Forestry FAQS (BC, Canada)
(under construction)
BACKGROUND
British Columbia is known for having one of the most elaborated Forestry Management Systems in the world. This system leads to tight practices that aim to protect the natural and cultural environments, as well as the renewability-sustainability of the Province's forests.
But with it come challenges. It can be hard to link the objectives and laws that regulate the different components of the Forest Management System (soil, faunal, riparian, archaeological, silvicultural, economical) with the mapping and permitting process.
This is intended as a guide for some putative frequent questions. Focus is on the mapping and permitting processs for the different kinds of timber harvesting tenures.
๐๐๐ธโ๐ป๐ธโ๐ป๐ ๐โ๐๐๐
๐๐ค๐ฌ ๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฎ ๐๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐จ ๐๐ค๐๐จ ๐ ๐๐ช๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ค๐๐ ๐ฃ๐๐๐?
It is sometimes believed that stocking standards and soil disturbance limits are the determining factors.
According to the FPPR, there need to be as many standards units (SUs) as:
regeneration dates
free growing dates
soil disturbance limits
stocking standards
free growing height for each species that contributes to establishing a free growing stand on the cutblock
Regeneration and Free Growing dates depend on the harvest commencement date. The other determinants are independent of harvest timing.
As per the FPPR, SUs needs to be at least as many as the number of different combinations of all the elements in the FPPR list.
๐๐ฅ๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ก ๐๐ญ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ค๐ ๐ ๐๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ก๐ฎ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ ๐ ๐๐ช๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ค๐๐
An SU is an area attributed with stocking information: rules for post-harvest regeneration.
By definition, then, the extent of a Standards Unit polygon is that of the Net Area to be Regenerated/Reforested (NAR). The NAR can be a subset of the harvested area, as for excluding permanent access structures where regeneration is inhibited.
In practice, it is the Forest Cover to be submitted post-harvest that provides the detailed spatial extent of Not Sufficiently Restocked (NSR) areas. NSR areas should always be in a SU.
๐๐๐๐ผ โ๐๐ธโ๐
๐๐ค๐ฌ ๐๐ค๐ข๐ฅ๐ก๐๐ญ/๐จ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ก๐ ๐๐ค๐๐จ ๐ ๐จ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ฅ๐ก๐๐ฃ ๐ฃ๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐?
As per the FPPR, a site plan should:
"identify the approximate locations of cutblocks and roads,
be consistent with the forest stewardship plan, this Act and the regulations, and
identify how the intended results or strategies described in the forest stewardship plan apply to the site."
Often, Site Plan maps present significantly more information than what is required by the legislation. Licensees use more integrated documents depicting the relationship between elements such as the layout, terrain, forest cover, and stocking standards.
โ๐๐๐น๐๐โ๐๐
๐พ๐ช๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ค๐๐ : ๐ก๐๐ฉ๐๐ง๐๐ก ๐ซ๐จ ๐ฌ๐ค๐ง๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฝ๐พ, ๐พ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐
Defined literally, a 'cutblock' is an area (block) where timber is harvested (cut).
For timber harvesting and management in British Columbia Crown Land, the 'cutblock' working definition differs from the literal one.
In manuals (e.g., RISS) and legislation (FPPR), 'cutblocks' can include planned non-harvest area.
For example, a Wildlife Tree Retention Area can be located within a cutblock (FPPR).
Thus, 'cutblocks' are used as overarching management areas that can include both planned logging areas and adjacent areas with other objectives. This is a convenience for activity and obligation management.
Of the two cutblock definitions above, which version should be submitted at the cutting permit application stage? It doesn't seem to be set in hard stone. The majority of licensees seem to submit cutblocks wider than the planned harvest area. If only the planned harvest area is submitted, adjacent areas with objectives linked to that cutblock can be dealt with at the opening submission stage.
Even if the submitted cutblock shape depicted only the planned harvest, the actual harvested area could deviate from it due to operational decisions responding to field findings/difficulties.
Post-harvest, the harvested area within the approved cutblock is reported through a Forest Cover Submission.
There can be some confusion in the communication between layout staff, permitting staff, and loggers: in practice, the cutblock may be larger for permitting and reporting than for loggers.
Lastly, across manuals and legislation, multiple forms of the term are used: block, cutblock, cut block. We believe that, presently they all refer to the same.
๐พ๐๐ฃ ๐ ๐๐ช๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ค๐๐ ๐๐๐ซ๐ ๐ข๐ช๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ฅ๐ก๐ ๐๐ค๐ข๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐๐ฉ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ง๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐๐จ๐๐ง๐๐ฉ๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ซ๐๐จ๐ฉ ๐ฅ๐๐๐จ๐๐จ?
Once logging/harvest is initiated, licensees report the disturbance to RESULTS (post-harvest obligations tracking system).
RESULTS uses the harvest commencement date to calculate the regeneration due date, which applies to the entire cutblock (โOpeningโ in RESULTS).
New logging disturbances can be reported in subsequent years, but the corresponding areas are still subject to the same regeneration due date.
That is, the answer is no. All standards units and areas in a cutblock are to be regenerated by the same date, independently of harvest timing and spatiality.
This is a simple example. There are more complex settings (e.g., multi-cutblock openings).