Quesnel Timber Supply Area - British Columbia Health Strategy... · Web viewSevere Bare branch tips and completely defoliated tops, most trees sustaining more than 50% total defoliation

Quesnel TSA Forest Health Strategy

Quesnel Timber Supply AreaForest Health Strategy

2007-2008

original signedGerry Grant, R.P.F.District ManagerQuesnel Forest District

Date: July 13, 2007 __________________________


1 Introduction................................................................................................................4

2 Guiding Principles.....................................................................................................4

3 Forest Health Objectives...........................................................................................4

4 Roles and Responsibilities.........................................................................................5

5 TSA Ranking of Importance of Forest Health Factors..........................................5

6 Known Extent of Forest Health Factors..................................................................6

7 Strategies and Tactics................................................................................................8

7.1 Bark Beetles.........................................................................................................87.1.1 Spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis)......................................................117.1.2 Douglas-fir beetle (Dendroctonus pseudotsugae).........................................117.1.3 Mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae).......................................127.1.4 Western balsam bark beetle (Dryocoetes confusus)......................................127.1.5 Ips Engraver Beetle (Ips spp.)........................................................................12

7.2 Defoliators.........................................................................................................137.2.1 Western spruce budworm (Choristoneura occidentalis)...............................137.2.2 Two-year budworm (Choristoneura biennis)................................................137.2.3 Forest Tent Caterpillar (Malacosma disstria)................................................137.2.4 Gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar)....................................................................13

7.3 Branch and Stem Rusts......................................................................................147.3.1 Hard pine stem rusts: commandra blister rust (Cronartium commandrae), stalactiform blister rust (Cronartium coleosporiodies) and western gall rust (Endocronartium harknessii).....................................................................................147.3.2 Dwarf Mistletoe on Lodgepole pine (Arceuthobium americanum)...............14

7.4 Root Disease......................................................................................................147.4.1 Armillaria (Armillaria ostoyae).....................................................................147.4.2 Tomentosus (Inonotus tomentosus)...............................................................15

7.5 Woody Tissue Feeders.......................................................................................157.5.1 Warren’s root collar weevil (Hylobius warreni)............................................15

7.6 Abiotic Injuries..................................................................................................157.6.1 Weather related Forest Health.......................................................................157.6.2 Windthrow.....................................................................................................15

7.7 Animal damage..................................................................................................167.7.1 Hare and Vole................................................................................................16

7.8 Other Forest Health Agents...............................................................................16


7.8.1 Pest in young managed stands.......................................................................167.8.2 Remaining Forest Health Agents...................................................................16

8 Reporting and Tracking..........................................................................................17

9 Map Links and Reference Material.......................................................................17

1.1 The aerial overview maps for 2006 are available on the Quesnel Forest District ftp site at.........................................................................................................................17

9.1 http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DQU/external/!publish/District%20Composites/Forest%20Health/..........................................................................................................17

Maps showing the Emergency Bark Beetle Management Areas designated as “aggressive” zones for control of spruce beetle and Douglas-fir beetle are available. The maps can be accessed at http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/mountain_pine_beetle/maps/ebbma/index.htm...............17

10 Reference Material..................................................................................................17

11 Appendix...................................................................................................................19


1 Introduction

The Quesnel Forest Health Strategy recommends actions to address forest health issues in the Quesnel Timber Supply Area (TSA). It specifies forest health conditions, issues and strategies unique to the Quesnel TSA.

This strategy is a source of information for reference to licensees in preparing Forest Stewardship Plans (FSP), of informing the district manager during the FSP review, for the preparation of Bark Beetle Management Tactical Plans and budgets, and to guide the district in obtaining accurate pest impact estimates for Timber Supply Reviews. This strategy also serves as a guide to operational plans and forest health investment.

The document titled Forest Health Implementation Strategy - March 2007 provides a template for the development of the TSA strategy and a framework for risk and hazard rating for pests.

Guiding Principles

Be consistent with current regulations: augment, rather than reiterate policy and legislation.

Provide general direction for management of forest health agents emphasizing the predominant bark beetles, which pose the most immediate forest health threat.

Be consistent with the Cariboo-Chilcotin Land Use Plan (CCLUP) and associated strategies.

Follow provincial guidance provided in “British Columbia’s Mountain Pine Beetle Action Plan 2005-2010”, the Provincial Forest Health Strategy and by the Provincial Bark Beetle Coordinator.

Utilize information provided to the Chief Forester during recent Allowable Annual Cut (AAC) determinations with respect to recommended wildlife tree retention to provide guidance for large scale salvage harvesting.

Utilize the Quesnel Enhanced Conservation Strategy February 2006. Enable operational planners to focus on economically viable priorities to get

maximum value from the infested trees. Licensees and BC Timber Sales (BCTS) are encouraged to build upon the strategies and tactics contained herein to maximize the available harvesting capacity.

