis of Ecological and Silvical Characteristics of Tree Species of British Columbia’s Forest. Canadian Cartographics Ltd. Stump, W.K. 1989. Noble fir provenance study. Undergraduate Thesis. Univ. B.C., Vancouver, th B.C. In Ying, C.C. 1992. Effect of sites and provenance on 6 -year performance of noble fir in Coastal British Columbia. Forest Science Research Branch. B.C. Ministry of Forests. Victoria, B.C. th
Ying, C.C. 1992. Effect of sites and provenance on 6 -year performance of noble fir in Coastal British Columbia. Research Note No. 112. Forest Science Research Branch. B.C. Ministry of Forests. Victoria, B.C. -----------. 2006. Chief Forester’s Specifications for Submitting Silviculture Information to the Provincial Government. Draft version. Ministry of Forests. Victoria, B.C. -----------. 2000. Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook: Vancouver Region. B.C. Ministry of Forests. Victoria, B.C. ----------. 1995. Root Disease Management Guidebook. B.C. Ministry of Forests. Victoria, B.C.
181
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 2: SMZ Analysis and Non Spatial Old Growth Data SMZ Analysis:
SMZ
FDU
Productive Mature/Old Area of Forest Forest Total SMZ SMZ in Old Growth Total in Total in Area (Ha) FSP (Ha) Age SMZ (ha) SMZ (ha)
Mature Old Forested Productive Productive Productive % in FSP Forest in Forest in Forest in mature/old (ha) FSP (ha) FSP (ha) FSP in FSP
%
Books Bay Koprino
3 4
Klaskish Mahatta San Josef
19982.5 6076.8
3358.1 6075.2
>80 >80
9758.6 6033.7
6514.1 66.75 3551.5 58.86
6481.8 6043.7
3289.4 6033.7
190.7 253.2
1830.6 3299.6
61% 59%
West Coast Nahwitti Lowlands
2
San Josef
15496.3
15094.5
>80
14801.3
9811.6 66.29
14849.3
14801.3
1682.4
8143.5
66%
2006 Non-spatial old growth data:
FDU Bonanza
Holberg
Keogh
Old LU Total Total Biodiversity Growth Area Area in Emphasis Age (Ha) FSP (Ha) Intermediate
Low
Low
>250
>250
>250
45712
41875
50868
2282
35955
43058
BEC Variant
Old Growth Forest NonProductive Old Total in FSP Old Contributing Productive Old Growth Growth Productive FSP Growth Old in FSP Inoperable Old growth Forest Forest Target Forest Area Area Target Area in FSP less target % Total (ha) Total (ha) (ha) in FSP (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) OG Target
CWH vm1
13
17196
3374
2235
874
395
CWH vm2
13
11497
7077
1495
742
313
96
76
-20
MH mm1
19
8285
7755
1574
594
504
113
348
236
CWH vh1
13
4192
1921
545
4156
1892
540
909
369
CWH vm1
13
31200
9800
4056
28452
9577
3699
3785
87
CWH vm2
13
1412
683
184
1412
683
184
288
104
MH mm1
19
151
135
29
151
135
29
128
99
CWH vm1
13
33038
6350
4295
32937
6328
4282
943
-3339
CWH vm2
13
4526
1935
588
4526
1935
588
154
-434
MH mm1
19
1034
825
197
1034
825
197
164
-33
182
114
64
-49
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
FDU
Klaskish
Mahatta
Marble
Neroutsos
San Josef
Lower Nimpkish
Upper Nimpkish
Old LU Total Total Biodiversity Growth Area Area in Emphasis Age (Ha) FSP (Ha)
High
Low
Intermediate
Low
Intermediate
Low
Intermediate
>250
>250
>250
>250
>250
>250
>250
19712
43218
58773
26585
90836
79173
119947
5433
29923
57913
25706
49092
73700
85893
BEC Variant
Old Growth Forest NonProductive Old Total in FSP Old Contributing Productive Old Growth Growth Productive FSP Growth Old in FSP Inoperable Old growth Forest Forest Target Forest Area Area Target Area in FSP less target % Total (ha) Total (ha) (ha) in FSP (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) OG Target
CWH vh1
19
15490
10322
2943
5174
3083
983
1732
749
CWH vm1
19
1529
1138
291
75
33
14
16
2
CWH vm2
19
978
720
186
54
32
10
24
14
MH mm1
28
12
12
3
0
0
0
0
0
CWH vh1
13
12477
3844
1622
3288
714
427
282
-145
CWH vm1
13
22154
4996
2880
20015
4463
2602
1462
-1140
CWH vm2
13
6660
3567
866
5065
2693
658
1023
365
MH mm1
19
331
238
63
307
228
58
171
112
CWH vm1
13
33305
5225
4330
32631
4992
4242
1112
-3130
CWH vm2
13
10285
4543
1337
10270
4534
1335
1141
-194
MH mm1
19
2633
1844
500
2633
1844
500
433
-67
CWH vm1
13
18417
6314
2394
18047
6241
2346
1286
-1060
CWH vm2
13
5958
