UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Addressing uncertainty in forest planning Cerda, Juan Pablo 2002

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_2002-0352.pdf [ 13.67MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0075307.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0075307-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0075307-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0075307-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0075307-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0075307-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0075307-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0075307-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0075307.ris

Full Text

ADDRESSING UNCERTAINTY IN FOREST PLANNING by JUAN PABLO CERDA B.Sc. F., Universidad Austral de Chile, 1995 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF FORESTRY in The Faculty of Graduate Studies  THE FACULTY OF FORESTRY D e p a r t m e n t of Forest Sciences We accept this thesis as c o n f o r m i n g to t h e required s t a n d a r d  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September 2002 © Juan Pablo Cerda, 2002  In  presenting  degree freely  at  this  the  available  copying  of  department publication  of  in  partial  fulfilment  of  University  of  British  Columbia,  I  for  this or  thesis  reference  thesis by  this  for  his thesis  and  study.  scholarly  or for  her  I further  purposes  gain  agree  of  rV^.SV  T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f British Vancouver, Canada  Date  DE-6  (2/88)  Columbia  that  agree be  It  is  shall  not  permission.  Department  requirements  may  representatives.  financial  the  S^CKQiQ&S  that  the  Library  an  granted  by  allowed  advanced  shall  permission  understood be  for  the that  without  for  make  it  extensive  head  of  my  copying  or  my  written  ABSTRACT Forests  are  complex  'systems'  with  forest  ecosystem,  resource,  stakeholder and policy ' s u b s y s t e m s ' . Knowledge a b o u t f o r e s t s y s t e m s is  always  incomplete,  and  uncertainty  pervades  decision-making.  Uncertainty produces risk o f losses and potential o p p o r t u n i t i e s , which have  to  be  recognized  and  characterized.  From  then,  the  best  probabilistic predictions, guesses, j u d g m e n t s , and scenario models can be  made.  Good  planning  addresses  uncertainty,  and  adapts  to  changes. I t is based on c o n s t a n t l e a r n i n g , and includes processes t h a t enable feedback on past o u t c o m e s to i n f o r m f u t u r e p l a n n i n g . British Columbia (BC)'s forest land area is 6 0 . 6 million hectares. Most of it is publicly o w n e d , and forest harvesting is licensed. Licensees must  prepare  Forest  Development  Plans  (FDP's),  which  describe  specific areas proposed for harvest. These plans allow f o r discussion and resolution of e n v i r o n m e n t a l and socioeconomic issues. The annual cost of p r e p a r i n g  and  reviewing  FDPs p r o v i n c e - w i d e  exceeds  $30  million. I n spite of t h i s e x p e n s e , actual o u t c o m e s r o u t i n e l y differ f r o m those described in t h e original FDPs because of u n c e r t a i n t y . This is due mostly to natural d i s t u r b a n c e e v e n t s , shifts in social values or policy, and t i m b e r m a r k e t c h a n g e s . FDPs are c o n s t a n t l y a m e n d e d . The annual cost of p r e p a r a t i o n unexpected  and  outcomes  review  exceeds  $12  million.  and f r e q u e n t a m e n d m e n t s  Furthermore,  undermine  public  confidence in t h e p l a n n i n g process. I n addition t o highlighting t h e weaknesses in t h e c u r r e n t processes, a m e t h o d t o address planning  uncertainty  in BC is p r o p o s e d . C o m p l e x i t y  uncertainty  in  planning  have  a  through  planning  better  forest  in t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m  spatial  dimension,  which  representable and analyzable using Geographic I n f o r m a t i o n  and is  System  ii  (GIS)  tools.  Ecosystem  dynamics,  and  the  impact  on  biophysical  a t t r i b u t e s of t h e landscape of changes in resources prices and policies, and  people's  unexpected  values outcomes  can  be  m a p p e d , and  of planning.  spatially  matched  Using t h e "SAFEPLAN"  with  method  these o u t c o m e s can be e x p l a i n e d , and i m p r o v e m e n t s t o t h e planning processes can be r e c o m m e n d e d . Results o b t a i n e d f o r s o u t h e a s t e r n BC show h o w t h e a d o p t i o n of this m e t h o d could increase t h e efficacy of f o r e s t plans, and i m p r o v e t h e cost-effectiveness of t h e whole planning process, including its role in t h e proposed c o n t e x t f o r forest planning  in BC.  iii  TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT  ii  TABLE OF CONTENTS  iv  LIST OF FIGURES  viii  ACRONYMS  x  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  xi  I. INTRODUCTION  1  1.1 Goals and Objectives  1  1.2 Structure  2  CHAPTER I I . A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR FOREST PLANNING  3  2.1 An Introduction to Forest Management  3  2.2 Forest Management, Sustainability and Emergent Paradigms  4  2.3 Forests as Systems  6  2.4 Determinism, Stochasticity and Chaos in a Forest System  11  2.5 Complexity of a Forest System  12  2.5.1 Complexity in the Forest Ecosystem Subsystem 2.5.1.1 Characteristics and Dynamics of Forest Ecosystems 2.5.2 Complexity in the Forest Resources Subsystem 2.5.2.1 The Economics of Forest Management 2.5.3 Complexity in the Forest Stakeholders Subsystem 2.5.3.1 Dealing with Stakeholders 2.5.4 Complexity in the Forest Policy Subsystem 2.5.4.1 Dynamics of Forest Policy 2.6 Conclusion  12 14 17 18 20 23 24 25 27  iv  CHAPTER I I I . UNCERTAINTY INCOMPLETE KNOWLEDGE  AND  BETTER  FOREST  PLANNING  3.1 Uncertainty. A kind of Ignorance  WITH 28 28  3.1.1 Origin, Assessment and Representation of Uncertainty  29  3.1.2 When Uncertainty becomes Risk  30  3.1.3 Crippling and Overlooked Uncertainty  31  3.2 Forest Decision-Making Under Uncertainty  32  3.2.1 The Information Channel  34  3.2.2 The Context for Decision-Making  36  3.3 Better Forest Planning: A Constant Learning Process  39  3.3.1 Better Present and Future Forest Plans  42  3.3.2 Forest Plan Efficacy and Indication of Planning Uncertainty  44  3.3.3 Estimation of Planning Uncertainty: A Spatial Approach  45  3.4 Conclusion  47  CHAPTER IV. FOREST PLANNING IN BRITISH COLUMBIA, CANADA. A CASE FOR BETTER PLANNING 48 4.1 Introduction to Forest Planning in BC  48  4.2 Current Challenges to Forest Development Planning in BC  52  4.3 Province-wide Quantification of How Uncertainty is Affecting Forest Planning in BC  54  4.3.1 Methods  54  4.3.2 Results  56  4.3.3 Discussion and conclusions from survey results  61  4.4 Conclusion  64  v  CHAPTER V. A METHOD FOR SPATIALLY ANALYZING FOREST PLANNING EFFICACY AND UNCERTAINTY (SAFEPLAN METHOD). A CASE STUDY 65 5.1 The