long term effect of beetle kill?

[ratherbefishin]

The effect of the beetle kill is easy enough to see-dead timber as far as the eye can see-but what I would like to know is-what will the longer term effect be to the deer-moose-elk habitat-will there be a similar result as after a fire-good browse-and increase of ungalate population-or will the loss of mature timber habitat be detrimental for wintering?Hopefully the biologists have some idea in terms of game management

[moosinaround]

Hopefully if our professional people out there in the many disaplines are doing their jobs properly, our resources such as wildlife water and flora will be managed appropriately. Riparian areas need to be protected, and non target species such as Douglas fir, spruce and Subalpine fir are left alone. Soils need to be protected, as absorption of water from the pine stands has stopped and the water table has risen. Professional foresters, biologists, engineers are all entrusted with the management of these public resources. Unfourtunately CEO's and shareholders are not personally or professionally liable. Pressure on these professional people may be great to push the limits on ethical management, be it forests, wildlife, water or air.

[rocksteady]

The effect of the beetle kill is easy enough to see-dead timber as far as the eye can see-but what I would like to know is-what will the longer term effect be to the deer-moose-elk habitat-will there be a similar result as after a fire-good browse-and increase of ungalate population-or will the loss of mature timber habitat be detrimental for wintering?Hopefully the biologists have some idea in terms of game management

Most of the experts agree that the kill will effect the whole ecosystem, knocking it back to a pioneer state, similar to what a forest fire creates, with the exception of the lack of nutrients being released, like a fire would.....

After a couple years, the sunlight, now able to reach the forest floor will explode with herbs, shrubs, then followed by pioneer species like aspen, will grow and of course, more pine...This should be good for browse for ungulates, but the loss of the mature timber could have a serious impact on the small critters - squirrels, martens,mink, lynx, bobcat etc, as their prey (the little guyus) may not be as plentiful...

Within 5 to 10 years, all of that beetle kill will be on the ground, creating some serious jackpots of crap that moose seem to enjoy hiding in....

Mother nature never creates areas that are dead forever, it just takes time for the earth to reinvent itslef and come up with a whole new ecosystem.....

Stay tuned and hope for the best......I don't think the beetle kill will totally get rid of all the ungulates in the red/dead areas.....

Who knows, once all the crap is on the ground, a lot more intese ground fire may occur, replenishing nutrients....

[trailhunter]

i agree.........."nature always finds a way".......quote from Jurassic park

[killman]

they should light it up.

[Jagermeister]

I agree with Killman, light it up.
It takes too long for the wood to fall over. There is some planted forest to the east of Dunkleys that were planted in 1977. These trees are about 20 to 30' tall. They are of no commercial value and should be torched under control burn conditions, not that any fire would get away there.
At the current replanting rate, it would take the Province 1300 years to accomplish replacing the beetle killed part. Burn it and the entire forest process can be recycled to a mature forest in less that 1/3 that time and it doesn't take a degree to understand that.
The heat of a fire will crack the seed casings that are now on the ground and will start the growth happening that much quicker. I do not understand the reluctance of the RPF's to get it done.

[ratherbefishin]

The positive effects of a fire are well known-huge burst of nutriants resulting in extensive browse-and ideal conditions for ungalates.The question is-if the beetle kill is not burned-will the area green up the same?are they looking at controlled burns?There should be some indication already in the southern areas where the beetle kill started

[TimberPig]

I agree with Killman, light it up.
It takes too long for the wood to fall over. There is some planted forest to the east of Dunkleys that were planted in 1977. These trees are about 20 to 30' tall. They are of no commercial value and should be torched under control burn conditions, not that any fire would get away there.
At the current replanting rate, it would take the Province 1300 years to accomplish replacing the beetle killed part. Burn it and the entire forest process can be recycled to a mature forest in less that 1/3 that time and it doesn't take a degree to understand that.
The heat of a fire will crack the seed casings that are now on the ground and will start the growth happening that much quicker. I do not understand the reluctance of the RPF's to get it done.


You don't seem to understand natural regeneration very well do you?

Not all areas require planting, which is a major reason why the number of trees being planted is lower. As to whether there would be viable seed left after a high intensity burn as is likely to happen right now is potentially questionable. There is already a significant amount of uncertainty about seed viability once the cones are on the ground under the dead stands. There is also uncertainty about the potential for future planting stock, due to a lack of viable seeds, harvested in the wild or in seed nurseries.


The main reason why prescribed fire is vastly underutilized as a management tool is because of the liability of it. If a fire escapes, whomever lit it and anyone involved with the decision to light it will be held liable. Prior to 1995, companies were limited to a maximum of $1 000 000 in liability for suppression costs. Now, they are liable for the whole shot. Pretty hard to tell your shareholders that they lost money this year cause your fire got away all your profits went to pay the suppression costs.

There are simply too many houses even in remote areas that someone will be affected. people don't like smoke, and they really don't like when a fire behaves unpredictably and burns there house down.

If you were the RPF prescribing the burn and it got away and burned down a number of people's homes how would you feel? Would you really want to be the person responsible for that? I strongly doubt it.