3702
775
5936
3694
772
1419
647
MH mm1
19
107
83
20
107
83
20
79
59
CWH vh1
13
CWH vm1
13
CWH vm2
13
MH mm1
19
CWH xm2
9
CWH vm1
13
CWH vm2
13
MH mm1
19
CWH xm2
9
CWH mm1
9
CWH vm1
13
CWH vm2
13
MH mm1
19
Not Applicable - Approved Landscape Unit Plan
Not Applicable - Approved Landscape Unit Plan
Not Applicable - Approved Landscape Unit Plan
183
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Appendix 3: Cultural Heritage Resources Data (Confidential) This appendix presents the supply and demand data for monumental cedar resources at the time of FSP submission. Data was prepared in 2007, and updated in 2012.
Appendix 4 List of CP, 196(1), and 196(2)B cutblocks. These blocks correspond to the FSP maps dated April 27, 2007. This list was not updated for FSP extension in 2012. Cutblocks and roads are from the following Forest Development Plans: 2002-2006 Holberg Forest Operation FDP for TFL 6 2001-2005 Jeune Landing Forest Operation FDP for TFL 6 2003-2007 Port McNeill Forest Operation TFL 6 Blocks 1 and 2 2002-2006 Port McNeill Timberlands FDP TFL 39 Block 4, FL A19244 andTL’s: 2001-2006 FDP for Nimpkish Valley for TFL 37 Blocks marked “BCTS” in the appended tables are not included in the FSP. The cutblocks to be included in the Kwakiutl portion of TSL A66259 are included in this list, as identified in the comments. TFL 37 and TL’s
Legacy CANFOR BLOCK_ ID AL060H BC109 BC204 CE023 CE046 CU038 DA311 DA317 DA319 DA321 DA415 KC153 KC196 KH093 KH205 KH424 LG106 LG209 LM194WFA
Type 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1
WFP E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E L
Comments ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
184
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
TFL 37 and TL’s
Legacy CANFOR BLOCK_ ID LM300WF ME135 ME215 MQ021H MQ050 MU102H MU199 NA230 Roads NE038C NE056 NS007 NS008 NW041H NW131 NW432 S115 UN038 WP110 WS123 WS250 AC002H AC180H AC181H AW016 BC099 BC100 BC101
Type 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-2 196-1
WFP L E E E E E E
196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
E E E E E E E E
BC107
196-2
E
BC108 BC110 BC132 BC170 BC190 CA017 CA023 CE004 CE009 CE010 CE016 CE031
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
E E E E E E E E E E E E
L E E E E E E E E E E E
Comments ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok Layout, some assess. ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok Layout, some assessments Layout, some assessments ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
185
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
TFL 37 and TL’s
Legacy CANFOR BLOCK_ ID CE035 CE054 CH050 CH051 CT070 CU017 DA103 DA107 DA111 DA313 DA328 DA330 DA410 DA419 DA429 DA433 DA500 FE003 FE005 HG014WF HR097 KA173 KC019 KC030 KC031 KC155 KC194 KC200 KC203 KH049 KH102 KU022B KX090H KX091H LG100H LG202 LG215 LM230WF ME003 ME050H ME120 ME130H
Type 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
WFP E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E L E E E E
Comments ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok Some assess done Some assess done ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok Some assess done ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
186
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
TFL 37 and TL’s
Legacy CANFOR BLOCK_ ID ME230 ME250 ME255 MG153 MG153H MQ005 MQ010 MQ022H MQ041 MQ053 MU090 MU096H NA102 NA118 NA123 NA201 NE014 NE018A NE030B NE062 NE063WF NE107 NE109 NE110 NE237 NS003 NS004 NS005 NS012 NS025 NS063 NS101 NS105 NW037AH NW092 NW093 NW096 NW370H NW901H NW908 NW910 OL017
Type 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
WFP E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
Comments ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
187
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
TFL 37 and TL’s
