8. Management Plan Community Forest Applica · 20/08/2013 · Community Forest Applica ... The partners in the Williams Lake Community Forest Agreement have developed a clear set

Community Forest Applica on

14

8. Management Plan


10

7. CFA Area OverviewTwo geographical areas together comprise the Williams Lake Community Forest (Figure 3). Selected from the area that overlaps the Secwepemc tradi onal territory and Central Cariboo Forest District, these blocks were iden fi ed as being capable of sustaining a long-term forestry enterprise. Tree species, stand age profi les and compa bility with other tenure and land-claim processes are among the many considera ons put into area selec on.

The Ne Sextsine (Flat Rock) Block (5,927 hectares, Figure 4) overlooks the Fraser River, just west of Williams Lake, B.C., and is situated in the Interior Douglas-fi r biogeoclima c zone. The forest growing in the dry/very dry climate is made up of mul -aged Douglas-fi r stands. The Peskwenkwinem (Potato Mountain) Block (22,913 hectares, Figure 5) spans an area between the Likely and Horsefl y Roads from Potato Mountain north to Beaver Valley. The climate of the Sub-Boreal Spruce biogeoclima c zone leads to produc ve forests dominated by Douglas-fi r, interior spruce, lodgepole pine, aspen and birch, generally in even-aged stands.

Both blocks have signifi cant historic and present cultural value for the T’exelcemc – the people of the Williams Lake Indian Band. In addi on to signifi cant archaeological, cultural and spiritual sites, there are important areas for fi shing, hun ng and gathering within the community forest area.

The blocks also have signifi cant historic and present value for all the people of the Central Cariboo – ranching, logging, transporta on, hun ng, gathering and recrea on have been and con nue to be important ac vi es. Surface and ground water are important for both potable and irriga on water sourced from numerous wells and surface developments.

The community forest area surrounds and abuts private land, Indian Reserves, Grazing Leases and Woodlot Licences, and overlaps range permits, mineral tenures, transporta on and transmission corridors. Many exis ng forest roads and cutblocks are subject to current licensee obliga ons.

Access is a signifi cant issue within the community forest area, par cularly in the Flat Rock block where there are authorized and unauthorized non-motorized and motorized recrea on trails. Access to private proper es adjacent to the Flat Rock Block is via roads within and outside the community forest boundaries.

Both blocks are currently in the opera ng areas of major forest companies opera ng on volume-based Forest Licences. Forest companies have been harves ng on Flat Rock block for more than 60 years, and probably began logging in the Potato Mountain block in the 1950s. Proximity of both blocks to the ranches and trails of the Gold Rush era suggest that mber has been cut for local use in these areas since the 1860s.

The Flat Rock Block is en rely within the Williams Lake Mule Deer Winter Range. A substan al por on of this block is very steep and generally inoperable for conven onal mber harves ng. Por ons of the Potato Mountain Block are also within mule deer winter ranges, and some inoperable areas in steep creek canyons exist.

Williams Lake Community ForestAugust 2013

11

!

!

!

!

!!

!

Pesk

wen

kwin

em (P

otat

o M

ount

ain)

Ne

sext

sine

(Fla

t Roc

k)

Big

Lake

Willi

ams

Lake

Hor

sefly

Lak

e

Tyee

Lak

e

McI

ntos

h La

kes

Ros

e La

ke

Anto

ine

Lake M

cInt

osh

Lake

s

Spok

in L

ake

McL

eese

Lak

e

Eagl

e (M

urph

y) L

ake

Beav

er L

ake

Squa

wk

Lake

Till

Lake

Two

Mile

Lak

e

Mar

guer

ite L

akeH

art L

ake

Fore

st L

ake

Dug

an L

ake

Beve

ridge

Lak

e

Uss

a La

keN

ikw

it La

ke

McC

aule

y La

ke

Tillic

um L

ake

Park

er L

ake

Beau

x Ye

ux L

ake

Geo

rge,

Lak

e

How

es L

ake

Elk

Lake

Niq

uide

t Lak

e

Dilla

boug

h La

ke

Cos

sack

Lak

e

Kwun

Lak

e

Star

like

Lake

Eric

Lak

e

Jum

eaux

Lak

es

Jess

ica

Lake

Dew

ar L

ake

Blue

Lak

e

Rob

ert L

ake

Shik

o La

ke

Jum

eaux

Lak

es

Bells

Lak

e

Suck

er L

ake

Bunt

ing

Lake

Rat

dam

Lak

e

Skul

ow L

ake

Gol

dpan

Lak

e

Alah

Lak

e

Cum

min

gs L

ake

Prou

ton

Lake

s

Buck

skin

Lak

e

Solo

mon

Lak

e

Jack

son

Lake

Pete

r Lak

e

Seve

n M

ile L

ake

Brun

son

Lake

Twin

Lak

eTw

in L

ake

Alph

a La

ke

Gru

hs L

ake

Cra

zy L

ake

Cui

sson

Lak

e

Jone

s La

ke

Min

er L

ake

Littl

e H

orse

fly L

ake

Veith

Lak

e

Duc

kwor

th L

ake

Kilg

ore

Lake

Mur

dock

Lak

es

Mur

dock

Lak

es

Baill

on L

ake

Jug

Lake

Que

snel

Lak

e

Jim

Low

ry L

ake

Saus

ser L

ake

Car

iboo

Bill

Lake

Batte

n La

ke

Waw

n La

ke

Lem

on L

ake

Cam

ille L

ake

Coo

k La

ke

Brig

hten

Lak

e

Dor

sey

Lake

Dou

glas

Lak

e

Yors

ton

Lake

Buch

anan

Lak

e

Lea

Lake

Mei

ss L

ake

Prou

ton

Lake

s

Coy

ote

Lake

Edne

y La

ke

Wal

ters

Lak

e

Cor

ner L

ake

Upp

er W

iggi

ns L

ake

Trip

let L

akeAr

mst

rong

Lak

eC

roan

Lak

e

Mio

cene

Lak

e

Echo

far L

ake

Mile

five

Lake

Fire

Lak

e

Patto

n La

ke

Asah

al L

ake

Moo

rhou

se L

ake

Jeffe

rson

Lak

e

Inez

Lak

e

Ros

s La

ke

Baco

n La

ke

Whi

test

one

Lake

McI

nnes

Lak

e

Bond

Lak

e

Mur

dock

Lak

es

O'K

eefe

Lak

e

Whe

atle

y La

ke

Wig

gins

Lak

e

Dav

is L

ake

Ande

rs L

ake

Mis

sion

Pon

ds

Uph

am L

ake

Mio

cene

Hor

sefly

Big

Lak

e

Mc

Lees

e La

ke

Will

iam

s La

ke

WL

Indi

an B

and

150

Mile

Hou

se

121°

30'0

"W

121°

30'0

"W

122°

0'0"

W

122°

0'0"

W

52°20'0"N

52°20'0"N

52°10'0"N

52°10'0"N

Lege

nd

!C

omm

uniti

es

WLC

F_

Pu

blic

_Ro

ads

Str

eam

s

Lake

s

Pro

pose

d C

omm

uni

ty F

ores

t

Riv

ers

CR

D P

riva

te L

ots O

05

102.