Need for the SAFEPLAN Method  65  5.2 Goals and Objectives of the SAFEPLAN Method  65  5.3 Description of the SAFEPLAN Method  67  5.4 Data Requirements for the SAFEPLAN Method  74  5.5 Test of the SAFEPLAN Method in the Lemon Landscape Unit  75  5.5.1 Introduction to the Case Study  75  5.5.2 Objectives of the Case study  77  5.5.3 Methodology of the Case study  78  5.5.4 Results and Discussion of the Case Study  81  5.5.4.1 Proposed and Approved Harvesting  82  5.5.4.2 Cutting Permit Issuance  83  5.5.4.3 Harvesting  84  5.5.4.4 Indicators of Forest Planning Uncertainty  85  5.5.4.5 Analysis of Sources of Uncertainty Affecting Planning  87  5.5.4.5.1 The Forest System as a Source of Uncertainty  87  5.5.4.5.1.1 Spatial Association of Uncertainty and Landscape Attributes  91  5.5.4.5.2 The Information Channel as a Source of Uncertainty  95  5.5.4.5.3 The Context for Decision-Making as a Source of Uncertainty  98  5.5.5 Conclusions and Recommendations from the Case study 5.6 Conclusion  101 106  vi  CHAPTER V I . FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR FOREST PLANNING IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. A NEW CONTEXT FOR THE SAFEPLAN METHOD 107 6.1 Forest planning in BC in a time of transition  107  6.1.1 Innovative Forestry Practices Agreements (IFPAs). Addressing Uncertainty by Improving the Information Channel 109 6.1.2 Results-Based Forest Practices Code Pilot Projects. Addressing Uncertainty by Improving the Context for Decision-Making 112 6.1.3 A Result-based BCFPC and Better Planning  114  6.2 Conclusion  117  V I I . CONCLUSION  118  V I I I . REFERENCES  120  APPENDIX 1. GLOSSARY  152  APPENDIX 2. PROVINCE-WIDE QUANTIFICATION OF HOW UNCERTAINTY IS AFFECTING FOREST PLANNING IN BC 156  vii  LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Levels of interaction within forest systems  10  Figure 2.2: Definition of a forest ecosystem  13  Figure 3.1: The environment for forest decision-making  34  Figure 3.2: Planning and stages in the learning cycle  41  Figure 3.3: Discrepancies between the 1995 forest development plan  46  and 1998 harvesting Figure 4.1: Main information requested for FDP preparation  5  u  Figure 4.2: Percentage of FDP reviewed by BCMOF Forest Regions  56  Figure 4.3: Principal causes of major amendments to FDP in BC  58  Figure 4.4: Principal causes of minor amendments to FDP in BC  60  Figure 5.1: Compilation of planned and actual harvesting in ArcView®  68  Figure 5.2: Preparation of grid cells and centroids  69  Figure 5.3: Attachment of feature data to cells  70  Figure 5.4: Data query  s  Figure 5.5: Aerial view of Lemon Landscape Unit and location of Lemon in BC  7  5  Figure 5.6: An example of obvious mapping shifts  80  Figure 5.7: Proposal of harvesting in FDPs between 1995-1999  82  viii  Figure 5.8: History of ha proposed in the 1995 FDP  83  Figure 5.9 Area under CP in Lemon between 1995-1999  84  Figure 5.10: Harvesting for proposed, approved and CP issued ha  85  Figure 5.11: Indicators of forest planning uncertainty (effort made to complete planning) for Lemon Landscape Unit.  86  Figure 5.12: Indicators of forest planning uncertainty (time required to complete planning) for Lemon Landscape Unit.  86  Figure 5.13: Sources of uncertainty for discarded and non-harvested 88 approved ha. Figure 5.14:  Example of ha approved in 1996 and 1997 and then  dropped due to their location in low quality stands.  92  Figure 5.15: Example of ha approved in 1995 and then dropped due to concern for visual values. Figure 5.16:  93  Example of ha approved in 1997 and 1999 and then  dropped due to BCFPC requirements for wildlife reserves.  94  Figure 5.17: Example of ha approved in 1995, 1996, and 1997 and dropped due to beetle outbreaks. Proposed ha were "chasing beetle".  95  ix  ACRONYMS AAC  Annual Allowable Cut  BC  Province o f British C o l u m b i a , Canada  BCFPB  Forest Practices Board of British Columbia  BCFPC  Forest Practices Code of British Columbia  BCLUCO  Land Use Coordination Office of British Columbia  BCMOF  Ministry of Forests of British Columbia  BCMSRM  Ministry of Sustainable  Resource M a n a g e m e n t of  British  Columbia FSC  Forest S t e w a r d s h i p Council  COFI  Council of Forest I n d u s t r i e s  CP  C u t t i n g Permit  FDP  Forest D e v e l o p m e n t Plan  GIS  Geographic I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s  ha  Hectares  IFPA  I n n o v a t i v e Forest Practices A g r e e m e n t  TSA  T i m b e r Supply Area  UBC  University of British Columbia  x  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was funded in part by Forest Renewal BC t h r o u g h the Arrow Innovative Forest Practices Agreement. Although not responsible for any of its final products, m a n y people made this dissertation possible: Special recognition to Ken Day, UBC Alex Fraser Research Forest; Paul Jeakins, Kokanee Forest Consulting; Robin Clark, RBC Inc.; Peter Lewis, John Sherbinin, George Edney, and Pat Field, BC Ministry of Forests; Yolanta Kulis, Arnold Moy and Nicole Robinson, UBC Faculty of Forestry; Kerry Rouck, Gorman Bros Lumber Ltd.; Stan Hadikin, Kalesnikoff Lumber Company L t d . ; Harold Waters, Riverside Forest Products L t d . ; and district and regional officials of the BC Ministry of Forests throughout the Province. Gratitude to Kathy Howard, Alex Ferguson, and staff of Slocan Forest Products analysis,  and  Limited for sharing their files, which giving  an  example  of  searching  enriched  excellence  on  managing forests. Appreciation to Gordon Weetman and Gordon Baskerville for helpful personal communications and also for their legacy, which inspired in part this research. Dr. Weetman is an Emeritus Professor at the UBC's D e p a r t m e n t of Forest S c i e n c e s . Dr.  professor  of  Integrated  Resources  B a s k e r v i l l e is a f o r m e r  Management  at  the  UBC's  Department of Forest Resources management. Special thanks to thesis committee members Dr. Gary Bull and Dr. John Nelson, who guided on the contents of the thesis. And to Dr. Steve Mitchell, supervisor of the thesis.  xi  I. I N T R O D U C T I O N For  anyone  concerned  with  the  effects  of  uncertainty  in  forest  planning, it is h a r d t o imagine a m o r e interesting place t h a n British Columbia ( B C ) , Canada at present. Forests here are m u l t i f a c e t e d and highly  dynamic,  processes  are  and  forestry  complicated,  forest e c o s y s t e m s  is  controversial.  representing  and stakeholders  the  in t h e  Forest  enormous  Province.  planning variety  of  Consequently  uncertainty pervades decision-making. Forest planning in BC is in a t i m e of t r a n s i t i o n . Processes are criticized. Licensees, officials, NGOs and t h e public w a n t i m p r o v e m e n t s . These changes are e x p e c t e d t o allow m o r e flexibility and reduction of costs, without  compromising  environmental  planning  will  are  vary,  and  expected  quality. to  be  Requirements  more  result-oriented.  