While prescribed fire may be a viable option, and in many cases a very good option that should be considered, it is not as simple as simply putting match to the forest and letting it burn.

[Sitkaspruce]

The govrnment would not want to burn all that $$$$$$.

What is going to happen is that Bio-energy will move in and utilize the dead wood...????????, that is if they can get a deal worked out with both the government and Hydro. A bio-Energy plant need a milliom cibic meters/year for 20 years to make it self sustainable. If they can get it rolling, it would be nice to see....

What is really going to happen is that the government is going to start using big D9's to knock it down, pile it and burn it, so that it can be replanted ASAP. This will also reduce the fire fuels.

The problem with prescribed burns, other that what Timber Pig said, is that the fire behavior is to unpredictable. We did some test burns in Vanderhoof a couple of years ago, but it told us what we already knew.......we would be at the mercy of the fire gods. Another thing with burning it is that it will burn too hot, which will severily damage the soil. As for the animals, there is enough regen to give the ungulates some cover and with the mixed stands of aspen, spruce, fir and Balsam, they will do allright.

Cheers

SS

[Toad Hunter]

I do not understand the reluctance of the RPF's to get it done.

Wow! I thought that the RPF's were to balance the needs of society. Burning the stand down will not be balancing many things - it is the easy way to manage - strike, place, walk away and watch? Communities and companies are in need of the fibre and burning it will not complete this!

And "At the current replanting rate, it would take the Province 1300 years to accomplish replacing the beetle killed part." - interesting statistic. Where did you get this.


Furthermore, timberpig, are you an RPF? Sounds like it. Fun job eh:)

G

[Sitkaspruce]

I do not understand the reluctance of the RPF's to get it done.
Not sure how RPF's are to "Get it done"? get what done???

Wow! I thought that the RPF's were to balance the needs of society. Burning the stand down will not be balancing many things - it is the easy way to manage - strike, place, walk away and watch? Communities and companies are in need of the fibre and burning it will not complete this!
Companies and communities have lots of fiber, it is the flood of that fiber on the market, crappy housing market in the States and the strong Canadian $$$ that are hurting the companies and communities the most. Increasing an already huge cut will not improve anything if they get nothing for it and there is a flood of it on the market.
Burning it will help reduce the fire hazzard, saving millions of taxpayer $$$$ and allow us to get a start on a new forest. We will not be able to pile and burn it all but it will be better than letting it waste away and not have a new forest coming up behind it.

And "At the current replanting rate, it would take the Province 1300 years to accomplish replacing the beetle killed part." - interesting statistic. Where did you get this.
It would not be far off. All you need to do is get a flight and see the sea of red and dead to understand the actual devistation that the little bugger had done. It still amazes me and I have lived through it. I watched it expand from Tweedsmuir and go forth and destroy. If only we were allowed to log in the park, although it probably would not have made much of a difference.


Furthermore, timberpig, are you an RPF? Sounds like it. Fun job eh:)
I actually enjoy my work, although I an only a lowley RFT:p:lol:;)

G

Cheers

SS

[ratherbefishin]

what I'd like to know is-what are the expected effects of burning vs not burning in terms of increase of browse?Actually-the only thing that surprises me is we haven't had a firestorm in the dead timber already, even from lightning strikes.But if we don't-eventually the dead standing timber will rot and fall of course-releasing the same amount of nutriants back into the soil.We have such a huge area of beetle kill in BC -its going to definately have an impact on ungalate population-and hunting.If the browse increases-we could well have a corresponding increase of ungalate populations-maybe back to the moose populations of the 60's.

[TimberPig]

Furthermore, timberpig, are you an RPF? Sounds like it. Fun job eh:)

G

I'm not yet, but will be in a couple more years. I've got the degree, haven't completed the FIT yet.

Some days the job is great, the odd one sucks, but overall its pretty good.

[willyqbc]

The part that concerns me most right now is not what we are going to do with all the standing dead timber....it's what we are going to do about the beetle kill cut blocks. It seems that in their haste to get the wood out regulations on block clean-up have been removed, or at the very least the ministry is turning a blind eye. With the wood as brittle as it is the breakage is much greater than it used to be and therefore the amount of clean-up required is even greater. I have lived and hunted in the Quesnel area for 25 years and I can say for a certainty the natural regeneration of forage in blocks done recently is much lower in volume and takes much longer than it did years ago. I believe it is simply due to the amount of wood and debris left in the blocks.....there is literally a "wood carpet" covering these blocks when the logging is done, it's hard to understand if you haven't seen it. I see a lot of these blocks that are still stark and grey 5 years after they were logged.....you never saw that years ago, even after the preliminary clean-up there was great forage growing the next year. Now I know these dead, grey blocks do have some food growing as I have seen ungulates feeding in them....it is just that it is 10% of what it could be if the blocks were cleaned up properly to await replanting.

Just my thoughts
Chris

[Squirrelnuts]

there is literally a "wood carpet" covering these blocks when the logging is done, it's hard to understand if you haven't seen it.