5Ki

lom

eter

s

Will

iam

s La

ke C

omm

unity

For

est

Key

Map

Dra

fted

by: M

ircea

Rau

Figure 3: Key map of the Williams Lake Community Forest.


12

Figure 4: Ne Sextsine (Flat Rock) Block of the Williams Lake Community Forest. A large scale version of this map is a ached to this applica on.

Ne

sext

sine

(Fla

t Roc

k)

Will

iam

s La

ke

WL

Indi

an B

and

150

Mile

Hou

se

Willi

ams

Lake

Asah

al L

ake

Bond

Lak

e

Res

ervo

ir La

ke

122°

0'0"

W

122°

0'0"

W

122°

5'0"

W

122°

5'0"

W

122°

10'0

"W

122°

10'0

"W

122°

15'0

"W

122°

15'0

"W52°10'0"N

52°10'0"N

52°8'0"N

52°8'0"N

52°6'0"N

52°6'0"N

52°4'0"N

52°4'0"N

Will

iam

s La

ke C

omm

unity

For

est

Ne

Sext

sine

(Fla

t Roc

k) B

lock

01,

500

3,00

075

0M

eter

s

OLe

gend Com

mun

ities

Pub

lic_R

oads

All_

Roa

dsC

onto

ur_l

ines

Stre

ams

Lake

sR

iver

sW

etla

nds

WLC

F_B

ound

ary

Will

iam

s C

ity B

ndB

CT

S_O

pera

ting_

Are

aP

rovi

ncia

l_Le

ase

Woo

dlot

sC

RD

LO

TSN

ON

-CR

OW

N

Dra

fted

by: M

ircea

Rau

June

, 201

2


13

Figure 5: Peskwenkwinem (Potato Mountain) Block of the Williams Lake Community Forest. A large-scale version of this map is a ached to this applica on.

Pesk

wen

kwin

em (P

otat

o M

ount

ain)

Big

Lak

eBi

g La

ke

Beav

er L

ake

Beve

ridge

Lak

e

McC

aule

y La

ke

Park

er L

ake

Geo

rge,

Lak

e

Jum

eaux

Lak

es

Jess

ica

Lake

Rob

ert L

ake

Jum

eaux

Lak

es

Bells

Lak

e

Bunt

ing

Lake

Skul

ow L

ake

Prou

ton

Lake

s

Solo

mon

Lak

e

Pete

r Lak

e

Alph

a La

ke

Rat

dam

Lak

e

Cra

zy L

ake

Veith

Lak

e

Baill

on L

ake

Jug

Lake

Abbo

tt La

ke

Har

t Lak

e

Saus

ser L

ake

Batte

n La

ke

Coo

k La

ke

Brig

hten

Lak

e

Dor

sey

Lake

Mei

ss L

ake

Prou

ton

Lake

s

Upp

er W

iggi

ns L

ake

Echo

far L

ake

Mile

five

Lake

Chi

na C

abin

Lak

e

Patto

n La

ke

Moo

rhou

se L

ake

Baco

n La

ke

Mal

colm

Lak

e

Cho

ate

Lake

McI

nnes

Lak

e

Gam

mar

us L

ake

Wig

gins

Lak

e

Beau

x Ye

ux L

ake

Ande

rs L

ake

Uph

am L

ake

121°

30'0

"W

121°

30'0

"W

121°

35'0

"W

121°

35'0

"W

121°

40'0

"W

121°

40'0

"W

121°

45'0

"W

121°

45'0

"W

121°

50'0

"W

121°

50'0

"W

121°

55'0

"W

121°

55'0

"W52°26'0"N

52°26'0"N

52°24'0"N

52°24'0"N

52°22'0"N

52°22'0"N

52°20'0"N

52°20'0"N

52°18'0"N

52°18'0"N

52°16'0"N

52°16'0"N

Will

iam

s La

ke C

omm

unity

For

est

Pesk

wen

kwin

em (P

otat

o M

ount

ain)

Blo

ck

02,

500

5,00

01,

250

Met

ers

OLe

gend Com

mun

ities

Pub

lic_R

oads

fore

st_r

oads

Con

tour

_lin

esS

tream

sLa

kes

Riv

ers

Wet

land

sW

LCF

_Bou

ndar

yB

CT

S_O

pera

ting_

Are

aP

rov_

Leas

eW

oodl

ots

CR

D L

OTS

NO

N-C

RO

WN

Dra

fted

by: M

ircea

Rau

June

, 201

2


15

Management Objec vesThe Province of BC has established goals for the Community Forest Program, the partners have set goals for the Williams Lake Community Forest, and stakeholders and neighbouriong communi es have expressed the resource and community values that are important to them. The partners have established a set of management objec ves and strategies to pursue the stated goals and values. Refer to the sidebar (this page) for further discussion of the interac ons between goals, values and management objec ves. (L to R) Surinderpal Rathor, Geoff Bourdon, Sue Zacharias, Chief Ann Louie, Mayor Kerry Cook, Robin Gilbert, Richard Sellars, Ivan Bonnell, Vern Michel, Geoff Goodall (A/City CAO) and Danica Hughes.

Government’s Goals for Community Forest Agreements

The Province of B.C. has stated goals (described as objec ves in the source document) for the community forest program and this community forest management plan is required to respond to those goals, which are quoted below.

This form of tenure is intended to provide new opportuni es for community management of Crown forest land. By providing communi es with greater fl exibility to manage local forests, government seeks to:

1. provide long-term opportuni es for achieving a range of community objec ves, values and priori es;

2. diversify the use of and benefi ts derived from the community forest agreement area;

3. provide social and economic benefi ts to Bri sh Columbia

4. undertake community forestry consistent with sound principles of environmental stewardship that refl ect a broad spectrum of values;

5. promote community involvement and par cipa on;

6. promote communica on and strengthen rela onships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communi es and persons;

7. foster innova on; and

8. advocate forest worker safety.

Partners’ Goals for the Williams Lake Community ForestThe partners in the Williams Lake Community Forest Agreement have developed a clear set of goals to which the management of the Community Forest will respond. The partners’ goals for the Community Forest are to:• refl ect community values and respect the land;• sustainably manage for all forest resources;• enhance local partnerships that support forest educa on and an increased public understanding of

forestry;

DEFINING GOALS, VALUES, AND OBJECTIVES

Goals are broad general statements that express a desired state or process.

