QuesnelTSAForest Health Strategy

Quesnel Timber Supply Area

Forest Health Strategy

2007-2008

original signed
Gerry Grant, R.P.F.
District Manager
Quesnel Forest District
Date: July 13, 2007 ______

1Introduction

2Guiding Principles

3Forest Health Objectives

4Roles and Responsibilities

5TSA Ranking of Importance of Forest Health Factors

6Known Extent of Forest Health Factors

7Strategies and Tactics

7.1Bark Beetles

7.1.1Spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis)

7.1.2Douglas-fir beetle (Dendroctonus pseudotsugae)

7.1.3Mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae)

7.1.4Western balsam bark beetle (Dryocoetes confusus)

7.1.5Ips Engraver Beetle (Ips spp.)

7.2Defoliators

7.2.1Western spruce budworm (Choristoneura occidentalis)

7.2.2Two-year budworm (Choristoneura biennis)

7.2.3Forest Tent Caterpillar (Malacosma disstria)

7.2.4Gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar)

7.3Branch and Stem Rusts

7.3.1Hard pine stem rusts: commandra blister rust (Cronartium commandrae), stalactiform blister rust (Cronartium coleosporiodies) and western gall rust (Endocronartium harknessii)

7.3.2Dwarf Mistletoe on Lodgepole pine (Arceuthobium americanum)

7.4Root Disease

7.4.1Armillaria (Armillaria ostoyae)

7.4.2Tomentosus (Inonotus tomentosus)

7.5Woody Tissue Feeders

7.5.1Warren’s root collar weevil (Hylobius warreni)

7.6Abiotic Injuries

7.6.1Weather related Forest Health

7.6.2Windthrow

7.7Animal damage

7.7.1Hare and Vole

7.8Other Forest Health Agents

7.8.1Pest in young managed stands

7.8.2Remaining Forest Health Agents

8Reporting and Tracking

9Map Links and Reference Material

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

9.1

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

10Reference Material

11Appendix

1Introduction

The Quesnel Forest Health Strategyis strategyrecommends actions to address forest health issues in the QuesnelTimber Supply Area (Quesnel Timber Supply Area (QTSA)). It specifies forest health conditions, issues and strategies unique to the Quesnel TSA. This strategy will serve to guide operational plans and forest health investments by the TSA members and individually through the Forest Development Plan or Forest Stewardship Plan and Forest Investment Account (FIA).

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.

Operations without forest health objectives are not required to follow this guidance. However, it is expected that proposals that vary from this agreed-upon direction will include a rationale to clarify the purpose of the proposal.

2Guiding 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 ConservationSstrategy 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.

3Forest 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.
  • Provide updated strategic guidance for the ongoing forest health management in the Quesnel TSA.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.

4Roles 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 PracticesAct Regulation (FPPRA). The majority of these activities (other than the individual licensee’s obligations)under FRPA)arewould be either the responsibility of the MoFR or can be conducted voluntarily by industry as enhanced or incremental activities presently eligible for Forest Investment Account (FIA) and Forests for Tomorrow (FFT) funding.

5TSA 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:Listing of Forest Health Agents by Priority within the Quesnel TSA

Very High / Spruce beetle (IBS) / Douglas-fir beetle (IBD) / Gypsy moth
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 sWestern spruce budwormpruce budworm (IDW*) / Warren’s root collar weevil (IWW) / Spruce weevil (IWS) / Dwarf mistletoe (DMP)
Low / Windthrow of lodgepole pine (NW) / Tomentosus root disease (DRT) / Armillaria root disease (DRA) / Gypsy moth (IDM)
Very Low / Forest Tent Caterpillar (IDF) / Animal damage (AH;AV) / Atropellis canker (DSA) / Lodgepole pine terminal weevil (IWP)
Other conifer and broadleaf biotic and abiotic factors

6Known Extent of Forest Health Factors

The Quesnel TSA forest health aerial overview information (2006) wasanalyzed 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 FraserRiver from Macalister north to DragonMountain.

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 thelicensees 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 / 257,770
Moderate / 581,492
Severe / 386,141
Very Severe / 54,876
Douglas-fir beetle (IBD) / Trace / 1,622 / 2,465
Light / 629
Moderate / 214
Spruce beetle (IBS) / Trace / 9,438 / 12,902
Light / 826
Moderate / 2,638
Western balsam bark beetle (IBB) / Trace / 25,563 / 25,563
Wildfire (NB) / Severe / 21,119 / 21,119
Windthrow (NW) / Severe / 171 / 171
Defoliation / Two-year budworm (IDB) / Light / 19,862 / 20,143
Moderate / 281
Forest 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.
Moderate / Noticeably thin foliage, top third of many trees severely defoliated, some completely stripped.
Severe / Bare branch tips and completely defoliated tops, most trees sustaining more than 50% total defoliation.

7Strategies 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.

7.1Bark Beetles

There 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 4Bark 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 / 7
Bowron / Trace / 1,515 / 1,515
Chine / Trace / 55 / 55
Cunningham / Trace / 1,417 / 1,417
Gerimi / Moderate / 51 / 51
Jack of Clubs / Light / 2 / 346
Trace / 344
Lightning / Trace / 175 / 1,214
Light / 55
Moderate / 984
Pantage / Light / 130 / 130
Pelican / Light / 64 / 64
Sandy / Trace / 587 / 587
Swift / Trace / 3 / 3
Umiti / Trace / 25 / 25
Umiti / Trace / 462 / 742
Light / 9
Moderate / 271
Victoria / Light / 532 / 574
Moderate / 42
Victoria / Trace / 827 / 915
Light / 20
Moderate / 68
Whittier / Trace / 179 / 397
Light / 97
Moderate / 121
Willow / Trace / 5,464 / 7,325
Light / 545
Moderate / 1,316
Total Hectares / 2,464 / 12,903 / 15,367

Note: The table above includes FHF contained inProvincial 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.

7.1.1Spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis)

Spruce beetle normally has a two-year life cycle; however aone-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 and 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 Themortality. The majority of the infestation detected in the aerial overview survey is located in TFL 52, which ishasnot part of thisits own forest health strategy. BCTS ground probing in the Whittier,BigValleyand 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 orthophotosground probing and walkthroughs, harvest, andsingle tree removal, fall, buck and burninfested 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.

7.1.2Douglas-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 beetleThis agent 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 MuleDeerWinterRanges, 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 fromthe biodiversity and the Mule Deer committees. Where2006 orthophotos identified Douglas-fir beetle, printed maps at 1:5,000 scale were provided to theWoodlot holders.

QTSA Tactic:Aggressive Suppression action.

The objective is to address 80-100% of the known sites. Activities include: aerial surveys, low level orthophotosground 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 MuleDeerWinterRange.

7.1.3Mountain 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.

7.1.4Western balsam bark beetle (Dryocoetes confusus)

The western balsam bark beetle trace and low attack levels are extensive, and includes the MountTom caribou habitat area. The life cycle of this pest is normallytwo years, however, climatic conditions are favourable, and the cycle can be completed in one year. This can causeextensive 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.