Management Options for Lodgepole Pine in Southern Interior British Columbia.

Management Options for Lodgepole Pine

in Southern Interior British Columbia

How do we manage lodgepole pine in BC?

It depends on where you are!!!!!

Major Forested Interior ZonesSBPS – light blueIDF – OrangeSBS – light purpleICH – yellowMS – brownESSF – Dark purple

Biogeoclimatic Zones of British Columbia

Wash IdahoMontana

Zone 50 year site index (ft)

Mean annual ppt (in)

Mean annual temp (F)

SBPS 49.2 – 59.0 13.2 – 22.8 33 – 37

IDF 39.4 – 72.2 11.8 – 29.5 35 – 49

SBS 59.0 – 78.7 17.3 – 35.4 35 – 41

ICH 59.0 – 78.7 19.7 – 47.2 36 – 48

ESSF 39.4 – 78.7 15.7 – 86.6 28 – 36

Characteristics of Biogeoclimatic Zones

Management Challenges

• IDF and SBPS have growing season moisture deficits and frosts but have less vegetation competition

• SBS and ICH are warmer and wetter with higher growing sites but vegetation competition is a concern

• ESSF is cold, usually wet, and can have serious vegetation problems combined with snow press

• Beetle is everywhere!

Regeneration Methods

• Drier zones (IDF and SBPS) natural regeneration is often used although some sites are planted

• Wetter areas (SBS, ICH, and ESSF) usually promptly planted to mitigate vegetation competition

• Most sites are clearcut but some research using group selection has been quite successful.

Silviculture Treatments

• Site preparation

• Brushing

• Density Management

• Fertilization

• Alternatives to Clearcutting

Site Preparation

• Commonly microsite planting has been used operationally

• Site preparation is used on some sites to both ensure survival and enhance early growth. Successful treatments by ecological grouping are:– Dry (IDF SPBS) linear trenching (Ripper Tooth, Disc trenching,

etc) – Moist sites (SBS ICH) site preparation treatments have had

minimal effect with some improvement from vegetation removal (Leno, V-Plow, Disc trenching, etc)

– Cold and wet (ESSF) – vegetation control and mounding (excavator, Disc trenching)

IDF Site Preparation

Pl Height: 16 years

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

SBS IDF

Hei

ght

(cm

)

CHSLenoDTRTRPVP

**

*

**

SBS Site Preparation

V-Plow

Ripper Tooth

Leno

ESSF Site Preparation

Pl Height (ESSF)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

5th yr 10th yr

Hei

ght

(cm

)

CCWHHWMMWBBW

*

* *

* * **

020406080

100120140160180200

5th yr 10th yr

Hei

ght (

cm)

CCWHHWMMWBBW

Spruce Height (ESSF)

*

**

12 year old pine 12 year old spruce

ESSF

Brushing

• Try to avoid by using site preparation and/or quick planting of fast growing species i.e. pine

• Limited use of herbicides due to poor public acceptance and problems in avoiding streams

• Manual methods more common (occasional use of sheep which is tricky with pine)

• Removal of broadleaves from lodgepole pine stands is an ongoing discussion.

To Brush or not to Brush?

~ 12 year old standIn the SBS

~15 year old stand In the IDF

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9>10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

>10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9>10

He

igh

t (cm

)

12-13 17-18 2 2 -2 3 ye a rs

(

22-23

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9>10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

>10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9>10

Tall aspen density classes (x 1000 stems/ha)

He

igh

t (cm

)

13-17 15-19 20-24

SBS

IDF

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Gro

und-

leve

l dia

met

er (

cm)

13-17 years 15-19 years 20-24 years

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9>10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

>10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9>10

Gro

und-

leve

l dia

met

er (

cm)

12-13 years 17-18 years 22-23 years

SBS

IDF

Comeau et al 2005

Changes in Light Intensity by Ecological Zone

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Relative Density

DIF

N1

.5

BWBS SBS SBPS IDF

BWBS SBS SBPS IDF

IDF 10 yrsplanted

SBPS 12 yrsSBS 18 yrs

Density Management

• Very little done in the last five years due to Mountain Pine Beetle activity

• Operational targets were usually 648 to 1012 stems per acre.

• Recently the maximum density allowed has increased to 10,121 stems per acre

Fertilization

• Most pine are N and S deficient and many are also deficient in B

• A common operational blend is urea and ammonium sulphate (35-0-0-10S), which delivered ~200 kg N/ha and 58 kg S/ha and if B is needed 1.5-3 kg B/ha is added.

• No fertilization has occurred over the last five years due to the beetle

35% 48% 50%

39% 63%63%

0

10

20

30

40

50

600 1100 1600 600 1100 1600

Stand density (st/ha)

Vol

ume

incr

emen

t (cm

3/tr

ee x

10-3

)

NF F

66%66%

38%53%52%

34%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

600 1100 1600 600 1100 1600

Stand density (st/ha)S

tand

vol

ume

incr

emen

t (m3

/ha)

NF F

1-5 years

6-10 years

1-5 years

6-10 years

Optimal fertilization trial

From: Brockley R.P 2005600 sph = 243 st/ac1100 sph = 445 st/ac1600 sph = 648 st/ac

Fertilized vs Unfertilized Stand

Increased diameter growth but not height growth

From: Brockley R.P 2005

Height Repression

Height growth response on 36 year old unspaced pine

Pre-fertilization

3 years after fertilization

Pre-fertilization 3 years after fertilization

Fertilizing 70 year old pine

Alternatives to Clearcutting

• Group Selection methods have been attempted in various ecosystems

• Some examples are Quesnel Highland (ESSF), Date Creek (ICH), Satah Mountain (SBPS)

8 Year old pine

At this elevation pine is alive in only the largest openings.

High elevationESSF

13 year old pine

Beetle Attack!!!!!

Summary

• Site preparation: dry – reduce moisture stress, moist – reduce vegetation competition, high - warmth

• Brushing: consider vigour of the competing vegetation

• Density management: higher densities for more stand volume??

• Fertilization: increases in diameter versus increases in height

• Alternatives to Clearcutting: optimal gap size will vary depending on where you are!