Values refer to the worth and u lity of forests as experienced by people. Values are subjec ve and refer to the principles or judgements about what is important in life.

Management objec ves are a set of concise statements of planned results that correspond to pre-established goals and values.

Day (2011)


16

• operate the Community Forest as a viable forestry enterprise;• realize socioeconomic benefi ts such as local employment and economic ac vity associated with

milling and manufacturing, and• generate revenue for economic development and community stability.

Community ValuesA series of community mee ngs, ques onnaires and direct conversa ons were held with neighbouring communi es and stakeholders. That input process (described in Sec on 9) resulted in a be er understanding of both general community values and spa ally specifi c values that apply to the Community Forest, as noted in Table 1.

Table 1: Community values iden fi ed through open houses and ques onnaires.Water Quan ty and Quality Wildlife Habitat Cultural and Tradi onal Uses

Community Safety from Wildfi re

Visual Quality and Aesthe cs Apprecia on of Scenery and Nature

Fishing and Hun ng Range and Forage Gathering FirewoodConserving Soils Access to the Forest Gathering Food

Recrea on Public Safety Sequestering carbonRespect for the Land Spirituality Archaeological Sites

Stewardship Local Assets - Trails and Green Spaces

Improved Roads

Respect for Tradi onal Medicines and Foods

Economic Ac vity Small Scale Logging

Management Objectives to Achieve Goals and Respect ValuesTable 2 lists the partners’ goals for the Williams Lake Community Forest and the management objec ves which result from those goals and the community values described above. A list of strategies to pursue those objec ves is provided for each objec ve, along with a cross-reference to Government’s goals for the community forest program.


17

Tabl

e 2:

Goa

ls, m

anag

emen

t obj

ec v

es a

nd st

rate

gies

of t

he W

illia

ms L

ake

Com

mun

ity F

ores

t, w

ith re

fere

nce

to G

over

nmen

t's g

oals

for t

he

com

mun

ity fo

rest

pro

gram

.

GOAL

SM

ANAG

EMEN

T O

BJEC

TIVE

SSt

rate

gies

to A

chie

ve M

anag

emen

t O

bjec

ves

RESP

ON

DS T

O

GOVT

’S G

OAL

#To

refl e

ct c

omm

unity

va

lues

and

resp

ect t

he

land

.

To m

anag

e an

d co

nduc

t ope

ra o

ns in

acc

or-

danc

e w

ith a

man

agem

ent p

lan

and

a fo

rest

st

ewar

dshi

p pl

an w

hich

iden

fy a

nd a

ddre

ss

com

mun

ity v

alue

s, a

nd re

spec

t the

land

and

re

sour

ces.

• Cr

eate

and

wor

k w

ith S

tand

ing

Com

mi

ee o

n Re

sour

ce V

alue

s and

Inte

rest

s.•

Cons

ult E

lder

s.•

Deve

lop

eff e

c v

e re

la o

nshi

ps w

ith n

eigh

bour

s an

d lic

ense

d us

ers.

1, 2

, 4, 5

, 6

Prot

ect c

ultu

ral h

erita

ge re

sour

ces.

• W

ork

with

WLI

B an

d SC

IB N

atur

al R

esou

rces

De

part

men

ts to

iden

fy re

sour

ces.

• Jo

int p

lann

ing

with

WLI

B N

atur

al R

esou

rces

De

part

men

t to

man

age

and

cons

erve

cul

tura

l he

ritag

e re

sour

ces.

4, 5

, 6

Ackn

owle

dge

and

resp

ect t

radi

ona

l use

s.•

Wor

k w

ith W

LIB

and

SCIB

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es

Depa

rtm

ents

to id

en fy

use

s.•

Join

t pla

nnin

g w

ith W

LIB

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es

Depa

rtm

ent t

o pr

otec

t, re

spec

t and

enh

ance

tr

adi

onal

val

ues.

4, 5

, 6

Resp

ect p

ublic

acc

ess t

o cr

own

land

and

m

anag

e ac

cess

to m

inim

ize c

onfl i

ct b

etw

een

valu

es a

nd u

sers

.

• M

anag

e ac

cess

to b

alan

ce v

alue

s and

inte

rest

s.2,

3, 5

Resp

ect n

eigh

bour

s and

thei

r exp

ecta

on

for

natu

ral s

pace

s.•

Deve

lop

a re

la o

nshi

p w

ith n

eigh

bour

s and

eng

age

them

in h

arve

st p

lann

ing.

1, 2

, 3, 4

Prot

ect t

he p

rodu

c v

ity a

nd h

ydro

logi

c fu

nc-

on

of th

e so

il in

all

oper

a o

ns.

• M

inim

ize ro

ad d

ensit

y.•

Harv

est o

n se

nsi

ve so

ils in

dry

or f

roze

n co

ndi

ons.

4


18

GOAL

SM

ANAG

EMEN

T O

BJEC

TIVE

SSt

rate

gies

to A

chie

ve M

anag

emen

t O

bjec

ves

RESP

ON

DS T

O

GOVT

’S G

OAL

#To

sust

aina

bly

man

age

for a

ll fo

rest

re

sour

ces.

Sust

ain

or e

nhan

ce th

e fo

rest

reso

urce

s ava

il-ab

le o

n th

e Co

mm

unity

For

est f

or :

• fi s

h an

d w

ildlif

e ha

bita

t•

wat

er•

mbe

r•

rang

e, a

nd•

recr

ea o

n

• Co

nsul

t with

ranc

hers

, wat

er u

sers

, tra

pper

s and

gu

ide

ou i

ers

.•

Redu

ce si

ght-l

ines

.•

Desig

n ro

ad sy

stem

s with

out l

oops

and

dea

c v

ate

loop

road

s to

disc

oura

ge ro

ad h

un n

g.•

Cons

ult w

ith m

ount

ain

bike

clu

b to

mai

ntai

n an

d en

hanc

e tr

ail i

nfra

stru

ctur

e in

the

Flat

Roc

k Bl

ock.

• Su

ppor

t eff o

rts t

o lim

it th

e sp

read

of i

nvas

ive

spec

ies.

• U

nder

take

edu

ca o

n pr

ogra

m to

redu

ce d

amag

e to

rang

e an

d w

ater

reso

urce

s by

off -r

oad

vehi

cles

.•

Plan

sust

aina

ble

fore

st m

anag

emen

t to

inco

rpor

ate

all f

ores

t res

ourc

es.

1, 2

, 3, 4

Prot

ect a

nd c

onse

rve

the

valu

es in

pla

ce o

n th

e Co

mm

unity

For

est,

incl

udin

g:•

visu

al q

ualit

y•

biol

ogic

al d

iver

sity,

and

• co

mm

unity

inte

rface

.