2 Forest Health Objectives

Provide updated strategic guidance for the ongoing forest health management in the Quesnel TSA through the Forest Health Strategy.

Detect, assess and predict the level of damage from forest health factors (FHF).

Conduct program planning management and partnering.


Maintain an annual detection program for bark beetles in the suppression Beetle Management Units (BMUs)

Identify and prioritize forest health agents and opportunities for suppression and salvage activities.

Identify treatment strategies for forest health management of agents affecting both merchantable and non-merchantable trees (young stands).

Facilitate co-operative planning between agencies and licensees.

Establish short-term and longer-term treatment guidelines to best address the opportunities given the current pest incidences and infestation levels.

Facilitate the development of scientifically and ecologically sound operational plans and practices.

Assign responsibility for beetle management to the various major licensees, BCTS and Ministry of Forests and Range (MoFR) and identify where there may be opportunities for small tenure holders, including small-scale salvage operators, to assist in salvage/suppression efforts.

3 Roles and Responsibilities

The obligation of individual licensees to act upon these priority actions are dependent on the legislated requirement under the Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA) and the Forest Planning and Practices Regulation (FPPR). The majority of these activities (other than the individual license obligations) are either the responsibility of the MoFR or conducted by industry as enhanced or incremental activities presently eligible for Forest Investment Account (FIA) and Forests for Tomorrow (FFT) funding.

4 TSA Ranking of Importance of Forest Health Factors

The ranking of the Quesnel TSA forest health factors differs slightly from the Provincial ranking. Within the Quesnel TSA pest species are ranked according to;

distribution of pest and current incidence levels,

available susceptible host species,

known or suspected impacts on forest resource values,

availability of operational detection and treatment methods,

costs and benefits of applying detailed detection and treatment activities, and

overall level of knowledge about the hazard and risk zones.


Table 1: Forest Health Agents by Priority within the Quesnel TSA

Very High Spruce beetle (IBS) Douglas-fir beetle (IBD)

High

Mountain pine beetle (IBM)

Windthrow of Douglas-fir and spruce (NW)

Western balsam bark beetle (IBB)

Two-year cycle budworm (IDB)

Hard pine stem rusts (3) in young stands (DSC; DSG; DSS)

Fire killed stands (NB)

Ips engraver beetle (IBI)

Moderate Western spruce budworm (IDW)

Warren’s root collar weevil (IWW)

Spruce weevil (IWS)

Dwarf mistletoe (DMP)

LowWindthrow of lodgepole pine (NW)

Tomentosus root disease (DRT)

Armillaria root disease (DRA)

Gypsy moth (IDM)

Very LowForest Tent Caterpillar (IDF)

Animal damage (AH;AV)

Atropellis canker (DSA)

Lodgepole pine terminal weevil (IWP)

Other conifer and broadleaf biotic and abiotic factors

5 Known Extent of Forest Health Factors

The Quesnel TSA forest health aerial overview information (2006) was analyzed from the dataset accompanying the spatial polygon information. Table 2 summarizes the results by forest health factor (disturbance; damaging agent), intensity and hectares. The aerial overview survey data does not describe the full extent of the forest health factors.

In addition to the aerial overview assessment, the district issued a contract for Vertical Digital Aerial Orthorectified Mosaic Photography and Interpretation of all Douglas-Fir and spruce bark beetle sites over approximately 10 mapsheets. The area included the settlement corridor along both sides of the Fraser River from Macalister north to Dragon Mountain.

The format for the digital orthorectified photos is compatible with ArcMap. CDs were provided to the licensees who have operations in the area. Woodlot holders were provided with printed maps at 1:5,000 scale. Results of this work identified single trace amounts of Douglas-fir beetle, and some small patches of spruce beetle. These orthophotos proved to be a more detailed detection tool. As more ground-proofing is completed by the licensees the extent of the beetle will be better known.


Table 2: Summary of the 2006 Disturbance Levels and Intensity Classes, within the Quesnel Forest District, TSA and excluding TFL 52.

Disturbance Damage Agent Intensity Polygon Area (ha) Total (ha)

Mortality

Mountain pine beetle (IBM)

Trace 150,003

1,430,282

Light 257,770Moderate 581,492Severe 386,141Very Severe 54,876

Douglas-fir beetle (IBD)Trace 1,622

2,465Light 629Moderate 214

Spruce beetle (IBS)Trace 9,438

12,902Light 826Moderate 2,638

Western balsam bark beetle (IBB) Trace 25,563 25,563

Wildfire (NB) Severe 21,119 21,119Windthrow (NW) Severe 171 171

DefoliationTwo-year budworm (IDB)

Light 19,86220,143

Moderate 281Forest Tent Caterpillar (IDF) Moderate 33 33

Grand Total 1,512,678


Table 3: Intensity classes used in aerial overview surveys for recording forest health damage (mortality and defoliation).