Legacy CANFOR BLOCK_ ID P024 Q215 S117 S119 SAL040 SC023 TK022H TK024H TN014A TS005 TS007 TS012 TS019 TS032 TS037 TS039 TS051 UN011 UN046 UN069 UN090ST UN115 WF049 WP101 WP120 WS001 WS002 WS015 WS255 WS301 AW020 AW022 BC104 CE005 CE007 CE040 CE044 CT046 DA150 DA310 DA320 DA400 DA401
Type 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
WFP E E L L E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
Comments ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
188
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
TFL 37 and TL’s
Legacy CANFOR BLOCK_ ID DA490 DA491 HG040 KC012 KC152 KC173 KC175 KC190 KC192WF KH063B KH063C KH075H KH076 KH101 KX132 KX133H LG062 LG108 LG212 ME200 MQ100H MQ370 MU060 MU080 MU080H MU082 MU197 NA008 NA009 NA202 NA220 NE065 NE106 NE108 NE115 NE399 NS011 NS013 NS070 NW103 NW121 NW160 NW162 NW421 NW424 Q211
Type CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
WFP E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
Comments
189
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
TFL 37 and TL’s
Legacy CANFOR BLOCK_ ID Q213 SB099 SC004 SC006 SC019 TS014 UN047 UN049 UN067 UN095 UN101 WS003 WS102 WS110 WS114 WS120 WS121 WS300 WS310
Type CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
WFP E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
Comments
Legacy CASCADIA TFL 39 Block 4, FLA19244, and TL’s BLOCK_NAME STATUS 2206 196(1) 2214 196(1) 2215 196(1) 2216 196(1) 2218 196(1) 2219 196(1) 2223 196(1) 2430 196(1) 4469 196(1) 4483 196(1) 4484 196(1) 4486 196(1) 4515 196(1) 4590 196(1) 4711 196(1) 4728 196(1) 4733 196(1) 4734 196(1) 5314 196(1)
190
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
5537 5540 5541 5550 5553 44110 3508H 3544H 3547H 3559H 4466H 4546H 2407 2408 2409 2429 2503 3443 3444 3446 3449 3452 3455 3457 3458 3499 3521 3523 3532 3533 3534 3535 3537 3553 3554 3556 3557 4309 4310 4411 4428 4429 4440 4453 4458 4480 4481 4482
196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(1) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2)
191
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
4487 4490 4491 4492 4496 4514 4545 4558 4561 4566 4572 4573 4574 4576 4577 4578 4579 4580 4581 4582 4583 4584 4585 4586 4587 4588 4589 4591 4725 5202 5203 5305 5308 5317 5405 5408 5410 5528 5530 5548 5554 5555 5556 5558 5712 6317 6324 6341
196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2)
192
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
44100 44101 44101 44102 44103 44104 44105 44106 44107 44108 44109 44112 44113 2205A 2205A 3445H 4460H 4559H 5535H 5539H 2415 3427 3432 3459 3461 3508 3544 3545 4457 4467 4468 4470 4471 4494 4497 4498 4510 4518 4556 4559 4563 4568 5309 5311 5407 5525 5533 5538
196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) 196(2) CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
193
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
5549 5550 5552 6343 4456H 4462H
CP CP CP CP CP CP
Legacy WFP
TFL 6
BLOCK_ID 41-733 41-734 41-736
196-1 196-2 196-2
WFP H H H
61-75
196-1
H
BCTS
Comments TSL A66259 No Engineering No Engineering Road Construction Complete; CP ready
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
Delete 563: Block is Logged 50-122
196-2
WH
50-124 50-127
196-2 196-2
WH WH
51-01 51-04 51-06 51-08
196-1 196-2 196-2 196-2
H H H H
51-9B
196-2
H
51-10 51-11 51-12 51-13 51-15 51-17 51-35
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
H H H H H H H
51-44 51-45A
196-1 196-2
H H
51-81 51-406 51-408 52-404 52-606 52-639B 52-644
196-1 196-2 196-2 196-1 196-2 196-2 196-2
H H H H H H H
Engineering complete; Kaines Peninsula No Engineering; Kaines Peninsula No Engineering Engineering complete. Road permit submitted. Combined with 51-01 Combined with 51-02 No Engineering Engineering in progress; draft TSFA received. No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering CP Ready; Road Permit approved; SP approved March 30/07 Roads built pre FPC Engineering completeRP approved; RoW falling in progress. No Engineering No Engineering CP Ready No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering
194
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 52-663 52-664 52-420