• Ab

ide

by th

e Ca

riboo

-Chi

lco

n L

and

Use

Pla

n (C

CLU

P) a

nd it

s str

ateg

ies.

• Su

ppor

t eff o

rts t

o se

cure

fund

ing

and

unde

rtak

e in

terfa

ce fu

el re

duc

on.

•

Deve

lop

stra

tegi

es to

redu

ce fu

els t

hrou

gh fo

rest

ha

rves

ng

oper

a o

ns.

1, 4

, 5, 7

Prot

ect t

he fo

rest

from

cat

astr

ophi

c lo

sses

du

e to

:•

fore

st fi

res,

and

•

inse

ct a

nd d

iseas

e in

fest

a o

ns

• Su

ppor

t eff o

rts t

o se

cure

fund

ing

and

unde

rtak

e in

terfa

ce fu

el re

duc

on.

•

Deve

lop

stra

tegi

es to

redu

ce fu

els t

hrou

gh fo

rest

ha

rves

ng

oper

a o

ns.

• M

onito

r ins

ect a

nd d

iseas

e ac

vity

, inc

ludi

ng b

ark

beet

les a

nd c

arry

out

app

ropr

iate

con

trol

ac

vi

es

(e.g

. tra

p tr

ees,

bai

ts, a

nd sa

lvag

e.)

1, 3

, 4


19

GOAL

SM

ANAG

EMEN

T O

BJEC

TIVE

SSt

rate

gies

to A

chie

ve M

anag

emen

t O

bjec

ves

RESP

ON

DS T

O

GOVT

’S G

OAL

#To

sust

aina

bly

man

age

for a

ll fo

rest

re

sour

ces (

con

nue

d).

Regu

late

the

com

posi

on

of th

e fo

rest

th

roug

h ha

rves

t and

silv

icul

ture

trea

tmen

ts to

en

sure

:•

vigo

rous

and

pro

duc

ve

fore

sts

• a

dive

rsity

of h

abita

ts, a

nd•

a di

vers

ity o

f pro

duct

opp

ortu

ni e

s

• Es

tabl

ish re

gene

ra o

n at

app

ropr

iate

den

sity.

for

grow

th o

f hig

h-qu

ality

m

ber

• U

lize

com

mer

cial

thin

ning

and

par

al-c

u n

g to

re

duce

den

sity

and

mai

ntai

n vi

gour

and

qua

lity.

• Re

tain

a c

ompo

nent

of b

irch,

asp

en a

nd

co o

nwoo

d in

stan

ds.

1, 2

, 3, 4

, 7

Min

imize

con

vers

ion

of p

rodu

c v

e fo

rest

land

to

non

-pro

duc

ve

land

(e.g

. roa

ds).

• Pl

an p

erm

anen

t acc

ess n

etw

ork

to effi

cien

tly se

rve

fore

st m

anag

emen

t and

m

ber h

arve

s n

g.

• Pl

an fo

r max

imum

skid

dist

ance

.•

Cons

ider

dec

king

shor

twoo

d on

road

side

with

out

land

ings

. •

Reha

bilit

ate

tem

pora

ry ro

ads f

or

mbe

r har

ves

ng

a e

r com

ple

on.

• De

ac v

ate

road

s acc

ordi

ng to

app

rove

d re

sults

and

st

rate

gies

1, 2

, 4, 5

, 8

To e

nhan

ce lo

cal p

art-

ners

hips

that

supp

ort

fore

st e

duca

on

and

an in

crea

sed

publ

ic

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

fo

rest

ry.

Build

cap

acity

in lo

cal c

omm

uni

es fo

r wor

k in

fore

stry

, log

ging

and

woo

d pr

oduc

ts m

anu-

fact

urin

g.

• De

velo

p a

capa

city

-bui

ldin

g st

rate

gy.

• W

ork

with

succ

essf

ul p

rogr

ams.

• Pr

ovid

e co

ntra

ct w

ork,

sum

mer

jobs

and

in

tern

ship

s.

1, 3

, 5, 7

, 8

Prov

ide

oppo

rtun

i es

for e

duca

on,

rese

arch

, an

d de

mon

stra

on

in fo

rest

reso

urce

s con

-se

rva

on,

man

agem

ent,

and

woo

d pr

oduc

ts

man

ufac

turin

g.

• Ho

st fi

eld

tour

s for

loca

l com

mun

i es

and

stud

ents

• Co

llabo

rate

with

UBC

Ale

x Fr

aser

Res

earc

h Fo

rest

.1,

5, 6

, 7, 8

Wor

k w

ith o

ther

s to

shar

e kn

owle

dge

and

impr

ove

fore

st m

anag

emen

t.•

Par

cipa

te in

B.C

. Com

mun

ity F

ores

t Ass

ocia

on.

• Co

llabo

rate

with

nei

ghbo

urin

g Co

mm

unity

For

ests

.1,

5, 6

, 7, 8


20

GOAL

SM

ANAG

EMEN

T O

BJEC

TIVE

SSt

rate

gies

to A

chie

ve M

anag

emen

t O

bjec

ves

RESP

ON

DS T

O

GOVT

’S G

OAL

#To

ope

rate

the

Com

-m

unity

For

est a

s a

viab

le fo

rest

ry e

nter

-pr

ise.

Harv

est

mbe

r to

prov

ide

suffi

cien

t rev

enue

to

pay

for t

he m

anag

emen

t of t

he C

omm

unity

Fo

rest

, pro

vide

a fi

nanc

ial r

etur

n to

the

part

-ne

rs a

nd c

ontr

ibut

e to

a g

rant

pro

gram

.

• Ca

lcul

ate

min

imum

mar

gin

of se

lling

pric

e ov

er

cost

s.

1, 3

, 5, 6

, 7

Reta

in e

arni

ngs t

o co

ver f

utur

e ex

pens

es a

s-so

ciat

ed w

ith

mbe

r har

ves

ng.

• Es

tabl

ish re

serv

e ac

coun

ts fo

r fut

ure

silvi

cultu

re,

road

and

oth

er c

osts

.1,

3

Grow

and

har

vest

a d

iver

se ra

nge

of

mbe

r pr

oduc

ts a

nd n

on-

mbe

r for

est p

rodu

cts.

• Se

t silv

icul

ture

stra

tegi

es to

gro

w h

igh-

qual

ity

mbe

r.•

Sort

logs

to re

alize

bes

t val

ues.

1, 2

, 3, 7

Regu

late

the

harv

est o

f m

ber a

nd n

on-

m-

ber f

ores

t pro

duct

s to

min

imize

the

perio

dic

varia

on

in re

venu

e an

d do

wn-

side

risk.