Disturbance Intensity Class Description

Mortality(bark beetle, Abiotic and animal damage)

Trace <1% of the trees in the polygon recently killed.

Light 1-10% of the trees in the polygon recently killed.

Moderate 11-29% of the trees in the polygon recently killed.

Severe / Very Severe 30%+ of the trees in the polygon recently killed.

Defoliation(defoliating insect and foliar disease damage)

Light Some branch tip and upper crown defoliation, barely visible from the air.

ModerateNoticeably thin foliage, top third of many trees severely defoliated, some completely stripped.

SevereBare branch tips and completely defoliated tops, most trees sustaining more than 50% total defoliation.

6 Strategies and Tactics

To keep this strategy document concise, the description of strategies, tactics and other measures is restricted to a citation of information currently available in Forest Health guidebooks, the Provincial Forest Health Strategy and other MoFR documents.

6.1 Bark BeetlesThere are three provincial designations or emergency bark beetle management areas (EBBMA) reflecting different levels of infestation and management effort:The provincial forest health strategy identifies the three broad zones of management as: Aggressive management (populations are managed down to endemic levels), Containment (populations are held static) and Salvage/Limited action (minimal active management of populations).

Within each broad zone there are a possible four strategies: Suppression/Prevention, Holding Action, Salvage, and Monitor (formerly described as abandon).


Table 4 Bark Beetle Strategy Definitions

Strategy Where Strategy Applicable Strategic Objective and Performance Measure

Prevention Large areas of uninfected or lightly infested timber with a moderate to high hazard rating

Reduce the susceptibility/attractiveness of a stand to bark beetles

Suppression Area with low level of infestation or incipient populations where levels are building and where resources are available for aggressive management actions

Maintain area in a relatively uninfected state. Treat >80% of polygons within one year

Holding Action Infestations in areas where resources or access are unavailable now, but are expected in the future

Maintain an existing outbreak at a relatively static level over the short term. Treat 50-79% of polygons within one year

Salvage Areas where management efforts cannot reduce the beetle population, harvesting capacity and/or access is available

Delineate affected areas and salvage log stands to recover losses and rehabilitate. Other management objectives take precedent. Treat <50 % of polygons within one year

Monitor Inaccessible areas or where management activities are restricted.

Satisfy other resource objectives or access concerns, some timber loss accepted

A Beetle Management Unit (BMU) is a planning and reporting unit for operational beetle management. Resource management objectives should be consistent throughout the unit. BMU boundaries are usually the same as the boundaries of Landscape Units (LU) due to the availability of the spatial and attribute data necessary for setting the BMU strategy. BMU strategies need to be reviewed annually based on the most current annual overview survey information. BMU boundaries will be synonymous with LU boundaries for managing and reporting on suppression activities for spruce and Douglas-fir bark beetle.

Table 5 on the following page shows the incidence of beetle from the regional 2006 overview flights by BMU in hectares of intensity of occurrence.


Table 5 Douglas-fir and Spruce bark beetle in hectares by

Beetle Management Unit

BMU (LU) Severity Forest Health Factor Total IBD (ha) IBS (ha)

Big Valley Trace 7 7Bowron Trace 1,515 1,515Chine Trace 55 55Cunningham Trace 1,417 1,417Gerimi Moderate 51 51

Jack of Clubs Light 2 346Trace 344

LightningTrace 175

1,214Light 55Moderate 984

Pantage Light 130 130Pelican Light 64 64Sandy Trace 587 587Swift Trace 3 3Umiti Trace 25 25

UmitiTrace 462

742Light 9Moderate 271

Victoria Light 532 574Moderate 42

VictoriaTrace 827

915Light 20Moderate 68

WhittierTrace 179

397Light 97 Moderate 121

WillowTrace 5,464

7,325Light 545Moderate 1,316

Total Hectares 2,464 12,903 15,367

Note: The table above includes FHF contained in Provincial Parks. The table does not contain FHF that are covered by Tree Farm Licence.

Susceptibility and risk rating data for Douglas–fir and spruce beetle were provided by the Southern Interior Region, Forest Health Specialists. They used the models developed by


L. Safranyik and T. L. Shore of the Canadian Forest Service Pacific Forestry Centre to produce the spatial information. This work is contained in Table 6 in the Appendix and indicates the number of hectares of susceptible stands by BMU risk rating.

6.1.1 Spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis)Spruce beetle normally has a two-year life cycle; however a one-year cycle can occur. When this happens, the result is double the beetle flight numbers. Spruce beetle is currently the species of greatest concern due to rapid spread high attack ratios and shortest “shelf life” of damaged timber due to ecotypes where this beetle is located. Spruce beetle normally attacks downed trees and logging debris. When the populations are rising they will attack live trees causing widespread mortality. The majority of the infestation detected in the aerial overview survey is located in TFL 52, which is not part of this forest health strategy. BCTS ground probing in the Whittier, Big Valley and Gerimi BMUs has identified extensive green attack in standing timber. West Fraser Mills Ltd. is finding similar results in their operating areas (Lightning, Victoria and Willow BMUs).