Compliance will r e q u i r e new approaches f o r addressing controlling p e r f o r m a n c e ( e . g . efficacy)  for  uncertainty,  and accounting f o r o u t c o m e s .  1.1 G o a l s a n d O b j e c t i v e s The goal of this thesis  is t o develop an approach  for  addressing  u n c e r t a i n t y and t h e r e b y i m p r o v e forest p l a n n i n g . Specific objectives are: 1) to d e v e l o p a q u a n t i t a t i v e m e t h o d f o r e v a l u a t i n g f o r e s t planning o u t c o m e s and u n c e r t a i n t y ; and 2) to t e s t t h e capabilities of t h e q u a n t i t a t i v e m e t h o d in a case study in s o u t h e a s t e r n BC. To provide c o n t e x t f o r this w o r k , a new conceptual f r a m e w o r k forest  planning  is  presented,  weaknesses  of  present  processes in BC are d e s c r i b e d , and applications of t h e  for  planning  quantitative  m e t h o d in a r e f o r m e d c o n t e x t f o r planning are discussed. l  1.2 Structure The thesis is c o m p o s e d of t w o parts. The first part contains a literature review  from  which  a conceptual  framework  for forest  planning  is  proposed. I n C h a p t e r I I forests are defined as c o m p l e x s y s t e m s w i t h d y n a m i c e c o s y s t e m , r e s o u r c e , s t a k e h o l d e r , and policy  subsystems.  Chapter I I I discusses how u n c e r t a i n t y pervades f o r e s t planning. Better forest  planning  is i n t r o d u c e d  as a learning  process t h a t  provides  feedback f r o m past o u t c o m e s f o r f u t u r e plans. Spatial r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of u n c e r t a i n t y as a source f o r feedback is e x p l a i n e d . The second p a r t o f t h e thesis presents results o f investigations into forest  planning o u t c o m e s  outcomes,  and  strategies  in BC, a m e t h o d for  reducing  f o r analysing  uncertainty.  planning  Chapter  IV  describes c u r r e n t weaknesses of forest planning processes in BC and provides results o f a s u r v e y of t h e Ministry o f Forests and licensees operating t h r o u g h o u t BC. Chapter V introduces a G I S - b a s e d  method  called SAFEPLAN f o r analysing forest plans efficacy and sources of u n c e r t a i n t y . The m e t h o d is applied in an area in s o u t h e a s t e r n BC to e x t e n d t h e analysis o f planning weaknesses described in C h a p t e r IV. Principles for s t r e n g t h e n i n g planning t h r o u g h addressing  uncertainty  are p r o p o s e d . C h a p t e r V I discusses key issues and initiatives in the transition in f o r e s t policy t h a t is m o v i n g BC t o w a r d s a m o r e resultsbased c o n t e x t f o r m a n a g e m e n t . The need f o r addressing u n c e r t a i n t y in this new c o n t e x t is h i g h l i g h t e d , and applications of t h e  SAFEPLAN  m e t h o d and principles f o r b e t t e r planning are p r o p o s e d . T h r o u g h o u t t h e thesis technical t e r m s are indicated in italics on t h e first use. These t e r m s are defined in a glossary in Appendix 1 .  2  CHAPTER I I . A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR FOREST PLANNING 2.1 An I n t r o d u c t i o n to Forest Management Forest m a n a g e m e n t , or f o r e s t r y , consists of a r e g i m e of i n t e g r a t e d 1  and c o o r d i n a t e d actions t h a t shape t h e forest's a t t r i b u t e s f o r specific purposes desired  (FAO, values  (personal  1998;  Romm,  (Erdle  and  communication,  1998),  in a m a n n e r  Sullivan, March  1998). 2002)  that  Gordon  provides  Baskerville  summarizes  forest  m a n a g e m e n t as " t h e process of creating a defined f u t u r e f o r e s t f r o m a present f o r e s t " . Forest m a n a g e m e n t t h e n is a b o u t defining values and setting p u r p o s e s , and directing and controlling actions in t h e forest. This requires planning and o r g a n i z i n g . H o w e v e r , t h e specific actions included in forest m a n a g e m e n t are not precisely d e f i n e d , and change w i t h t i m e . According t o t h e Santiago Declaration ( 1 9 9 5 ) and Shindler and  Cramer  knowledge  (1999), of  how  management forest  changes  ecosystems  in  function  response and  to  respond  new to  i n t e r v e n t i o n s , and t o changing public d e m a n d s f o r f o r e s t products and services. Silviculture is only part of forest m a n a g e m e n t ( S m i t h et a l . , 1 9 9 7 ) . Fedkiw ( 1 9 9 8 ) sees silviculture as being i n t e g r a t e d w i t h o t h e r disciplines in f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t , such as e c o s y s t e m and landscape m a n a g e m e n t , e c o n o m y , and sociology. As J. Wilson ( 1 9 9 8 ) , H a y t e r ( 2 0 0 0 ) , Tollefson ( 2 0 0 0 ) and Cashore et al. ( 2 0 0 1 ) chronicle in t h e i r reviews of t h e e v o l u t i o n of f o r e s t r y in BC, p r o d u c t i v i t y o f f o r e s t sites and accessibility w e r e t h e m a j o r constraints on producing t i m b e r until t h e late 1970's. Forest d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g was mostly  concerned  with  improving  yield  and  surpassing  technical  Forest M a n a g e m e n t a n d f o r e s t r y are s y n o n y m s ( D i c t i o n a r y of Science a n d T e c h n o l o g y , 1 9 9 2 ; O x f o r d English D i c t i o n a r y , 1 9 9 6 ; T h e New E n c y c l o p a e d i a B r i t a n n i c a , 1 9 9 7 ; M c G r a w - H i l l D i c t i o n a r y of Scientific a n d T e c h n i c a l T e r m s , 1 9 9 7 ) . 1  3  engineering difficulties. More recently h o w e v e r , actions dealing w i t h w o o d yield have b e c o m e j u s t a fraction o f t h e actions required t o m a n a g e forests acceptably. Sheppard ( 2 0 0 1 ) f o r e x a m p l e s u m m a r i z e s actions required t o deal w i t h t h e new d i m e n s i o n o f public perceptions t o w a r d s f o r e s t r y . Forest m a n a g e r s carry o u t actions t h a t interact n o t only w i t h f o r e s t e c o s y s t e m s b u t w i t h c o m m u n i t i e s and m a r k e t s . Also, they  must  act  with  consideration  for  current  generations  and  generations t o c o m e . Propper de Callejon e t a l . ( 1 9 9 8 ) describe this new c o n t e x t f o r m a n a g e m e n t , w h e r e w o o d yields a r e only o p t i m i z e d t o the e x t e n t t h a t o t h e r goods produced by t h e forests are n o t w e a k e n e d . People e x p e c t these g o o d s , and d e m a n d t h a t t h e y persist into t h e future. Forest m a n a g e r s are m a k i n g decisions w i t h respect t o a broad and m o r e complex s y s t e m . I n dealing w i t h this n e w c o n t e x t , t h e y are encountering  n o t only n e w obligations, b u t also n e w o p p o r t u n i t i e s  (e.g.  non-timber  new  requirements constraints,  dictated  resources). by  Conflicting  ecological  a n d socio-economic  realities  demands  limitations, have  to  and  technological be  harmonized  (Kleine, 1 9 9 7 ) . Forest m a n a g e m e n t is m o v i n g along a p a t h w a y o f e m e r g e n t p a r a d i g m s t o w a r d s broader sustainability.  