Document Details
 |
Title |
Ecosystem Representation Analysis Update in the Prince George Timber Supply Area and Tree Farm License 30 | ||||||||
Author |
CanFor | ||||||||
Date |
2009 | ||||||||
Abstract |
The purpose of this study is to update the existing Ecosystem Representation Analyses for the Prince George Timber Supply Area and TFL30 into one aggregated analysis. Maintaining ecosystem representation in non-harvestable areas is a strategy for protecting the array of species that we have no knowledge of and maintaining unmanaged benchmarks for monitoring the ecological effects of human activities. This analysis supports the Sustainable Forest Management and certification initiatives adopted by Canfor. Wells (2009) provided the coarse filter ecosystem groups, in which the site series of the study area were aggregated based on relative similarities of their indicator plant communities. The groups were also matched to those in the Mackenzie and Quesnel Timber Supply Areas so that a uniform strategy can be applied to all three areas. Using a netdown modified from the Prince George TSA Type 2 Silviculture Analysis (Forest Ecosystem Solutions Ltd. 2007) and TFL30 SFM Forecasting (Forest Ecosystem Solutions Ltd. 2006), the forested land base was divided into the Non-Harvestable Land Base (NHLB) and the Timber Harvesting Land Base (THLB). The proportion of each ecosystem group in the Non-Harvestable Land Base was measured. Other analyses include an assessment of interior NHLB (the amount of the NHLB that is at least 50m from the THLB), representation by licensee operating areas and in the Excluded Land Base, and comparisons of the attributes of the NHLB and THLB (pine leading stands and site index). Companion maps are included with this report that show the spatial distribution of the ecosystem groups and the harvesting constraints of the NHLB. The Non-Harvestable Land Base occupies 33% of the forested land base of the Prince George Timber Supply Area. Of this percentage, 7% occurs in parks, 5% in caribou and mule deer habitat, 2% in Riparian Reserve Zones, 7% in ESA and unstable terrain, 1% in OGMA, preservation VQO and physically inoperable areas, and 11% in economically inoperable areas. The results of this study were integrated into a preliminary rating of relative ecological risk associated with ecosystem representation. The eventual establishment of management priorities would also consider the individual indicators including: responsibility, percent NHLB, abundance, and beetle outbreak, along with a qualitative assessment of the ecological context and function of these groups. Based on this evaluation, ecosystem groups can be ranked, and management objectives developed which should include special operating procedures for rare site series/groups and identification of important riparian types. Additionally, the development of management objectives should be done considering any trade-offs for priorities that may occur. This report provides a base of information and theory that will allow forest managers to start to develop their ecosystem conservation priorities and management objectives. These objectives will ultimately allow for the integration of the ecosystem representation results into the larger Sustainable Forest Management framework by assessing trade-offs with other ecological, economic, and social indicators. | ||||||||
Report Number |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