• As

sem

ble

a ha

rves

t que

ue th

at re

cogn

izes e

ach

stan

d’s m

arke

t val

ue1,

3

Sell

mbe

r com

pe

vely

to se

ek m

axim

um

valu

e fo

r the

logs

pro

duce

d.•

Mar

ket l

ogs t

o re

alize

the

max

imum

Net

Mar

ket

Valu

e (N

MV)

.•

Sell

logs

as c

lose

to th

e w

oods

as p

ossib

le to

m

inim

ize tr

ucki

ng c

osts

.•

Adop

t a “

mar

ket-l

ogge

r” a

tud

e.

• Re

tain

the

oppo

rtun

ity to

sell

outs

ide

the

loca

l m

arke

t to

ensu

re c

ompe

ve

pric

ing.

1, 3

Carr

y ou

t ac

vi

es in

a sa

fe, h

ealth

y, an

d se

cure

env

ironm

ent.

• Ce

r fy

as a

Saf

e Co

mpa

ny.

• M

aint

ain

good

stan

ding

with

Wor

kSaf

e BC

1, 3

, 8

Wor

k w

ith n

eigh

bour

s and

lice

nsed

use

rs

(rang

e te

nure

hol

ders

, gui

de o

u i

ers

and

tr

appe

rs) t

o se

ek m

utua

lly sa

sfa

ctor

y ou

t-co

mes

.

• De

velo

p a

Stan

ding

Com

mi

ee to

mak

e re

com

men

da o

ns re

gard

ing

plan

s and

thei

r im

plem

enta

on.

• Co

llabo

rate

with

lice

nsed

use

rs a

nd re

crea

on

inte

rest

s to

min

imize

con

fl ict

s.•

Mai

ntai

n an

ope

n-do

or p

olic

y to

rece

ive

inpu

t.

1, 2

, 3, 5

, 6


21

GOAL

SM

ANAG

EMEN

T O

BJEC

TIVE

SSt

rate

gies

to A

chie

ve M

anag

emen

t O

bjec

ves

RESP

ON

DS T

O

GOVT

’S G

OAL

#To

real

ize so

cioe

co-

nom

ic b

enefi

ts su

ch

as lo

cal e

mpl

oym

ent

and

econ

omic

ac

v-

ity a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith

mill

ing

and

man

ufac

-tu

ring.

Man

age

and

harv

est t

he

mbe

r profi l

e to

pr

ovid

e a

dive

rse

rang

e of

pro

duct

s.•

Mai

ntai

n fo

rest

div

ersit

y.•

Harv

est t

he w

hole

m

ber p

rofi l

e.•

Sort

logs

to re

alize

bes

t val

ues.

•

Adop

t a “

mar

ket-l

ogge

r” a

tud

e.

1, 2

, 3, 7

Sell

mbe

r as c

lose

to th

e re

tail

cust

omer

as

poss

ible

.•

Sort

logs

to re

alize

bes

t val

ues.

1,

2, 3

, 7

Seek

opp

ortu

ni e

s to

mar

ket f

ores

t pro

duct

s pr

esen

tly le

as w

aste

.•

Purs

ue o

ppor

tuni

es t

o m

arke

t bio

mas

s for

pel

lets

an

d he

at.

• In

ves

gat

e co

mm

erci

al fi

rew

ood

mar

kets

.

1,2,

3,7

Hire

qua

lifi e

d lo

cal c

ontr

acto

rs to

car

ry o

ut

ac v

i es

.•

Deve

lop

a qu

alifi

ca o

n lis

t for

inte

rest

ed

cont

ract

ors.

1, 2

, 3, 5

, 6, 7

To g

ener

ate

reve

nue

for e

cono

mic

dev

elop

-m

ent a

nd c

omm

unity

st

abili

ty.

Harv

est

mbe

r to

gene

rate

resid

ual n

et re

v-en

ue to

the

part

ner c

omm

uni

es to

pur

sue

thei

r goa

ls.

• Se

lect

stan

ds fo

r har

ves

ng

to g

ener

ate

posi

ve

cash

fl ow

.1,

2, 3

, 6

Dist

ribut

e a

por

on o

f the

resid

ual n

et re

v-en

ues t

o th

e re

gion

al c

omm

unity

• Di

strib

ute

5% o

f net

reve

nues

thro

ugh

a gr

an n

g pr

ogra

m.*

• Ta

sk S

tand

ing

Com

mi

ee to

det

erm

ine

the

acce

pted

pur

pose

s and

pro

cess

to a

ccom

plish

the

dist

ribu

on

of g

rant

s.

1, 2

, 3, 5

, 6

* Gr

an n

g pr

ogra

m to

be

man

aged

by

the

Stan

ding

Com

mi

ee c

onsis

tent

with

thei

r Ter

ms o

f Ref

eren

ce.


22

Other Management Plan Requirements

ConsistencyThis Management Plan is consistent with the:1. Direc on received from the Regional Manager and the District Manager;2. Community Forest Agreement K3A;3. Forest Act, Forest and Range Prac ces Act, and their regula ons;4. Cariboo Chilco n Land Use Plan and the Horsefl y and Williams Lake subregional plans;5. Following commitments made by the WL Community Forest LP a er the April 22, 2013 Open

House:• Good stewardship and resource management• Crea on of a Standing Commi ee of the Board of Directors to make reccommenda ons to the

regarding planning and implementa on, and eff ec ve distribu on of grant program funds;• Other benefi ts

• Timber available to local mills and manufacturers• Contract work adver sed and awarded to eligible contractors by a ranking system; • Goods and services purchased from communi es; • Annual alloca on of 5% of net profi t from the previous year to a gran ng program;

• Transparency in management and administra on; 6. There is no “original proposal” described in paragraph 6.02(l) of the licence document, and so there

are no further commitments listed here.

Forest InventoryThe Ne Sextsine (Flat Rock) Block (5,927 hectares) overlooks the Fraser River, just west of Williams Lake, B.C., and is situated in the Interior Douglas-fi r biogeoclima c zone. The forest growing in the dry/very dry climate there is made up of mul -aged Douglas-fi r stands. The Peskwenkwinem (Potato Mountain) Block (22,913 hectares) spans an area between the Likely and Horsefl y Roads from Potato Mountain north to Beaver Valley. The climate of the Sub-Boreal Spruce biogeoclima c zone leads to produc ve forests dominated by Douglas-fi r, interior spruce, lodgepole pine, aspen and birch, generally in even-aged stands. Table 3 provides a summary of the gross area for each block of the Community Forest by biogeoclima c subzone.