196-2 196-2 196-2
TFL 6 WFP H H H
BCTS
Comments No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
Logging complete 52-686 53-433 53-435 541A 59-216 59-225 59-61D 60-61A 60-61B
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
H H H
60-104 60-106 60-30A 60-31 60-32 60-40 60-44 60-55 60-56 60-61 60-65 60-67 60-79B 61-102 61-104 61-106 61-78 61-79
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-1 196-2 196-21 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-1
WH WH WH WH WH WH WH WH WH
61-82 61-84 61-86 61-801A 61-856 61-857 61-859 61-873 61-906B 69-142 69-170 69-175 69-175B
196-1 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-1 196-2 196-2 196-1 196-2 196-1
H H H H H H H H H
H H H WH WH WH
H WH WH H H H H H H
H H H H
No Engineering Engineering In Progress Engineering In Progress BCTS BCTS BCTS No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering
No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering TSL A66259 Engineering In Progress BCTS; WFP did the Site Plan Engineering In Progress No Engineering BCTS Engineering In Progress Engineering In Progress Engineering In Progress No Engineering CP Ready; SP approved Roads in Progress/CP Ready; SP approved March 30/07 No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering Engineered. CP ready No Engineering BCTS; Logging completed BCTS; WFP did the Site Plan BCTS BCTS; WFP did the Site Plan
195
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 69-175C 69-176 69-249 69-251 69-253 69-254 69-256 69-270 69-272 69-274 69-275 70-57C 70-61 70-106 70-109 70-113 70-115
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
70-163D
196-1
70-200 70-202 70-204 70-206 70-208 70-212 70-393 70-540A 70-562 70-57B 79-191 80-384 80-700 80-701 80-701 80-826A 80-826A 80-829 80-836 80-836 80-836 80-838 80-840 80-841 80-921A 80-927
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-1 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-1 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS H H H H H H H H H H H
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
Comments BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS No Engineering No Engineering Engineering In Progress No Engineering No Engineering Engineering In Progress MF 61 Block Logged; MF 61 & FL Block BCTS; WFP did the SP MF 61 Block No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering No Engineering BCTS Engineering In Progress BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS Logging in progress BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS BCTS
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
H H
196
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID
TFL 6 WFP
BLOCK_ID 33-810 33-915 33-972 42-955 43-917 44-54 53-809 53-821 54-57A 61-348 62-135 62-136 62-137 62-193 62-199 62-381 62-382 63-928B 63-928C 64-211 64-304 64-307 64-336 64-338 64-516 64-520A
196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1 196-1
BLOCK_ID 23-736H 23-738H 23-745 24-407 24-418 24-422H 24-620 24-623H 31-55 31-56 32-62 32-923 33-413 33-511A 33-538 33-608 33-623
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
TSL A66259 FDU
197
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 33-705 33-769 33-812 33-816 33-851 33-900 33-905 33-909 41-13 41-403 41-410 41-411 41-703 41-733 42-528 42-78 42-913 42-967 44-56 52-160 53-561 53-563 53-566 53-580 53-584 53-599 53-832 53-842 53-848 53-851 53-854 53-857 53-890 53-93 54-59 55-107 61-307 61-308 61-333 62-144 62-145 62-198 62-383 62-384 62-385 62-411 62-461
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
198
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 62-510 62-512 63-165 63-210 63-514 64-308 64-309 64-310 64-330 64-331 64-335 64-64
196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2 196-2
BLOCK_ID 48 50 52 56 58 60 82 90 101 140 163 169 179 185 204 210 260 267 268 269 299 311 344 404 406 408 414 416 420 421 425 428 432
STATUS CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
TSL A66259 FDU TSL A66259 FDU