QTSA Tactic: Aggressive Suppression action.

The objective is to address 80-100% of the known sites. Activities include: aerial surveys, low level orthophotos ground probing and walkthroughs, harvest, and single tree removal, fall, buck and burn infested stems, ensure timely slash disposal, incorporate trap trees, and beetle pheromone baiting.

The Regional Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Update Note #7b- December 2006 makes recommendations regarding management of biodiversity and bark beetles in spruce stands in Old Growth Management Areas and other constrained areas.

6.1.2 Douglas-fir beetle (Dendroctonus pseudotsugae)Douglas-fir beetle takes one year to complete its life cycle. This beetle normally attacks downed trees and logging debris, however, when populations increase or during periods of drought, they will also attack and kill standing live trees. Douglas-fir beetle is predominantly located in the central portion of the TSA, in the Sub-Boreal Spruce (SBS) dw 1; SBS dw 2; SBS mh and Interior Douglas-fir (IDF) biogeoclimatic zone. It is of particular concern due to its prevalence in the Mule Deer Winter Ranges, where preservation of closed-canopy Douglas-fir stands is paramount, and to a lesser extent in Old Growth Management Areas. Sanitation and control tactics in these areas must be consistent with existing direction from the biodiversity and the Mule Deer committees. Where 2006 orthophotos identified Douglas-fir beetle, printed maps at 1:5,000 scale were provided to the Woodlot holders.

QTSA Tactic: Aggressive Suppression action.

The objective is to address 80-100% of the known sites. Activities include: aerial surveys, low level orthophotos ground probing and walkthroughs, harvest, and single tree


removal, fall, buck and burn infested stems, ensure timely slash disposal, incorporate trap trees, and beetle pheromone baiting.

The Regional Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Update Note #7b- December 2006 makes recommendations regarding management of biodiversity and bark beetles in Douglas-fir stands in Old Growth Management Areas and other constrained areas such as Mule Deer Winter Range.

6.1.3 Mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae)Mountain pine beetle has been assigned a high priority for salvage harvesting. It is no longer practical to continue with suppression activities in the midst of an epidemic situation. Lodgepole pine is still the dominate species in the TSA. Of immediate concern is the accelerated spread and high attack levels not only in older age classes but also in young managed stands that were expected to mature and become the mid-term timber supply.

The general strategy in the “salvage” zone is to harvest affected stands before their economic value is degraded while managing current and future forest values in the context of sustainability. This strategy is not an option in young stands. In young stands impacted by MPB, we need to assess the impact and develop a recovery strategy.

QTSA Tactic: Salvage action.

The Quesnel Forest District Enhanced Retention Strategy – February 2006 provides stand level biodiversity guidance for large scale salvage of mountain pine beetle impacted stands.

6.1.4 Western balsam bark beetle (Dryocoetes confusus)The western balsam bark beetle trace and low attack levels are extensive, and includes the Mount Tom caribou habitat area. The life cycle of this pest is normally two years, however, climatic conditions are favourable, and the cycle can be completed in one year. This can cause extensive tree mortality in stands containing a large percentage of the preferred host. Normally, however, less than 5% of a stand is attacked in a single season, with the damage usually scattered throughout the stand. The Field Guide to Forest Pest in BC states that “The extent of an infestation is difficult to determine as a result of overlapping lifecycles, a lack of telltale pitch tubes and the fact that the majority of the attack occur above 2 m on the bole.” The brick-red foliage of the attacked tree may be retained for up to five years.

QTSA Tactic: Containment and ground-truth the extent of the infestation. Harvesting the current attack is a feasible means of control.

6.1.5 Ips Engraver Beetle (Ips spp.)The most critical attacks occur in pole size to mature lodgepole pine. Two or three generations of beetle may be produced each year. Ips engravers usually attack only dead, dieing or damaged trees. Heavy populations can build up in windthrow and slash, posing a threat to healthy green trees. Ips damage often occurs at the edges of cut blocks, and


may be confused with mountain pine beetle. Ips beetle can be distinguished from other bark beetles by their gallery patterns and the distinct shape of the adult.

QTSA Tactic: Monitor stands for population build up. Dispose of slash in a timely manner.

6.2 Defoliators

6.2.1 Western spruce budworm (Choristoneura occidentalis)Western spruce budworm is an insect that defoliates Douglas-fir. This pest is of high significance as it not only has the potential to cause mortality in the current growing stock but also stresses the Douglas-fir trees, increasing future vulnerability to bark beetle attack. No Western spruce budworm stands have been detected in the TSA however evidence has been found just south of the district boundary in the McLeese Lake area.