2.2  Forest  Management,  Sustainability  and  Emergent  Paradigms The World C o m m i s s i o n o n E n v i r o n m e n t and D e v e l o p m e n t in 1 9 8 7 , and t h e United Nations Conference on E n v i r o n m e n t a n d D e v e l o p m e n t in 1992 b r o a d e n e d t h e f o r m e r mostly biological a n d e c o n o m i c concept o f forest sustainability t o include social issues. T h e concept of sustainable forest m a n a g e m e n t has been constructed t o f i t d i f f e r e n t values and needs (Schanz, 1 9 9 4 ) , a n d as such has m o r e t h a n f o u r t e e n different  4  categories of definitions (Schanz, 1 9 9 8 ) . Dovers and H a n d m e r ( 1 9 9 3 ) have identified m a n y contradictions a m o n g t h e e l e m e n t s of existing definitions, such as g r o w t h versus limits, individual v e r s u s collective interests,  intergenerational  versus  intragenerational  equity,  and  adaptability v e r s u s resistance. A l t h o u g h t h e r e is no clear definition of w h a t c o n s t i t u t e s sustainable f o r e s t r y , t h e r e is a g e n e r a l  consensus  t h a t sustainable f o r e s t r y in s o m e f o r m or a n o t h e r should be practiced (Sedjo et a l . , 1 9 9 8 ) . I t is presented by Schanz ( 1 9 9 8 ) as t h e main objective of all e f f o r t in f o r e s t r y . A  succession  of  paradigms  have  emerged  from  the  concept  of  sustainability. Schools of sustainable forest m a n a g e m e n t include social forestry holistic  (Gregersen forestry  a l . , 1 9 8 9 ) , new  et  forestry  ( H a m m o n d , 1 9 9 1 ) , ecosystem  (Franklin,  management  1990), (Society  of A m e r i c a n Foresters, 1 9 9 3 ) , and eco-forestry  ( D r e n g s o n and Taylor,  1998),  paradigms  among  others.  Kuhn  (1970)  defines  as  beliefs,  accepted s t a n d a r d s , procedures and e x e m p l a r s . According to Barker (1993),  each  boundaries  paradigm  and  is  a  regulations.  theory  or  Paradigms  dogma are  that  establishes  dynamic,  and  can  complicate f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t . Managers are p e r m a n e n t l y challenged to understand paradigm  t h e m . As B a r k e r ( 1 9 9 3 ) n o t e s , d a t a c o n f o r m i n g w i t h t h e  are  overemphasized,  preventing  new  developments  that  c o m e f r o m o u t s i d e t h e p a r a d i g m . Knowing w h a t people w a n t , and w h a t t h e y e x p e c t f r o m a p a r a d i g m is difficult. Meanwhile, m a n a g e r s have p r o b l e m s convincing people t h a t a d e q u a t e f o r e s t  management  can be carried o u t w i t h o u t subscribing t o a given p a r a d i g m . As an e x a m p l e , S t a n b u r y ( 2 0 0 0 ) identifies difficulties in being pressured t o managing challenged  in not  accordance only  by  with having  ecological to  paradigms.  operate  inside  of  Forestry  is  established  p a r a d i g m s , but also by t h e necessity of proving to people t h a t it is not  5  operating outside of t h e m . A l t h o u g h e c o n o m i c , scientific, and political debates precede and follow t h e proposition of each new  paradigm,  t h e r e is no definitive a g r e e m e n t on w h a t c o n s t i t u t e s " a d e q u a t e " , or socially desirable, f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t . Forest m a n a g e m e n t should be by definition sustainable. M a n a g e m e n t actions are planned ( e . g . integrated and c o o r d i n a t e d ) , and t h e y are directed t o w a r d previously defined objectives ( e . g . desired v a l u e s ) . A main challenge, h o w e v e r , is t h a t " i t is impossible t o be certain a t any m o m e n t t h a t a f o r e s t is being sustainably m a n a g e d " (Poore et a l . , 1 9 9 8 ) . C o n s e q u e n t l y , n u m e r o u s criteria  and indicators  by which to  j u d g e t h e sustainability o f m a n a g e m e n t r e g i m e s are being discussed worldwide  under  environmentally  various  responsible,  schemes. socially  These  initiatives  beneficial,  and  pursue  economically  viable m a n a g e m e n t of t h e forests in response t o public forest concerns (e.g. FSC, 1 9 9 9 ) . The m o r e t h a n 100 indicators of sustainability are a good indication of t h e b r e a d t h of people's concerns a b o u t f o r e s t s . T h e y refer t o issues as diverse as land t e n u r e , indigenous people's w e l f a r e , ecosystem c o n s e r v a t i o n , reduction of e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s , o p t i m a l utilization  of  forest  products  and  services,  and  participatory  m a n a g e m e n t planning (FSC, 1 9 9 9 ; Meridian I n s t i t u t e , 2 0 0 1 ) .  2.3 Forests as Systems A system  is a  network  of  hierarchically  related  components  and  processes t h a t w o r k as a whole t o m a i n t a i n its particular properties ( S i n n o t t , 1 9 9 8 ; Ford, 2 0 0 0 ) . The s y s t e m ' s uniqueness is given by its c o m p o n e n t s , w h i c h have internal relationships t h a t are closer t h a n w i t h those of c o m p o n e n t s in t h e s u r r o u n d i n g e n v i r o n m e n t (Naveh and L i e b e r m a n , 1 9 9 4 ) . S u b s y s t e m s are parts of t h e larger s y s t e m and are defined by a subset of its c o m p o n e n t s ( O d u m , 1 9 9 4 ) . C o m p o n e n t s of  6  subsystems have a relationship t h a t is closer t h a n t h e one w i t h the rest of t h e c o m p o n e n t s of t h e s y s t e m . Since t h e beginnings of m o d e r n f o r e s t r y , forests have been seen as systems including  m o r e t h a n j u s t t r e e s . Fernow  ( 1 9 0 2 ) s t a t e d , "A  forest... is by no m e a n s a m e r e collection o f t r e e s , b u t an organic whole..." Pinchot ( 1 9 0 3 ) s t a t e d , " A l t h o u g h it is c o m p o s e d of t r e e s , t h e forest is far m o r e t h a n a collection of trees s t a n d i n g in one place..." Forestry has f u r t h e r broadened f r o m t h e view of these visionary m e n . Oliver  et  al.  management relations  (2001) of  among  recommend  a  forest  ecosystems,  grouped  biophysical  systemic which  approach  to  the  concentrates  on  the  components.  Marshall  (1984)  goes f u r t h e r , and visualizes forests as s y s t e m s being c o m p o s e d of a biophysical p o r t i o n and a social c o m p o n e n t .  H o w e v e r , he  mentions  only biological and physical m e c h a n i s m s of t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m w h e n commenting  on  what  should  be u n d e r s t o o d  about the system  to  adequately m a n a g e it. Systemic visions are c o m m o n in natural resource m a n a g e m e n t ( O d u m , 1 9 9 4 ; G r a n t , 1 9 9 8 ) . H a w o r t h et al. ( 1 9 9 8 ) , Kiang ( 1 9 9 8 ) , and Kropff et al. ( 2 0 0 1 ) (2001)  to  describe a s y s t e m s approach t o a g r i c u l t u r e ,  fisheries,  Robinson  et  al.  (1999)  to  ocean  Charles  resources  m a n a g e m e n t , and Clayton and Radcliffe ( 1 9 9 6 ) t o e n v i r o n m e n t a l and sustainability  problems.  