Table 3: Biogeoclima c zones and subzones of the Williams Lake Community Forest.Block Biogeoclima c

ZoneGross Area (Ha) by Subzone Total Area

(Ha)dk3 xm dw1 dw2 mhFlat Rock IDF 3,499 2,394 5,893

Potato Mountain

SBS 21,316 2,567 9 22,892

Missing Data 55Total 28,840

Non-forest land is an important component of the Community Forest, suppor ng ecological goods and services that are important to the community. Table 4 provides a summary of forest and non-forest area. The total forest area has been classifi ed in the provincial forest inventory (accessed 2011), which is summarized by leading species and age in Table 5. The same informa on is depicted graphically in Figure 6.


23

Table 4: Total Forest and non-forest area (hectares) of the Williams Lake Community Forest.Category Potato Mountain Flat Rock Grand Total

Forest Forested 19,890 5,675 25,565NSR 1,690 30 1,720

Subtotal 21,580 5,705 27,285Non-Forest Clearing 17 63 79

Gravel Pit 3 0 3Lake 630 17 646

NP Brush 136 8 144Open Range 1 27 28

River 2 2Rock 5 5

Urban 5 100 105Wetland 536 5 541

Subtotal 1,333 222 1,554Grand Total 22,913 5,927 28,840

Table 5: Area (hectares) by leading species and age class for the Williams Lake Community Forest. Block Lead.

Specie*Age Grand

Total1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 100-120 121-140 141-250 >250 Error

Potato Block

Ac 218 65 66 130 77 557

At 319 590 141 384 939 316 326 101 3,115

Bl 5 49 384 68 11 5 522

Cw 32 32

Ep 9 68 159 20 103 35 5 19 417

Fdi 129 78 411 270 1,063 990 1,325 2,249 304 6,819

Pli 1,078 835 61 116 769 292 727 111 3,990

Sx 413 109 173 172 992 481 947 1,083 4,371

Error 67 67

Subtotal 1,952 1,729 1,549 1,030 3,931 2,191 3,466 3,640 336 67 19,890

Flat Rock Block

At 5 12 6 22

Fdi 4 31 139 406 197 637 2,457 1,700 5,571

Pli 6 22 21 49

Sx 3 3

Error 30 30

Subtotal 4 31 150 440 197 646 2,478 1,700 30 5,675

Total 1,952 1,733 1,579 1,180 4,371 2,388 4,111 6,118 2,036 97 25,565

* Leading Species Codes Ac=Co onwood At=Aspen Bl=Subalpine fi r

Cw=western redcedar Ep=paper birch Fdi=interior Douglas-fi r

Pli=lodgepole pine Sx=interior spruce


24

Timber Harvest Specifi cationsTimber harves ng will u lize coniferous log grades described in the “approved interior standard mber merchantability standard specifi ca ons.”1 Deciduous logs and logs that do not meet standard

grades are op onal u liza on; the Williams Lake Community Forest will aggressively pursue markets for those products.

Management and Conservation of Non-Timber Resource ValuesNon- mber resource values are managed in two ways.

1. Some values are excluded from the net produc ve harvestable area. Net produc ve harvestable area is calculated by deduc ng non-forest area, Old Growth Management Areas (OGMAs) and inoperable areas from the gross area (Table 6).

2. Other values included in the net produc ve harvestable landbase are managed by specifi c silvicultural strategies.

Net produc ve harvestable area is classifi ed according to Working Circles -- areas of consistent land management values that are managed by a consistent silvicultural approach (see sidebar next page). Where values overlap (e.g. mule deer winter range and visual quality) the more constraining value is

1 Interior Appraisal Manual Sec on 1.5.1, Table 1-1.h p://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ p/hva/external/!publish/web/manuals/interior/2012/Interior2012Nov-Master_1.pdf (January 2013)

Figure 6: Area (hectares) by age class and species distribu on by block for the Williams Lake Community Forest. Age Classes and species codes are as shown in Table 5 above.

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Potato Mtn Flat Rock

AC AT BL CW EP FDI PLI SXSPEC_CD_1

Sum of AREA_HA

Area

(ha)

Age Class


25

dominant. Maps of working circles are shown at Figures 7 and 8, and working circle areas are shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Gross area (hectares) and reduc ons to net harvestable landbase by Working Circle for the Williams Lake Community Forest.

Block Gross Area

Non-Harvest Landbase Area Net Prod. Harv. Area

Harvest Landbase Area

Mule Deer WR

Work Circle

Visual QualityWork Circle

TimberWork Circle

Non Produc ve

Area

Inop Work Circle

OGMA Work Circle

Potato Mountain

22,913 1,333 879 4,136 16,565 2,275 (13.7%)

2,328 (14.0%)

11,962 (72.2%)

Flat Rock 5,927 222 1,235 1,688 2,782 2,782 (100%)

Total 28,840 1,554 2,114 5,825 19,347 5,057 (26.1%)

2,328 (12.0%)

11,962 (61.8%)

Silviculture PracticesEach of the Working Circles described in Table 6 and Figures 7 and 8 have silvicultural strategies described below and also summarized under the sec on tled Allowable Annual Cut Ra onale.

Inoperable working circle is comprised of areas deemed to be too steep for conven onal harves ng methods and is excluded from the operable landbase. These areas will contribute to wildlife tree patches and will form part of the forest-level matrix for conserva on of non- mber resource values. Extra-ordinary market condi ons and refi ned mapping may allow some limited harvest from within this working circle.

Old Growth Management Areas working circle are designated through the biodiversity strategy of the CCLUP, and are excluded from the operable landbase. Only minor harvest ac vi es are allowed to manage bark beetle infesta ons. These areas form a key part of the forest-level matrix for conserva on of non- mber resources, par cularly biodiversity.

Mule deer winter range working circles will be managed for uneven-aged stand condi ons to provide snow intercep on and forage. Government Ac ons Regula on (GAR) Order U5-002 dictates that mule deer habitat within the Potato Mountain Block should be managed under group selec on; gradual conversion of even-aged stands to uneven-aged condi ons will mean delaying the last selec on cut for 200 years. Current stand age plus 200 years suggests that some por ons of some stands will be very old, and bark beetle infesta ons will con nue to be a problem.

GAR Order U5-002 dictates that mule deer habitat within the Flat Rock Block will be managed by clumpy single-tree selec on. Current stand structures have a preponderance of small-diameter, low-vigour trees which compete heavily for available soil moisture, pu ng large diameter trees under signifi cant stress. Snow press and bark beetle infesta ons will con nue to be problema c. Thinning of Douglas-fi r stands should be carried out to u lize volume at risk and improve the vigour and growth of residual trees and stands.

WORKING CIRCLE

The division of the land base accoridng to its values and the biophysical landscape in which these values are located. Working circles can provide a common silvicultural approach to management.