199
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 435 436 437 451 453 455 456 484 502 504 506 507 512 539 587 588 591 592 592 594 595 596 597 601 613 626 665 667 667 809 811 820 910 912 925 934 5201 5202 23-730 23-736 23-753 23-760 24-403 24-408 24-624 24-792 263A
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
200
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 32-322 32-59 32-960 33-415 33-509 33-511 33-514 33-625 336-974 33-707 33-742 33-743 33-775 33-780 33-781 33-804 33-806 33-807 33-808 33-815 33-821 33-904 33-907 33-913 33-963 33-964 33-965 33-966 34-405 34-640 400A 400B 400C 400D 41-11 41-12 41-52 41-53 416A 41-729 41-730 41-770 42-440 42-441 42-460 42-461 42-462
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
201
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 42-463 42-464 42-465 42-466 42-467 42-544 42-545 42-546 42-547 42-650 42-72 42-73 42-74 42-75 42-76 42-77 42-79 42-79 42-921 42-927 42-942 42-943 42-957 42-959 432A 432D 432E 433A 43-429 43-430 43-431 43-432 43-433 43-434 43-435 43-436 43-437 43-438 43-84 43-970 44-57 500A 50-114 51-163 51-19 51-25B 51-37
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
202
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 51-402 51-404 51-405 51-46 51-51 51-53 51-54 51-617 51-619 51-62 51-62D 51-62E 51-635A 51-635B 51-67B 51-70 51-706B 51-706D 51-710 51-710A 51-744 51-747 51-748 51-757 51-759 51-765 51-766 51-9A 52-147 52-25 52-29 52-401 52-416 52-418 52-419 52-421 52-423 52-425 52-431 52-433 52-446A 52-449 52-453 52-455 52-457 52-460 52-603
TFL 6 WFP
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
H
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
RP/CP/SP Approved
203
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 52-615A 52-622 52-627 52-641A 52-645 52-654 52-682 52-684 52-688 52-692 52-694 53-429 53-431 53-576A 53-586A 53-800 53-800A 53-803 53-806 53-815 53-818 53-822 53-824 53-827 53-831 53-837 53-840 53-843 53-845 53-860 53-92 53-934A 54-232 54-280 54-281 54-282 54-296 54-438 54-440 54-443 54-444 54-61 54-65 54-68 59-207 60-01 60-02
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
204
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP
TFL 6
BLOCK_ID 60-06 60-08
WFP CP CP
60-184
CP
WH
60-246
CP
WH
60-321 60-187 60-206 60-210 60-212 60-230 60-240 60-244 60-3 60-302 60-303 60-323 60-3A 60-5 60-712 60-79 60-90 60-93 60-95 60A 61-100 61-306 61-317C 61-321A 61-324B 61-326 61-41 61-52B 61-73 61-73 61-77 61-807 61-811 61-855 61-910 61-914 61-916 61-918 62-132B 62-490 63-140
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
WH
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
SP approved Mar 12/07; CP approved Apr 3/07 SP approved Mar 13/07; CP approved Apr 3/07 SP approved Mar 13/07; CP approved Apr 3/07
205
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 63-142 63-167 63-176 63-182 63-515 63-525 63-96 64-212 64-300
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
64-301
CP
64-302 64-303 64-433B 64-504 64-508 64-509 64-521 64-62 64-98 65-102A 65-102B 65-102C 65-102D 65-102E 68A 69-173 69-178 69-258 70-105 70-122 70-152 70-181 70-181A 70-183 70-184A 70-184B 70-186 70-2
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
TSL A66259 FDU This CP was in effect 4 months prior to submission, but subsequently was to be deleted from WFP and the cutblock made available to the TSL. The blocks are now 196-2’s. TSL A66259 FDU This CP was in effect 4 months prior to submission, but subsequently was to be deleted from WFP and the cutblock made available to the TSL. The blocks are now 196-2’s.
206
Western Forest Products Inc, North Vancouver Island Forest Operations – Background Information Material supporting the Forest Stewardship Plan but not part of the FSP – January 18, 2012
Legacy WFP BLOCK_ID 70-391 70-392 70-51A 70-546 70-565 70-805 71-819 71-822 71-846 71-849 79-360 79-364 80-390 80-834 80-835 811A
TFL 6 WFP
BCTS
Comments
H: Holberg
WH: Winter Harbour
CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP
207