Systemic  approaches  towards  the  m a n a g e m e n t of f o r e s t s y s t e m s are scarcely r e p o r t e d . Prabhu et al. ( 2 0 0 1 ) aim in this direction by introducing t h e concept of " s y s t e m i c s u s t a i n a b i l i t y " as a s y s t e m o f indicators o f f o r e s t sustainability, which would be holistic and g r e a t e r t h a n t h e s u m of its p a r t s . The Clayoquot Sound Scientific Panel ( 1 9 9 5 ) constitutes an operational e x a m p l e of viewing forests as broad s y s t e m s . I n its 120 r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s t o w a r d s the sustainable  ecosystem  management  of t h e  forests  of  western  7  Vancouver  Island,  management  BC, t h e  Panel  made  recommendations  of t r e e s , wildlife and s t r e a m s .  recommendations  on  the  integration  of  on  Furthermore,  recreational  it  and  the  made  spiritual  d e m a n d s , and c o m m u n i t y and first nations interests. A 'forest  system'  is  composed  of  ecological  and  socio-economic  s u b s y s t e m s , w h i c h i n t e r a c t w i t h each o t h e r t o f u n c t i o n as a whole. Major s u b s y s t e m s a r e : 1. Forest e c o s y s t e m s s u b s y s t e m , w i t h t r e e s , s t r e a m s , wildlife, fire, w i n d , and s t o r e d c a r b o n . 2. Forest  resources  subsystem,  with  the  wide  range  of  e n v i r o n m e n t a l , economic and social benefits d e r i v e d f r o m  the  forests e c o s y s t e m s and perceived by p r e s e n t and f u t u r e forest stakeholders. 3. Forest s t a k e h o l d e r s s u b s y s t e m , w i t h f o r e s t o w n e r s and w o r k e r s , local  communities,  inhabitants  of  the  forests,  and  forest  resources a n d services processors and c o n s u m e r s . 4 . Forest  policies  subsystem,  with  the  goals  and  objectives,  i n s t r u m e n t s , and specific i n s t r u m e n t settings of policy t h a t direct how f o r e s t users i n t e r v e n e forest e c o s y s t e m s t o benefit f r o m forest resources. Dynamism  is also an i n h e r e n t c o m p o n e n t of each s u b s y s t e m . The  ecosystems s u b s y s t e m disturbances, stakeholder  the values,  includes a series of e n d e m i c processes  stakeholders the  resources  subsystem subsystem  includes includes  and  shifts  in  changes  in  resources v a l u a t i o n and prices, and t h e policies s u b s y s t e m  includes  policy changes. Forestry, t h e n , e n c o m p a s s e s t h e m a n a g e m e n t of a f o r e s t s y s t e m - t h e assemblage of given s u b s y s t e m s - , which is unique and particular to a 8  location and t i m e , and has particular p r o p e r t i e s . Based on w h a t A m e n ( 1 9 6 6 ) , and t h e n Beishon and Peters ( 1 9 7 2 ) , M a t u r a n a and Varela (1980),  O'Neill  et  al. ( 1 9 8 6 ) , O d u m  ( 1 9 9 4 ) , and  Sinnott  (1998),  describe as general properties of s y s t e m s , a f o r e s t s y s t e m has t h e following p r o p e r t i e s : 1. Hierarchy. I t is c o m p o s e d of s u b s y s t e m s , w h i c h are c o m p o s e d of o t h e r s u b s y s t e m s and so o n . The s y s t e m , itself, is a c o m p o n e n t of larger s u p r a s y s t e m s ( e . g . t h e national e c o n o m y s y s t e m ) . 2. Boundaries. I t can be arbitrarily d e l i m i t e d in t i m e and space. I t s components  can  be  circumscribed  by  a  boundary  (e.g.  a  w a t e r s h e d ; 120 y e a r s ) . 3. Openness. I t connects in space and t i m e w i t h o t h e r s y s t e m s . I t s f u n c t i o n i n g m a y change in response t o e x t e r n a l s t i m u l u s ( e . g . economic crisis affects d e m a n d for f o r e s t r e s o u r c e s ) . 4. D y n a m i s m .  It  changes  over time  as a w h o l e .  Its  individual  c o m p o n e n t s change o v e r t i m e as well ( e . g . t r e e g r o w t h ) . 5. S y n e r g y . A m o n g its c o m p o n e n t s positive a n d n e g a t i v e s y n e r g y coexists. I t s b e h a v i o r is not predictable by looking at t h e s u m of t h e c o m p o n e n t s , due to e m e r g e n t properties ( e . g . ecosystem resilience, s t a b i l i t y , and efficiency). 6. Autopoesis. I t t e n d s t o self-organize. The interaction a m o n g its c o m p o n e n t s creates new internal s t r u c t u r e s and flows t h a t are m o r e " e f f i c i e n t " f o r t h e functioning of t h e s y s t e m ( e . g . d e m a n d f o r a n d s u p p l y of f o r e s t r e s o u r c e s ) . According t o O'Neill et al. 's ( 1 9 8 6 ) Hierarchy T h e o r y , w i t h i n s y s t e m s components  interact  with  other  components  at t h e  same  level  of  hierarchy and b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t levels of h i e r a r c h y . Each c o m p o n e n t in t h e forest s y s t e m  ( e . g . a t r e e , w i n d , a recreationist, t h e price  of 9  t i m b e r , e t c ) b e h a v e s , o r it is induced t o b e h a v e , a c t i v e l y ,  inducing  changes in s u b s y s t e m s and eventually in t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m  (Figure  2.1).  Lemon Landscape Unit  Forest e c o s y s t e m s  Watershed  Trees a n d shrubs  Wildlife and fisheries  Oldgrowth forests  Soil  Forest s t a k e h o l d e r s  Lakes a n d streams  Fire, beetle: wind  I n h a b i t a n t s of the area "  Slocan Valley Watershed Alliance  Forest resources consumers  Mountain bikers  Environmental groups  First Nations  Timber licensees  Interaction at the same level of the hierarchy Interaction at different levels of the hierarchy  Figure 2.1. Levels o f interaction w i t h i n forest s y s t e m s . Simplification of a forest s y s t e m in Lemon Landscape Unit, BC a n d s o m e c o m p o n e n t s of its e c o s y s t e m a n d s t a k e h o l d e r s u b s y s t e m s . The distinctiveness o f a forest s y s t e m is t h e result o f c o n s t a n t change over t i m e . For this change t o occur, S i n n o t t ( 1 9 9 8 ) states t h a t some e n t r o p y - o r d i s o r d e r - has t o be present. From this d i s o r d e r e d systems t e n d t o w a r d homeostasis  state,  t h r o u g h feedback f r o m w i t h i n and  f r o m w i t h o u t t h e i r boundaries ( e . g . a u t o p o e i s i s ) . A x e l r o d a n d Cohen ( 2 0 0 0 ) explain t h a t c o m p o n e n t s of t h e s y s t e m change t o a d j u s t t o a c o n t e x t ( s u b s y s t e m / s y s t e m ) in c o n s t a n t change. External stimuli also change t h e s y s t e m as a w h o l e . Forest s y s t e m s are c o m p l e x s y s t e m s t h a t progress t h r o u g h deterministic,  stochastic,  a n d chaotic  processes.  