Day (2012)


26

Will

iam

s La

ke

WL

Indi

an B

and15

0 M

ile H

ouse

Willi

ams

Lake

Asah

al L

ake

Bond

Lak

e

Res

ervo

ir La

ke

122°

0'0"

W

122°

0'0"

W

122°

10'0

"W

122°

10'0

"W52°10'0"N

52°10'0"N

52°5'0"N

52°5'0"N

Will

iam

s La

ke C

omm

unity

For

est

02,

000

4,00

01,

000

Met

ers

O

Lege

ndC

omm

uniti

es

Roa

ds

Stre

ams

WLC

F_B

ound

ary

Lake

s

Riv

ers

FC_N

on_P

rodu

ctiv

e

FC_N

SR

WO

RK

_CIR

CLE

INO

PER

MD

WR

OG

MA

TIM

BE

R

Dra

fted

by: M

ircea

Rau

June

, 201

2

Ne

Sext

sine

(Fla

t Roc

k) B

lock

Prov

inci

al L

ease

s an

d Li

cenc

esW

orki

ng C

ircle

s

Figure 7: Working Circles of the Flat Rock Block describe land values that will be managed by diff ering silvicultural approaches.


27

Big

Lak

eBi

g La

ke

Beve

ridge

Lak

e

McC

aule

y La

ke

Park

er L

ake

Geo

rge,

Lak

e

Jum

eaux

Lak

es

Jess

ica

Lake

Rob

ert L

ake

Jum

eaux

Lak

es

Bells

Lak

e

Rat

dam

Lak

e

Skul

ow L

ake

Solo

mon

Lak

e

Pete

r Lak

e

Alph

a La

ke

Cra

zy L

ake

Veith

Lak

e

Beav

er L

ake

Baill

on L

ake

Jug

Lake

Abbo

tt La

ke

Prou

ton

Lake

s

Saus

ser L

ake

Batte

n La

ke

Coo

k La

ke

Brig

hten

Lak

e

Mei

ss L

ake

Prou

ton

Lake

s

Bunt

ing

Lake

Upp

er W

iggi

ns L

ake

Mile

five

Lake

Chi

na C

abin

Lak

e

Patto

n La

ke

Har

pers

Lak

e

Baco

n La

ke

Mal

colm

Lak

e

McI

nnes

Lak

e

Gam

mar

us L

ake

Wig

gins

Lak

e

Ande

rs L

ake

Uph

am L

ake

121°

30'0

"W

121°

30'0

"W

121°

40'0

"W

121°

40'0

"W

121°

50'0

"W

121°

50'0

"W

52°25'0"N

52°25'0"N

52°20'0"N

52°20'0"N

Will

iam

s La

ke C

omm

unity

For

est

02,

500

5,00

01,

250

Met

ers

O

Lege

ndC

omm

uniti

es

Roa

ds

Stre

ams

WLC

F_B

ound

ary

Lake

s

WO

RK

_CIR

CL

INO

PER

MD

WR

OG

MA

TIM

BE

RVI

SU

AL

Dra

fted

by: M

ircea

Rau

June

, 201

2

Pesk

wen

kwin

em (P

otat

o M

ount

ain)

Blo

ckPr

ovin

cial

Lea

ses

and

Lice

nces

Wor

king

Circ

les

Figure 8: Working Circles of the Potato Mountain Block describe land values that will be managed by diff ering silvicultural approaches.


28

The visual quality working circle at Potato Mountain will be managed by shelterwood, with reten on to provide visual screening. Shelterwood systems have proven to be eff ec ve on the UBC Alex Fraser Research Forest to regenerate Douglas-fi r and spruce while an overstory reduces the visual impact of the harvest opera ons. Careful placement of reserves within the stand also so ens the visual impact of harves ng. Computer simula ons of visual impacts will be used during harvest planning to maintain visual quality during the regenera on phase. Overstory removal releases established regenera on thereby minimizing the me to visually eff ec ve greenup. Rota on age of 120 years will ensure high-quality Douglas-fi r and spruce logs for mbers, house logs and veneer logs.

The mber working circle will be managed for high-quality Douglas-fi r and spruce logs. Commercial thinning will be u lized to develop straight logs of large diameter for mbers, house logs and veneer logs. Rota on age will be set at 120 years to achieve culmina on of mean annual increment.

Forest Health FactorsWind, snow and ice damage are signifi cant and ongoing health factors that cause broken mber and damaged pole stands. They also lead to increased popula ons of bark beetles.

Douglas-fi r and spruce bark beetles are frequently problema c, and the increasing density and declining vigour of old stands favours bark beetle outbreaks.

Mountain pine beetle has killed virtually all of the pine over 60 years of age, and has caused signifi cant mortality in juvenile trees with diameters greater than 10 cm. Li le mature pine remains to be salvaged, since the forest companies (Tolko and West Fraser) have been ac vely harves ng in the Potato Mountain Block up un l 2012. Restora on of impacted juvenile stands will be an opportunity to improve the growing stock.

Spruce budworm is a signifi cant problem in the Flat Rock Block. This is a rela vely new forest health factor in the Cariboo, arriving in the vicinity of Williams Lake in about 2000. A sustained outbreak has been underway in the area since about 2005, and government has been spraying infested forests in the IDF with Btk, a naturally occurring bacteria selec ve to bu erfl ies and moths. The literature indicates that thinning improves tree and stand resistance and resilience to spruce budworm.

Root diseases (armillaria, laminated, and tomentosus root rots) are signifi cant diseases of site that require modifi ca on of silvicultural approach. These frequently make good long-term reserves because they contain high levels of diversity. Control is diffi cult, requiring either mechanical stumping or applica on of Hypholoma fasiculare as an experimental biological control.

Damage and decay follow wounding of trees, par cularly spruce and subalpine fi r. Logging damage during par al-cu ng silviculture treatments is one mode of damage that can be controlled.

Numerous other forest health factors aff ect regenera on strategies, including:

• Spruce terminal weevil • Root collar weevil• Stem rusts of hard pines • Dwarf mistletoe• Growing-season frost • Rodent damage• Ca le damage

Proposed Allowable Annual CutThe proposed allowable annual cut (AAC) for the Williams Lake Community Forest is 40,000 m3 per year. This harvest level has been calculated (Table 7) by:


29

• Calcula ng the net harvestable area of the Community Forest by block (Table 4 above);• Reducing the net area of the Community Forest by a factor of 7% for access (roads, landings and

gravel pits), and 8% for wildlife tree patches (Table 7); and• Applying an es mated mean annual growth rate for each working circle/block combina on (Table

8).This approach has been accepted in the le er from District Manager Mike Pedersen, which is included in Sec on 5 of the Williams Lake Community Forest applica on.

