1 / 9

Patrick Martin March 14, 2007

Multi-block Stocking Standards. Patrick Martin March 14, 2007. 1. Message received. Concerns: Workload We won’t be able to do our jobs well Risk Declining standards Comfort, familiar, and set-up for our traditional system. 2. Why are proposals considered?. Option within FRPA

gersemi-hannes
Download Presentation

Patrick Martin March 14, 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multi-block Stocking Standards Patrick Martin March 14, 2007

  2. 1. Message received • Concerns: • Workload • We won’t be able to do our jobs well • Risk • Declining standards • Comfort, familiar, and set-up for our traditional system

  3. 2. Why are proposals considered? • Option within FRPA • Administrative law • Delivering government’s multiple objectives • The Chief not the King

  4. 3. Some potential advantages A good multi-block approach: • Provides a broader context • Monitors cumulative effects • Links to forest level strategies • Improves economic efficiency • Structures management flexibility • Brings best available science • Clarifies purpose

  5. 4. Merritt proposal - Chronology • September CF determination criteria: capture productive potential, verifiable, and acceptable risk. • October CF rejects early proposal • Nov-Feb Critiques and revisions • March 1 “Final” submission

  6. 5. Overview of the proposal • SU-level standards • Conventional uneven-age and IC standards, Max density standards • MAI-based standards • Expected MAI  benchmark MAI (subject to rules) • Multi-block standards • Overall mean MAI  90% maximum possible MAI • Overall mean MAI(p)  70% max possible MAI • Deciduous density ≤ 1% overall density

  7. 6. Our vision • People • Doing our jobs effectively • Capitalizing on the opportunities provided by the experiment • Sustaining good relationships • Forest management • SFM • environmentally appropriate, economically viable, socially acceptable • Policy framework • Some experimentation with policies, standards, etc • Learning organization • Managing, not trying to eliminate, risk

  8. 7. How do we get there? • A concerted effort by all of us • Victoria staff can contribute by: • Providing training and tech support • Helping get the C&E and stewardship monitoring parts in place • Learning from the experiment • What do you suggest? • How can you contribute?

  9. 8. Discussion What do we need to do to make this work?

More Related