200 likes | 317 Views
STAND DEVELOPMENT MONITORING. What is Stand Development Monitoring?. A FREP (Forest & Range Evaluation Program) protocol FREP’s Mission is to provide science based information for decision making and continuous improvement of BC’s forest and range practices, policies and legislation
E N D
What is Stand Development Monitoring? • A FREP (Forest & Range Evaluation Program) protocol • FREP’s Mission is to provide science based information for decision making and continuous improvement of BC’s forest and range practices, policies and legislation • SDM measures pest incidence and stocking in randomly selected polygons • 1) in RESULTS, 2) > 5ha, 3) aged 15-40. • Earlier SDM surveys (2009-10) were restricted to stands already declared free growing
SDM in Williams Lake TSASampling design &Stand attributes • 79 random polygons (35 from DCH & 44 from DCC) • 10 plots per polygon • Average age of blocks was 22yrs. (13-40) in Chilcotin and 24yrs. (9-46) in Cariboo • Data collected between 2009 & 2012
Aside • 9 of the 19 blocks surveyed in 2011-2012 (47%) were overdue for FG in RESULTS
Summary • 79 random blocks from a range of BECs (av. age around 23 years, 75% Pl leading) • Top pests were gall rust, snow press, & Elytroderma • Snow press was highest in the ICH (7.1%) & SBS (4.5%) • SBS had the highest incidence of Mountain Pine Beetle (5.6%) • The average percentage of total trees affected by forest health factors was 14% • > 25% of the total trees in the SBS were affected by forest health factors • Average site index ranged from 13 (IDF) to 21 (ICH & SBS) • 87% of Blocks FG (2 non FG blocks are overdue in RESULTS) • Mean Total Trees dropped by 1500 stems/ha • 75% of trees were L3
How do SDM results compare to what TIPSY Projections? • Non of the WLTSA SDM sites were modelled using TIPSY • TIPSY results vary depending on what values are input into the model • FIB is currently trying to develop some recommendations for how to model real stands
What have others found? • FREP report #13 Are Free-Growing Stands Meeting Timber Productivity Expectations in the Lakes TSA? Woods & Bergerud, 2008. – concluded that they were. Some difficulties in comparing total tree and well spaced volumes. • Alex Woods NSC, 2013. Summary of Mackenzie SDM data - found that Sx basal area was underestimated in TIPSY. Pl basal area was overestimated by 32% when forest health agents were taken into account.
Recommendations for WLTSA • SDM surveys support previous evidence that the SBS has a higher incidence of forest health factors than any other BEC in the TSA. • Higher densities in Pli leading stands and less reliance on Pli as a leading species are recommended in the SBSdw • Continued SDM monitoring is recommended • Stratified sampling by BEC is recommended to increase the sample size for highly productive ecosystems of greatest concern. The current FREP survey approach is based on simple random sampling across all ecosystems.
Link to Presentation • http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DCC/external/!publish/FREP%20SDM/