Table 7: Net area (hectares) for AAC by Working Circles within the harvestable landbase for the Williams Lake Community Forest.

Block Net Prod. Harv. Area

Access Withdrawal

(7%)

Wildlife Tree Patch Required

(8%)

Net Area for AAC

Net Working Circle AreaMule Deer

WRVisual

QualityTimber

Potato Mountain

16,565 1,160 1,245 14,160 1,954 (13.8%)

1,982 (14.0%)

10,224 (72.2%)

Flat Rock 2,782 195 223 2,364 2,364 (100%)

Total 19,347 1,355 1,468 16,524 4,318 (26.1%)

1,982 (12.0%)

10,224 (61.9%)

Table 8: Allowable Annual Cut (AAC) by Working Circles within the harvestable landbase for the Williams Lake Community Forest.

Block Net Working Circle Area (ha)

Es mated Available Annual Increment (m3/ha/yr)

Indicated AAC (m3/year)

AAC (m3/year)

Mule Deer WR

Visual Quality

Timber Mule Deer WR

Visual Quality

Timber Mule Deer WR

Visual Quality

Timber

Potato Mountain

1,954 1,982 10,224 1.25 2.7 2.92 2,443 5,351 29,854 37,648

Flat Rock 2,364 1.00 2,364 2,364Total 4,318 1,982 10,224 4,807 5,351 29,854 40,012

Allowable Annual Cut Ra onaleEs mated available annual increment has been determined with reference to approved Timber Supply Reviews2. AACs (m3/ha) for local Woodlot Licences and Community Forest Agreements throughout the province were also considered.

Silvicultural strategies and reten on strategies will vary by working circle to achieve the management objec ves stated in Table 2.

• Visual quality areas on the Potato Mountain Block will be managed through par al cu ng and reten on strategies to manage aesthe cs while regenera ng even-aged stands.

• Mule deer winter range on the Potato Mountain Block will be managed in accordance with the Government Ac ons Regula on (GAR) Order U5-002 Transi on and Deep Snowpack Zone. These areas are managed under group selec on to provide a perpetual forest of mature Douglas-fi r, while

2 Snetsinger, J. 2007. Williams Lake Timber Supply Area Ra onale for Allowable Annual Cut Determina on. Province of BC. h p://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hts/tsa/tsa29/tsr3/29ts07ra.pdf


30

allowing thinning and fi nal harvest in small groups to regenerate the stand and advance even-aged cohorts.

• Mule deer winter range on the Flat Rock Block will be managed in accordance with the Government Ac ons Regula on (GAR) Order U5-002 Shallow and Moderate Snowpack Zone. These areas are managed under clumpy single tree selec on to provide a con nuous cover of mature Douglas-fi r while allowing thinning and fi nal harvest in clumps of trees to regenerate the stand throughout me.

• Timber management areas on the Potato Mountain Block will be managed through even-aged systems including clearcut and shelterwood silvicultural systems.

• Grassland Restora on Areas on the Flat Rock Block are designated through the Grassland Strategy of the CCLUP. These areas overlap with both Old Growth Management Areas, Mule Deer Winter Range, and Visual Quality values. They will be harvested once to restore grassland condi ons, and will not contribute to the Timber Harves ng Landbase.

• Old Growth Management Areas are designated through the Biodiversity Strategy of the CCLUP, and only minor harvest ac vi es are allowed to manage bark beetle infesta ons. Their contribu on to the annual harvest is sporadic and so the area does not contribute to the calcula on of AAC. However, mber harvested from within OGMA will count as part of the annual harvest for cut control purposes.

• Inoperable Areas are deemed to be too steep for conven onal harves ng methods, and are excluded from the mber harves ng land-base. Because these areas are defi ned based upon map contours, it is possible that their boundaries may change. Extra-ordinary market condi ons may make some por ons of those areas operable in the future. Timber harvested from within these areas will count as part of the annual harvest for cut control purposes.

An analysis has been conducted to demonstrate that the harvest level is sustainable through me, resul ng in approximately equal area by age class within about 100 years (Figure 9). Assuming a rota on age of 120 years and a produc ve forest area of 14,290 ha, the average harvest area is 119 ha per year or 2,382 ha per 20 year period. Each year of harves ng is assumed to select the oldest stands fi rst, gradually reducing the area of old forest un l the area by age classes is normalized. The harvest rate is sustainable if the age of harvest does not decline below appropriate levels. In this analysis it appears that harvest age will need to decrease to 80 years in the sixth period to achieve a balanced age-class distribu on. This analysis does not include the Old Growth Management Areas, Inoperable, or Mule Deer Winter Range working circles, all of which contribute to the biodiversity value of having old forest on the Community Forest.

Harvest Priority and MethodsIn general mber harves ng will respond to the following priori es:

1. imminent or expanding losses;

2. salvage of dead mber;

3. regenera on cuts in even-aged par al cu ng systems;

4. mber at risk of infesta on by insects;

5. mber of declining vigour;

6. mber aff ected by disease;

7. healthy vigorous mber.


31

Harvest method will rely primarily on ground-based mechanical systems:

• feller buncher, grapple skidder, processor at landings for par al cuts or at roadside for clearcuts; or • harvester-forwarder with processing in the woods and decking at roadside.

Management of Non-Timber Forest ProductsThe Williams Lake Community Forest supports the rights of individuals and First Na ons to gather food, medicinal and cra materials for individual or community use. We will manage the Community Forest to allow that ac vity through me, recognizing that produc vity of forest condi ons varies through me and by loca on depending upon the par cular non- mber forest product of interest.

At the me of wri ng, no enabling regula on exists to allow Community Forest Agreements to manage and charge fees for commercial produc on of non- mber forest products. If government sees fi t to enact such regula ons at some me in the future, the Williams Lake Community Forest will defer to the direc on of the Williams Lake Indian Band.

Figure 9: Area by age class through me for even-aged working circles (Potato Mountain Block, Timber and Visuals Working Circles) of the Williams Lake Community Forest. Each graph represents a 20-year harvest period, during which the oldest stands are cut and the other stands age by 20 years.

0.0

1000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

6000.0

INITIAL

Normal Class Size

INITIAL

0.0

1000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

6000.0

20 YEARS

Normal Class Size

0.0500.0

1000.01500.02000.02500.03000.03500.04000.0

40 YEARS

Normal Class Size

0.0

500.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

3000.0

3500.0

60 YEARS

Normal Class Size

0.0

500.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

3000.0

3500.0

80 YEARS

Normal Class Size

Area

(ha)

Age Class (years)

Documents

8. Management Plan Community Forest Applica · 20/08/2013 · Community Forest Applica ... The partners in the Williams Lake Community Forest Agreement have developed a clear set