10  2.4 Determinism, Stochasticity and Chaos in a Forest System D e t e r m i n i s m refers t o t h e principle t h a t exact laws are f o l l o w e d , so t h a t w h a t will h a p p e n in t h e f u t u r e is a necessary consequence of states at any given m o m e n t in t h e past (McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical T e r m s ) . Given sufficient  knowledge  of the  initial state of a d e t e r m i n i s t i c s y s t e m , its f u t u r e can be d e t e r m i n e d exactly ( D e n n y and Gaines, 2 0 0 0 ) . H o w e v e r , v e r y few s y s t e m s are purely d e t e r m i n i s t i c (Gillman and Hails, 1 9 9 7 ) . Stochastic  processes  incorporate chance. Even if t h e exact state of a stochastic s y s t e m is k n o w n a t one t i m e , e x a c t states in t h e f u t u r e can n e v e r be predicted ( D e n n y and Gaines, 2 0 0 0 ) . D e t e r m i n i s m and stochasticity are not rigid p r o p e r t i e s , t h o u g h . D e n n y and Gaines ( 2 0 0 0 ) describe t h e c o m m o n l y k n o w n stochastic flipping of a coin as a process w i t h an o u t c o m e t h a t could be exactly p r e d i c t e d . Knowing e n o u g h a b o u t t h e factors affecting t h e landing of t h e coin (i.e. t h e initial state of t h e c o i n , height above t h e g r o u n d at w h i c h t h e coin is flipped, t h e initial a n g u l a r v e l o c i t y , and air resistance, e t c . ) it w o u l d be possible to k n o w exactly w h e n t h e coin will land heads up. Flipping a coin in a c o n t e x t of sufficient knowledge and u n d e r s t a n d i n g w o u l d be a d e t e r m i n i s t i c process. S o m e o u t c o m e s , h o w e v e r , are e x t r e m e l y sensitive t o t h e initial s t a t e . These o u t c o m e s are said t o e x h i b i t d e t e r m i n i s t i c chaos ( S a r e w i t z e t a l . , 2 0 0 0 ) because they  are  unpredictable  due  to  non-measurable  shifts  in  initial  conditions. These o u t c o m e s can reasonably be assigned t o " c h a n c e " (Denny and Gaines, 2 0 0 0 ) . Forest s y s t e m s (1997),  contain  Kimmins  et  many  deterministic  al. ( 1 9 9 9 ) , and  Baker  processes. As and  Kimmins  Mladenoff  (1999)  illustrate t h r o u g h n u m e r o u s e x a m p l e s , science and f o r e s t  expertise  have  of  deepened  knowledge  and  understanding  of  many  these  ii  deterministic processes ( e . g . tree g r o w t h , m o r t a l i t y and c o m p e t i t i o n , and biomass a c c u m u l a t i o n in f o r e s t s ) . T i m m e r m a n s ( 1 9 9 1 ) describes some d e t e r m i n i s t i c c o m p o n e n t s of h u m a n d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g processes and  choice  outcomes  behaviour in  forest  on  systems,  d e t e r m i n i s t i c . Complexity these  outcomes  and  relating  with  however,  the  environment.  appear  to  be  Many  far  from  and subsequent u n c e r t a i n t y m a k e m a n y of the  underlying  processes  seem  stochastic.  Further, e v e n if c o m p l e t e knowledge w e r e possible, chaotic and linear interactions  non-  limit k n o w i n g all f u t u r e o u t c o m e s .  2.5 Complexity of a Forest System Viegas ( 1 9 8 2 ) points o u t t h a t w h e n d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g involves several deciding  bodies  and  several  sets  of  values  and  interrelations,  c o m p l e x i t y arises. C o m p l e x i t y makes acquiring k n o w l e d g e f o r b e t t e r decisions  challenging  in  forestry.  The  ability  to  manage  forests  systems u l t i m a t e l y depends on acquiring k n o w l e d g e and addressing the c o m p l e x i t y arising f r o m e c o s y s t e m s , s t a k e h o l d e r s , resources and policies.  2.5.1 Complexity in the Forest Ecosystem Subsystem The  terms  'ecosystem'  (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA,  and  1997a;  'forest'  are  Commission  variously on  defined  Sustainable  D e v e l o p m e n t , 1 9 9 6 ) . More t h a n one h u n d r e d definitions were f o u n d during this thesis r e s e a r c h . K i m m i n s ( 1 9 9 7 ) suggests t h a t few people really know w h a t t h e t e r m ecosystem m e a n s , and Seastedt believes t h a t e c o s y s t e m  (1996)  m a y mean w h a t e v e r t h e users w a n t it to  m e a n . The t e r m f o r e s t , according t o Meridith ( 1 9 9 3 ) , m a y also mean e v e r y t h i n g and w h a t e v e r we w a n t it to m e a n . Definitions of ecosystem and  forest  are  constructed  from  ambiguous  concepts,  such  as  12  c o m m u n i t i e s and e n v i r o n m e n t s , which t h e m s e l v e s have h u n d r e d of definitions. The  lack of precise and o p e r a t i v e  definitions  makes  it  difficult to k n o w how i n t e r v e n t i o n s relate to f o r e s t e c o s y s t e m s , given t h a t e c o s y s t e m s do not have boundaries n a t u r a l l y fixed in t i m e or space ( D u n s t e r and D u n s t e r , 1 9 9 6 ; Perry, 1 9 9 4 ) . I n a practical sense, ecosystems objectives  are  functional  (BCMOF,  units  relative  1 9 9 8 a ; Seastedt,  to  given  management  1 9 9 6 ; Jensen et a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) .  Division of f o r e s t e c o s y s t e m s into manageable units is one of t h e v e r y first issues t h a t f o r e s t e r s have to deal w i t h , and c o n s t i t u t e s a good example  of  how  forest  decision-making  should  involve  the  four  subsystems of t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m (Figure 2 . 2 ) .  Selection of spatial and temporal ecological scale  ...-r  V ...k^..  Forest r e s o u r c e s to priorize  .•**  A p p l i c a b l e policy  ><'.'.'..••.;>*••...  X ....  : V *•  ...•*** Agreement with stakeholders  / •*  Figure 2.2. Definition of a forest e c o s y s t e m . The filled area shows t h e convergence of c o m p o n e n t s of t h e f o u r s u b s y s t e m s of t h e forest s y s t e m in a n s w e r i n g t h e q u e s t i o n : Which is t h e unit of m a n a g e m e n t ?  13  Forest m a n a g e r s m u s t agree w i t h stakeholders of t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m on the  temporal  and  spatial  boundaries  of  forest  ecosystems,  in  accordance w i t h t h e scientific, m a n a g e m e n t , o r policy questions being considered. A l t h o u g h  in f o r e s t r y  the  basic subdivision  stand,  is a  depending upon specific purposes a single f o r e s t s t a n d , a w a t e r s h e d , or an entire f o r e s t region m a y be t h e spatial unit f o r m a n a g e m e n t . The t e m p o r a l scale of m a n a g e m e n t m a y be t h e p r e s e n t s t a t e , only one h u m a n g e n e r a t i o n , a stand r o t a t i o n , or p e r p e t u i t y .  