QTSA Tactic: Containment and treat moderate and severely defoliated high-value stands of Douglas-fir with Bacillus thurigiensis var. Kurstani (B.t.k.), coordinated by the Southern Interior Region.

6.2.2 Two-year budworm (Choristoneura biennis)This pest attacks subalpine fir and spruce, of all ages. It is important to consider because these two species are important for our mid-term timber supply. Tree mortality can occur after several successive years of severe defoliation, particularly on immature or suppressed trees. Other damage includes top-kill (resulting in stem defects), reduced seed production due to damaged cones, and height and volume loss. In 2006, from the aerial overview, approximately 20,000 hectares of Two-year budworm were detected in the district and 17,000 hectares were detected in TFL 52.

QTSA Tactic: Containment, treat moderate and severely defoliated high-value stands with Bacillus thurigiensis var. Kurstani (B.t.k.), coordinated by the Southern Interior Region.

6.2.3 Forest Tent Caterpillar (Malacosma disstria)Occasionally deciduous trees will be attacked by the Forest Tent Caterpillar. The larvae feed on opening buds and leaves in the spring causing defoliated trees. Significant tree mortality has not been recorded. Severely defoliated trees usually re-foliated in mid-summer. Outbreaks are not uncommon and seem to be cyclic, every 10 years or so, with an outbreak lasting three to five years. Approximately 33 hectares were detected last year.

QTSA: Monitor outbreaks and re-foliation response of trees.

6.2.4 Gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar)The Gypsy moth is not native to BC. It is an introduced pest that has significant economic implications if it becomes established in this province. It was first discovered in B.C. in 1978. It has more than 300 host plants. This pest is very high on the


provincial and federal priority list though none have been reported in the district. An outbreak brings potential international trade restrictions. It has the potential to become a major forest pest and serious threat to urban shade trees and ornamental.

The eggs can be transported on vehicles and in particular recreational vehicles travelling from an area of infestation to other areas of the province. A number of infestations have been found and treated in on Vancouver Island, Gulf Islands and the lower mainland.

QTSA Tactic: Monitor by placing pheromone traps at various recreational sites throughout the District. Eradicate known infested sites with Bacillus thurigiensis var. Kurstani (B.t.k.), coordinated by the Southern Interior Region.

6.3 Branch and Stem Rusts

6.3.1 Hard pine stem rusts: commandra blister rust (Cronartium commandrae), stalactiform blister rust (Cronartium coleosporiodies) and western gall rust (Endocronartium harknessii)

The hard pine stem rusts impact young pine forests that will form our timber supply. Locally, these rusts can cause mortality, unacceptable damage to stems and plantation failure. Gall rust is endemic throughout most pine stands. There are a few spots in the vicinity of Beavermouth and Nyland Lake where the incidence has become more than endemic. Commandra has been evident in the Snaking River and Udy Creek areas.

QTSA Tactic: Containment and treat detected infestation areas in accordance with provincial best management practices and guidebooks. Free growing and post free growing surveys will assist in providing the locations of infestation areas. Species mix will help reduce the incidence or stem rusts. It is important to start tracking the FHF incidence in a database.

6.3.2 Dwarf Mistletoe on Lodgepole pine (Arceuthobium americanum)Mistletoe causes swelling on braches and stems. Heavily infected trees suffer reduced height diameter growth hence volume reductions. Mistletoe is present in many pine stands.

QTSA Tactic: Aggressive Suppression action.When mistletoe is noted in the understory pre or post harvest, the site is usually treated by cutting or knocking down all post harvest stems less than three meters in height.

6.4 Root Disease

6.4.1 Armillaria (Armillaria ostoyae)Generally in the TSA armillaria is restricted to a few scattered trees. This root disease is spread by root contact e Incidence of very small armillaria spots have been reported in a few areas in the district (500 Road, Ernst Road and Deep Creek).


QTSA Tactic: Monitor and treat as prescribed in best management practices in the RSI.

6.4.2 Tomentosus (Inonotus tomentosus)Stand level symptoms of Tomentosus is difficult to identify. It is spreads through root contact. It is widely disturbed in the SBS BEC zones in spruce stands. There has been some evidence of tomentosus identified in the 10 Mile Lake area.

QTSA Tactic: Monitor and treat as prescribed in best management practices in the RSI.

6.5 Woody Tissue Feeders

6.5.1 Warren’s root collar weevil (Hylobius warreni)As our mature pine forests die, this pest is moving into adjacent plantations. Lodgepole pine may be completely girdled at the root collar and die. Older trees are often partially girdled at the root collar, and may be completely girdled around some of the roots; however, no mortality results.

In addition to direct mortality, damaged trees may suffer growth loss and increased susceptibility to root rot, blue-stain fungi, windthrow, and snow press. This is of particular concern to our mid-term timber supply.