That's from processing at the stump (as opposed to roadside) and skidding and decking with a forwarder rather than with a conventional skidder. The forwarder runs over the debris, which reduces soil disturbance and compaction. It also spreads the debris (soon to be nutrients) around the block as opposed to the roadside where the cull pile would have to be burned.

[Sitkaspruce]

The part that concerns me most right now is not what we are going to do with all the standing dead timber....it's what we are going to do about the beetle kill cut blocks. It seems that in their haste to get the wood out regulations on block clean-up have been removed, or at the very least the ministry is turning a blind eye. With the wood as brittle as it is the breakage is much greater than it used to be and therefore the amount of clean-up required is even greater. I have lived and hunted in the Quesnel area for 25 years and I can say for a certainty the natural regeneration of forage in blocks done recently is much lower in volume and takes much longer than it did years ago. I believe it is simply due to the amount of wood and debris left in the blocks.....there is literally a "wood carpet" covering these blocks when the logging is done, it's hard to understand if you haven't seen it. I see a lot of these blocks that are still stark and grey 5 years after they were logged.....you never saw that years ago, even after the preliminary clean-up there was great forage growing the next year. Now I know these dead, grey blocks do have some food growing as I have seen ungulates feeding in them....it is just that it is 10% of what it could be if the blocks were cleaned up properly to await replanting.

Just my thoughts
Chris

Chris

This a good thing as the the debris is slowly decaying, releasing nutirents into the soil at a much slower rate. It is called Course Woody Debris (CWD) and is a much better way to manage the new growth. The old ways looked good, but they are finding that after about 20 years, there is a definate lack of nutrients in the soil from the clean logging. Burning did the same thing, great burst of nutrients after the burn, but 20 years later, very poor growing site (or not as good as it would be if left alone). The trees will grow slower as a seedling, but will be better off in the long run. It also slowes down the growth of non desirable species (the moose and deer browse) and lets the seedling get a head start. It looks like hell, but in the long run it helps the forest. It does not help the ungulates, but the timber was not cut to manage for that.

Another thing is processing at the stump, higher Residue and Waste benchmarks and very picky mills in the wood quality have all contributed to higher volume of wood left on a block.

At least we got rid of herbicide spraying of blocks, for the most part, and we can thank the FN for a lot of that. hack and squirt, girdling and brushing are more affective and help with employment.

Cheers

SS

[ratherbefishin]

so-the question is-what is the effect of this on browse-will we see the area ''green up''and increase the food supply for ungalates?Will we see an increase in the deer-moose numbers?

[Sitkaspruce]

so-the question is-what is the effect of this on browse-will we see the area ''green up''and increase the food supply for ungalates?Will we see an increase in the deer-moose numbers?

They will all green-up, with first decidious species like willow and aspen, then it will green-up with coniferous species like pine and spruce. It is the regular cycle and that will not change, it's Mother Nature. Will there be an increase in deer and moose??, probably, but with less mature timber around, there will less wintering ground, so this will probably off set the increase in # if there is a hard winter like 06/07. It will also increase the # of black bears, like we need more of those...:razz:, and the # of predators, especially wolves, grizz and hunters. Less cover for them to hide in.

So to answer your question......there will probably be a slight increase in #'s, but it will probably be the same as any other year.....but who really knows.

SS

[willyqbc]

Thanks for the insight Squirrelnuts and Sitka. Good to know there is a reason for it. It's still the shits for hunting in....you have no prayer of stalking animals in that stuff, but at least now I know there is a long term gain behind it.

Thanks
Chris

[mcrae]

This thread is awesome thanks guys for answering these questions I have been wondering about allot of these same issues for a couple of years. Here in Nelson the mountain sides have literally turned red around the city and I have often wondered what the options are for the wood,ecosystem,etc...

[ratherbefishin]

well,I figure the beetle kill is one of the main factors facing habitat in BC today-the question is-what should we be doing about it-such as burning-or just leave well enough alone?Burns and cutblocks are well known for their value to wildlife in terms of food

[Aaron Blom]

Very good thread. I moved down from Burns Lake this spring. I have been working in the forstry industry most of my adult life and was amazed at the different forest practices down here. The southern portion of the province should be looking to the north to see what has and hasn`t worked there.I believe that the secondary stand struture legislation will most certainly help wildlife of all varities throughout the provice where the beetle is an issue. It will allow the the people on the land to actually have an opportunity to have a reasone to walk away from an area and maitain some structure on the landscape without hearing whining from the licensee that they ``want that wood``. I was amazed when I saw some of the areas around here and the VAST cutblocks with little or no cover for anything. In the north most licensee`s have dash distance WTP`s in their FSP`s, not so here, they do work when you place then in locations with some value to wildlife. As for the burning of the infested satands, well i actually lite up some of the test plots in Vanderhoof and all I can sat is WOW much fast rate of spread and higher intensity burn, but is was alot of fun. It is a huge problem that I feel the province is doing an fair to good job at, they do lack the man power to oversee everything but on a whole they seem to be doing a decent job on our behalf...just my opinion though.

[ratherbefishin]

I was just up on the BC-Yukon border where there was a huge fire several years ago-it is greening up, the browse is definately coming back-and with it the moose