2.5.1.1 Characteristics and Dynamics of Forest Ecosystems Complexity pervades f o r e s t ecosystems. T h e y are t h e m o s t biologically diverse t e r r e s t r i a l e c o s y s t e m s , as a c k n o w l e d g e d by t h e Convention on Biological  Diversity  (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA,  1997b),  and  present  an  intricate s t r u c t u r e , m a d e up of m a n y biological c o m p o n e n t s w i t h a high  degree  of  interaction  interdependency  and  (Mauersberger,  often 1995;  a  considerable  Kimmins,  degree  of  1997). Instead  of  averaging o u t , t h e m o s t l y n o n - l i n e a r interactions a m o n g c o m p o n e n t s of  ecosystems  modify  the  characteristics  and  functioning  of  the  ecosystems (Jorgensen and Muller, 2 0 0 0 ; G r e e n , 1 9 9 7 ) . T h r o u g h both positive and n e g a t i v e f e e d b a c k s , some o u t c o m e s of interactions r e t u r n as inputs to t h e e c o s y s t e m , f u r t h e r affecting s o m e characteristics and processes. A forest e c o s y s t e m  is hierarchically s t r u c t u r e d . According t o  ( 1 9 9 4 ) each e c o s y s t e m w h e n defined in space comprises  Perry  numerous  smaller e c o s y s t e m s a n d , at t h e same t i m e , is part of and in interacts w i t h a hierarchy of larger ecosystems. Van Dyne ( 1 9 6 6 ) s u m m a r i z e s basic  ecosystem  functions  as  transformation,  circulation,  a c c u m u l a t i o n - o f m a t t e r and flow of e n e r g y t h r o u g h t h e m e d i u m living o r g a n i s m s  and  t h e i r activities, and t h r o u g h  natural  and of  physical 14  processes.  As  open  systems,  ecosystems  exchange  energy  and  materials w i t h o t h e r s y s t e m s , including a d j a c e n t f o r e s t s , d o w n s t r e a m ecosystems,  and  the  atmosphere  (U.S.  National  Science  and  Technology Council, 1 9 9 6 ; Waring and Schlesinger, 1 9 8 5 ) . Forests are not static. Many a u t h o r s argue t h a t t h e y are rarely in equilibrium 1994;  (Waring  and  Schlelsinger,  1985;  Botkin,  1990;  Perry,  Pahl-Wostl, 1 9 9 5 ; C a r p e n t e r , 2 0 0 0 ; Jensen et a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) . Their  c o m p o s i t i o n , s t r u c t u r e and functioning are d y n a m i c (Wilds and W h i t e , 2 0 0 1 ) . Many states of e q u i l i b r i u m , or optimal  operating  points,  may  exist f o r an e c o s y s t e m ( C a r p e n t e r , 2 0 0 0 ; Perry et a l . , 1 9 9 0 ; DeAngelis and W a t e r h o u s e , 1 9 8 7 ) . Different states of forests . p r e s e n t a great range of t u r n o v e r r a t e s , which range f r o m forests t h a t are replaced by disturbances w i t h frequencies of t h o u s a n d s of y e a r s , t o forests t h a t are  naturally  disrupted  Forests owe t h e i r  much  more  frequently  properties to an interplay  (Carpenter;  between  2000).  deterministic  processes and stochastic e v e n t s , which include: •  gradual changes or t r e n d s in e c o s y s t e m ' s characteristics  that  occur at broad scales and o v e r v e r y long t i m e periods (DeAngelis and W h i t e , 1 9 9 4 ) . Jensen et al. ( 2 0 0 1 ) refer t o these changes as succession along multiple p a t h w a y s , and T u r n e r and  Johnson  ( 2 0 0 1 ) as t r a n s i e n t d y n a m i c s ; •  natural periodicities t h a t constitute seasonal variations or s e m i periodic  environmental  fluctuations  (DeAngelis  and  White,  1 9 9 4 ) ; and •  disturbances.  DeAngelis  and White  (1994)  refer to these  as  discrete, d i s r u p t i v e e v e n t s ; C a r p e n t e r ( 2 0 0 0 ) refers t o t h e m as surprising o u t b r e a k s and collapses; and Jensen et al.  (2001)  15  refer as discontinuities and unexpected c h a n g e s . These t e r m s give  a sense  of how  disturbances  are  considered  stochastic  events f o r t h e m o s t part. Gradual  changes  and  natural  periodicities  constitute  deterministic  processes t h a t t e n d t o be s m o o t h l y absorbed by f o r e s t  ecosystems  (Scheffer et a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) . As discussed in Section 2 . 5 , these can be fairly well described. H o w e v e r , f o r e s t d e v e l o p m e n t is n o t an o r d e r l y and predictable process. Rather, in m o s t forests succession is periodically disrupted  by  disturbances,  deflecting  them  from  some  otherwise  predictable successional path ( W h i t e , 1 9 7 9 ; A t t i w i l l , 1 9 9 4 ; K i m m i n s , 1997;  Parminter,  1 9 9 8 ) . Disturbances m a y  be artificial or n a t u r a l .  Forest m a n a g e m e n t , clearance and burning of f o r e s t s , a g r i c u l t u r e , and urbanization artificially d i s t u r b forest e c o s y s t e m s . W i l d f i r e , insects and pests, w i n d , floods and landslides naturally d i s t u r b t h e m . Forests are in fact highly d e p e n d e n t or c o n t i n g e n t on n a t u r a l d i s t u r b a n c e and its spatial and t e m p o r a l  d i s t r i b u t i o n for survival  (e.g. maintenance  of  properties) as r e p o r t e d by White and Pickett ( 1 9 8 5 ) , Wilds and White (2001),  and  Forman  (1995).  Each  forest  reflects  a  particular  disturbance r e g i m e ( e . g . d i s t r i b u t i o n , f r e q u e n c y , and r e t u r n interval of f i r e ) , which affects n o t only t h e state o f an e c o s y s t e m  immediately  following a d i s t u r b a n c e , but also t h e r a t e , degree and nature of its recovery  (Pickett  and  White,  1985;  Wilds  and  White,  2001).  Disturbance r e g i m e s v a r y along e n v i r o n m e n t a l g r a d i e n t s , which reflect spatially v a r y i n g f e a t u r e s of t h e landscape, which t r i g g e r disturbances or influence t h e i m p a c t s t h a t t h e y have on t h e forests (Naveh and L i e b e r m a n , 1 9 9 4 ) . A l t h o u g h natural disturbances m a y be necessary f o r long t e r m e c o s y s t e m health and s u r v i v a l , t h e y do not necessarily serve forest m a n a g e m e n t o b j e c t i v e s ( e . g . w i n d t h r o w of partial cut residual t r e e s ) . Disturbances d i s r u p t c o m m u n i t i e s and population  structures,  16  and change r e s o u r c e s , t h e availability of suitable h a b i t a t s , a n d / o r t h e physical  habitat  (Parminter  and  Daigle,  1997;  White  and  many  interacting  Pickett,  1985). Ecosystem  dynamics  is  the  result  of  factors.  Understanding these factors for m a n a g i n g forests is a challenging task and  requires  significant  processes  requires  processes  occurring  knowledge.  knowledge in  of  Understanding  present  ecosystems.  states  deterministic  and  cause-effect  Understanding  disturbances  requires k n o w l e d g e of both d e t e r m i n i s t i c processes and r a n d o m events and how t h e y affect t h o s e predictable p a t h w a y s .  