QTSA Tactic: Contain and treat individual blocks to maintain stocking. The latest research suggests that planting spruce near timber edges may discourage the weevil from entering the plantation.

6.6 Abiotic Injuries

6.6.1 Weather related Forest HealthFrost, drought, snow press, flood damage and other weather related events are difficult to predict. However preventative measures can be taken that recognize the factors that we can be controlled to mitigate the problem (e. g. species selection or mix, stand tending (brushing), understanding the silvics of the species).

Catastrophic events such as wildfire killed 21 000 hectares of lodgepole pine in three large fires in 2006. The stands had previously been impacted by mountain pine beetle and resulted in erratic fire behaviour.

QTSA Tactic: Salvage harvest merchantable timber within one year of the catastrophic event.

6.6.2 WindthrowAll species are vulnerable to strong winds. Scattered windthrow (blowdown) in Douglas-fir stands and leave trees during wind events have the potential to trigger substantial increases in infestations of Douglas-fir beetle. Windthrow patches should be addressed


promptly to minimize the expansion of beetle populations, especially in the vicinity of mule deer winter ranges and old growth management areas.

Blowdown spruce and Douglas-fir trees attract bark beetles. It may be appropriate in some areas to leave blowdown trees on the ground until after the beetle flight and utilize them as trap trees. Windthrown trees should be removed or burned prior to the beetle flight of the following year so that attacked blowdown trees do not contribute to an increase in beetle populations.

QTSA Tactic: Aggressive Suppression action. Harvest Douglas-fir and spruce blowdown within one year of windthrow event to reduce opportunities for bark beetle build-up.

6.7 Animal damage

6.7.1 Hare and VoleHare and voles can cause damage in plantations.

QTSA Tactic: Monitor and recommend treatment when required.

6.8 Other Forest Health Agents

6.8.1 Pest in young managed standsMid-term timber supply will come from our present post free growing stands. Anecdotal observations and scientific surveys of forest health factors in young stands are indicating that not all our managed stands are performing as expected. An emphasis on the health of young stands as it relates to mid-term timber supply is worthy of a detailed study in the district.

A survey assessment of young managed stands is proposed for this field season to better understand the forest health implications that Mountain pine beetle, Ips and other insects, stem rusts, defoliators, root diseases and abiotic agents are having on our post free growing stands. This survey is intended to sample stands that have been declared free growing with particular emphasis on forest health factors. An attempt will be made to replicate the original free growing survey on a given area. Random sample areas will be selected over a number of BEC units in the district.

The results of this study should help us to better understand and make recommendations concerning regeneration practices, and productivity of immature stands that may mitigate timber losses in order to stabilize the mid-term timber supply in the TSA.

QTSA Tactic: Monitor and recommend treatment when required.

6.8.2 Remaining Forest Health AgentsThe remaining forest health agents on the priority list will be in containment status and be addressed in accordance with the provincial best management practices and applicable guidebooks.


7 Reporting and Tracking

The 2007/08 Business Area Service Plan, Targets and Operational Resources that the district report to the Southern Interior Region on a quarterly basis Internal (IPM) and Corporate Performance Measures (CPM).

GIS forest health layer that incorporates the annual aerial overview information with the action taken by the licensees.

The expectation for the district is to build a system to detect and monitor and track forest health agents in a database. This system will be in a GIS format and the information will reside in a forest health mapping layer.

Monitor and review the previous year’s accomplishments.

8 Map Links and Reference Material

8.1 The aerial overview maps for 2006 are available on the Quesnel Forest District ftp site at http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DQU/external/!publish/District%20Composites/Forest%20Health/

Maps showing the Emergency Bark Beetle Management Areas designated as “aggressive” zones for control of spruce beetle and Douglas-fir beetle are available. The maps can be accessed at http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/mountain_pine_beetle/maps/ebbma/index.htm

9 Reference Material

BC Ministry of Forests. 1995. Bark Beetle Management Guidebook – October 1995. Ministry of Forests; Ministry of Environment co-publication.

BC Ministry of Forests and Canadian Forest Service. 1999. Field Guide to Forest Damage in British Columbia joint publication number 17. BC Ministry of Forests and Forestry Canada.

BC Ministry of Forests. 2003. Provincial Bark Beetle Management Technical Implementation Guidelines Spring 2003. BC Ministry of Forests publication.

BC Ministry of Forests and Range. 2007. Forest Health Implementation Strategy - March 2007. Ministry of Forests and Range Forest Practices Branch, Victoria B.C.

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/mountain_pine_beetle/maps/ebbma/index.htm

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DQU/external/!publish/District%20Composites/Forest%20Health/%0D

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DQU/external/!publish/District%20Composites/Forest%20Health/%0D


BC Ministry of Forests and Range, updated 2007. TSA Forest Health and Tactical Plans BC Ministry of Forest and Range, Forest Practices Branch, Victoria B.C.

http:www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/health/fhdata/TSA_strategy.htm

BC Ministry of Forests and Range. 2007. FRPA General Bulletin number 11 Managing Forest Health under the Forest and Range Practices Act February 28, 2007. Ministry of Forest and Range, Forest Practices Branch, Victoria B.C.

Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Committee. 2006. An Integrated Strategy for Management of Biodiversity and Bark Beetles in Douglas-fir and Spruce Stands update 7b. Interagency (ILMB) Cariboo Manager’s Committee (CCLUP). Williams Lake B.C.

Safranyik, L. and T.L. Shore. 1999. Draft susceptibility and risk rating system for the Spruce beetle, Dendroctonus rufipennis. Canadian Forest Service. Pacific Forest Centre.

Shore, T. L. and L. Safranyik. 2000. A susceptibility and risk rating system for Douglas-fir beetle. Canadian Forest Service. Pacific Forest Centre.

Westfall, Joan. 2006 Summary of Forest Health Conditions in British Columbia . Ministry of Forests and Range, Forest Practices Branch.


10 Appendix

Appendix

Table 6 Susceptibility rating for Spruce and Douglas-fir bark beetle in hectares by BMU

Hazard Class Nil Low Low

moderate Moderate High Very high

% 0-5 6-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 80+

Spruce Beetle Douglas-Fir Beetle

Spruce Beetle Douglas Fir Beetle

Beetle Management

Unit

Hazard Class (20%)

HectaresHazard Class (20%)

HectaresBeetle

Management Unit

Hazard Class (20%)


Hectares

Antler

NIL 46,816 NIL 47,104

Baezaeko

NIL 52,666 NIL 82,604VL 8 VL 0 VL 5,422 VL 425L 37 L 0 L 10,061 L 84

LM 143 LM 0 LM 12,736 LM 14M 95 M 0 M 1,864 M 45H 5 H 0 H 422 H 14

VH 0 VH 0 VH 14 VH 0

Baker

NIL 42,733 NIL 82,980

Betty Wendle

NIL 29,821 NIL 27,832VL 10,232 VL 7,100 VL 4 VL 148L 19,722 L 2,750 L 16 L 37

LM 16,404 LM 989 LM 1,088 LM 0M 4,276 M 263 M 3,382 M 0H 637 H 42 H 159 H 6,453

VH 119 VH 0 VH 0 VH 0

Big Valley

NIL 19,521 NIL 19,551

Bowron

NIL 25,397 NIL 47,910VL 1 VL 0 VL 370 VL 0L 9 L 0 L 4,690 L 456

LM 18 LM 0 LM 6,693 LM 0M 4 M 0 M 8,957 M 0H 0 H 0 H 2,524 H 265

Chine

NIL 32,298 NIL 61,138

Clisbako

NIL 51,718 NIL 63,985VL 2,264 VL 16 VL 3,015 VL 56L 12,268 L 4 L 6,478 L 0

LM 12,012 LM 0 LM 2,628 LM 0M 1,924 M 38 M 193 M 0H 428 H 0 H 9 H 0




Beetle Manageme

nt Unit

Hazard Class (20%)


HectaresBeetle

Management Unit

Hazard Class (20%)


Hectares

Coglistiko

NIL 40,555 NIL 55,255

Cunningham

NIL 10,986 NIL 30,063

VL 1,090 VL 0 VL 1,222 VL 1,703

L 6,162 L 0 L 5,431 L 2,428

LM 6,015 LM 0 LM 11,975 LM 1,855

M 1,334 M 0 M 5,781 M 443

H 99 H 0 H 1,090 H 83


Downton

NIL 13,303 NIL 14,793

Dragon

NIL 57,655 NIL 42,155

VL 31 VL 0 VL 8,972 VL 28,156

L 1,182 L 0 L 13,244 L 18,460

LM 278 LM 0 LM 10,513 LM 3,288

M 0 M 0 M 4,021 M 2,721

H 0 H 0 H 590 H 294


Eliguk

NIL 25,943 NIL 39,699

Euchiniko

NIL 25,385 NIL 58,173

VL 974 VL 0 VL 8,087 VL 631

L 6,401 L 0 L 10,646 L 119

LM 5,086 LM 0 LM 11,324 LM 33

M 1,026 M 0 M 2,991 M 24

H 269 H 0 H 554 H 25

VH 0 VH 0 VH 18 VH 0Gerimi

NIL 17,782 NIL 24,898Indianpoint

NIL 16,167 NIL 20,104VL 2,602 VL 10,565 VL 1 VL 0


L 6,414 L 5,030 L 794 L 0

LM 8,660 LM 2,033 LM 2 LM 0

M 5,067 M 561 M 2,571 M 0

H 1,125 H 0 H 614 H 47

VH 146 VH 0 VH 0 VH 0

Jack of Clubs

NIL 21,463 NIL 26,248

Kluskus

NIL 43,180 NIL 77,233

VL 379 VL 0 VL 1,683 VL 0

L 860 L 0 L 1,005 L 0

LM 2,149 LM 0 LM 14,779 LM 0

M 1,162 M 0 M 6,264 M 0

H 235 H 0 H 322 H 0

Lightning

NIL 20,688 NIL 35,764

Marmot

NIL 33,937 NIL 49,992

VL 20 VL 69 VL 2,880 VL 1,480

L 835 L 54 L 6,846 L 705

LM 6,716 LM 0 LM 7,689 LM 118

M 6,301 M 0 M 1,355 M 482

H 1,316 H 0 H 198 H 130




Beetle Manageme

nt Unit

Hazard Class (20%)


HectaresBeetle

Management Unit

Hazard Class (20%)


Hectares

Mathew

NIL 27,452 NIL 42,476Narcosli

NIL 47,538 NIL 38,591

VL 1,049 VL 359 VL 8,535 VL 17,280

L 4,155 L 1,343 L 10,295 L 17,424

LM 6,111 LM 194 LM 8,096 LM 1,910M 4,678 M 14 M 2,222 M 1,522


H 886 H 0 H 152 H 140

VH 54 VH 0 VH 31 VH 0

NIL 49,868 NIL 75,628 NIL 4,402 NIL 68,559

Pan

VL 2,622 VL 0

Ramsey

VL 7,818 VL 5,911

L 14,206 L 0 L 10,802 L 2,796

LM 6,922 LM 0 LM 11,452 LM 703

M 1,830 M 0 M 3,484 M 564

H 178 H 0 H 621 H 46

NIL 43,324 NIL 76,926 NIL 43,989 NIL 62,315

Pelican

VL 9,994 VL 1,224

Snaking

VL 9,185 VL 6,020

L 11,507 L 198 L 11,014 L 2,012

LM 11,720 LM 15 LM 5,312 LM 74

M 1,327 M 165 M 1,076 M 176

H 357 H 0 H 89 H 67

NIL 27,443 NIL 29,759 NIL 33,117 NIL 64,317

Sandy

VL 61 VL 0

Tibbles

VL 9,213 VL 221

L 75 L 156 L 12,701 L 74

LM 1,049 LM 3,043 LM 7,591 LM 12

M 1,646 M 0 M 1,819 M 10

H 2,761 H 77 H 196 H 3

NIL 29,412 NIL 36,622 NIL 39,813 NIL 68,633Swift

VL 36 VL 0 Twan VL 9,119 VL 159

L 1,723 L 35 L 9,948 L 43

LM 4,350 LM 0 LM 7,943 LM 0

M 1,101 M 0 M 1,725 M 0

H 30 H 0 H 289 H 0VH 6 VH 0 VH 0 VH 0


NIL 41,392 NIL 51805 NIL 20,327 NIL 13951

Toil

VL 240 VL 0

Victoria

VL 4,219 VL 10235

L 5,846 L 0 L 3,743 L 4038

LM 3,963 LM 0 LM 1,412 LM 606

M 306 M 0 M 309 M 1020

H 59 H 0 H 13 H 170



Beetle Management

Unit

Hazard

Class (20%

)


HectaresBeetle

Management Unit

Hazard Class (20%)


Hectares

Umiti

VL 4,580 VL 9,012 VL 1596 VL 1434

L 7,644 L 4,597 L 116 L 2071

LM 3,527 LM 784 LM 1,774 LM 691

M 3,226 M 141 M 2,328 M 37

H 672 H 3 H 2,353 H 0

VH 109 VH 0 VH 0 VH 0

Wentworth

NIL 53,744 NIL 65,129 NIL 31,776 NIL 40,071

VL 1,205 VL 757 VL 3,997 VL 12,411

L 6,993 L 349 L 11,156 L 6,785

LM 4,147 LM 111 LM 10,469 LM 2,067

M 387 M 27 M 3,726 M 493

H 35 H 138 H 699 H 9


Willow

NIL 30,050 NIL 47,644

VL 541 VL 0

L 758 L 0


LM 7,557 LM 0

M 7,615 M 0

H 1,097 H 0

VH 26 VH 0

Susceptibility ratings in this table include area within provincial parks in the TSA but do not include area within the TFL.

Follow the link below to the .pdf fileshttp://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DQU/external/!publish/District%20Composites/Forest%20Health/pdf%20map%20files/

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DQU/external/!publish/District%20Composites/Forest%20Health/pdf%20map%20files/

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DQU/external/!publish/District%20Composites/Forest%20Health/pdf%20map%20files/

Documents

Quesnel Timber Supply Area - British Columbia Health Strategy... · Web viewSevere Bare branch tips and completely defoliated tops, most trees sustaining more than 50% total defoliation