2.5.2 Complexity in the Forest Resources Subsystem Forest  resources  are  a  compound  array  of  goods  and  services  obtained f r o m forests t h a t are valued by people (Rollins, 2 0 0 1 ) . These resources include t i m b e r p r o d u c t s , such as l u m b e r , pulp and paper and p l y w o o d , and f u e l w o o d ; n o n - t i m b e r p r o d u c t s , such as herbs and m u s h r o o m s , t r e e bark and leaves, and medicinal p l a n t s ; ecological f u n c t i o n s , such as c a r b o n s t o r a g e , w a t e r r e g u l a t i o n , and soil stability; and social f u n c t i o n s , such as habitat for h u m a n c o m m u n i t i e s (i.e. First Nations), r e c r e a t i o n , and spiritual solace. Provision of s o m e of these resources (i.e. t i m b e r ) is m o s t l y achieved t h r o u g h f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t . O t h e r forest resources, e v e n w h e n not directly provided by f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t , are affected by it. capability o f e c o s y s t e m s to provide f o r e s t resources  As t h e  is f i n i t e ,  the  people t h a t can benefit f r o m each e c o s y s t e m are also l i m i t e d . To know w h o , h o w , and in w h a t q u a n t i t y  people benefit f r o m  forest  m a n a g e m e n t is difficult. W h a t makes this task e v e n m o r e difficult is the fact t h a t people v a r y in t h e i r valuation of resources. Even t h e  17  same individual's v a l u a t i o n of a resource varies d u r i n g h i s / h e r life. Adding t h e m a n y  individual  rationales  behind v a l u a t i o n  is a very  onerous s c h e m e f o r m a n a g i n g forests.  2.5.2.1 The Economics of Forest Management D u e r r and Vaux ( 1 9 5 3 ) state t h a t m o s t f o r e s t r y concerns a r e economic concerns. Economics e n t e r s into t h e solution o f all t h e m a j o r practical problems in a f o r e s t s y s t e m , such as decisions a b o u t w h e n , w h e r e and how t o h a r v e s t a f o r e s t , a n d do so w i t h effectiveness  and  efficiency  (Pearse, 1 9 9 0 ) . Production of t i m b e r , by f a r t h e m o s t r e q u e s t e d forest product, presents unique characteristics, such as ( G h e b r e m i c h a e l e t al., 1996): •  t h e dual  nature  of timber.  Trees  (timber), and a "manufacturing  are both  a final  product  p l a n t " t h a t produces t h e final  product; •  a long p r o d u c t i o n period. T i m b e r p r o d u c t i o n t a k e s years t o reach a harvestable a g e . This makes t h e choice of an a p p r o p r i a t e discount rate a vital m a t t e r . I t also requires e s t i m a t e s of f u t u r e benefits, w h i c h are e x t r e m e l y uncertain d u e t o t h e length of t i m e involved;  •  joint  production  of  multiple  outputs.  Multiple  benefits  are  associated w i t h t h e production of t i m b e r ; •  i m m o b i l i t y . T i m b e r is fixed in a specific place; a n d  •  derived d e m a n d . D e m a n d f o r t i m b e r is d e r i v e d f r o m t h e d e m a n d for  the  various  intermediate  input  products  ( e . g . lumber,  p l y w o o d , p u l p ) . I n t u r n , d e m a n d f o r these is d e r i v e d f r o m t h e d e m a n d f o r e n d - u s e products ( e . g . h o u s i n g , f u r n i t u r e , p a p e r ) .  18  Forest  management  is  challenged  by  this  diverse  array  of  characteristics. A d e q u a t e knowledge is necessary f o r solving t h e m a n y questions t h a t arise in t i m b e r m a n a g e m e n t , such as h a r v e s t i n g t h e timber  from  appropriate  the  forest  discount  in  rate,  the  very  best  estimating  moment,  future  choosing  benefits  of  an  timber  I harvesting in t h e long r u n , selecting which o t h e r f o r e s t resources will be  prioritized  along  with  timber  production,  and  which  will  be  sacrificed, pricing t i m b e r , and forecasting d e m a n d f o r t i m b e r , f r o m t h e m a n y individual d e m a n d s f o r forest products ( e . g . G u n t e r and Haney 1984,  Klemperer  1996).  Markets  give  answers  to  many  of  these  questions. N u m e r o u s f o r e s t resources do not have a m a r k e t value, however. As Van Kooten and K r e m a r ( 2 0 0 0 ) a r g u e , " i n seeking to value e n v i r o n m e n t a l have  trouble  monetary  trading  amenities off t h e  and  public  (vague)  goods,  amenity  or  individuals good  often  against  a  m e a s u r e " . The value of n o n - m a r k e t resources has to be  estimated through  e v a l u a t i n g t h e willingness of people t o  pay  for  t h e m , instead o f establishing a m a r k e t value f o r t h e m ( K e n g e n , 1 9 9 7 ) . As t h e y do not have an exchange value, t h e i r value is not c o m p a r a b l e with m a r k e t value of o t h e r resources. This issue is a m a j o r challenge for f o r e s t r y . As t h e c h a p t e r 11 of Agenda 2 1 e m p h a s i z e s , a m a j o r reason f o r t h e failure t o practice sustainable f o r e s t r y is t h e inadequate recognition and t h e u n d e r e s t i m a t i o n of t h e value of t h e t o t a l package of  resources  provided  by  forests  (Commission  on  Sustainable  Development, 1992). Market conditions f o r f o r e s t resources are not static. Prices of products rise and fall due t o changes in quantities of products being d e m a n d e d and supplied (Pearse, 1 9 9 0 ) . Markets become less a t t r a c t i v e not only due to reduction in prices, but also due t o lack of economic supports given in t h e past ( K o l n , 1 9 9 8 ) , decreases in v o l u m e of d e m a n d , and  19  internal social and  political instabilities  (Chambers,  1999).  also impose s a n i t a r y , political, e c o n o m i c , ethical a n d barriers  to  the  exchange  of  products  (World  Trade  Markets  environmental Organization,  2 0 0 1 ) . As PriceWaterhouseCoopers ( 2 0 0 0 ) a r g u e s , globalization has become a t w o - e d g e d  s w o r d for f o r e s t r y , offering t h e possibility  of  m a r k e t e x p a n s i o n b u t also increasing t h e chances o f costly d a m a g e s f r o m new b a r r i e r s . Barbier ( 1 9 9 6 ) identifies t h e m o s t c o m m o n n o n t a r i f f barriers as q u a n t i t a t i v e restrictions a n d / o r q u a l i t y controls t h a t have  been t a r g e t e d  at  specific  products, wood  species  and  even  individual e x p o r t e r s . A b r u p t shifts in c o n s u m e r a t t i t u d e s also change m a r k e t s . For e x a m p l e , in August  1999 Home  Depot  surprised  the  forest i n d u s t r y w i t h t h e a n n o u n c e m e n t t h a t t h e c o m p a n y intends t o avoid all w o o d p r o d u c t s m a d e f r o m l u m b e r h a r v e s t e d f r o m e n d a n g e r e d or e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y sensitive forests by t h e e n d o f 2 0 0 2 (The Home Depot, 1 9 9 9 ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , in N o v e m b e r 1999 HomeBase  and  resolved t h a t  of  they  would  be  phasing  out  all  purchases  IKEA forest  products of n o n - c e r t i f i e d origin ( I . L u m b e r , 1 9 9 9 a ; I. L u m b e r , 1 9 9 9 b ) . The main task in f o r e s t r y is to solve t h e m a n y questions t h a t arise in deciding w h a t resources t o prioritize. A n o t h e r t a s k is t o deal w i t h t h e issue  of  who  eventually  benefits  and  who  potentially  loses  from  i n t e r v e n t i o n s in t h e f o r e s t .  2.5.3 Complexity in the Forest Stakeholders Subsystem Stakeholders are all t h e people w h o have an i n t e r e s t in a forest and w h o m a y be affected by a n y activity in it, or w h o m a y have an i m p a c t on t h e f o r e s t (Bass et a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) . A l t h o u g h people o f t e n have m o r e than  one  'stake'  in  forests,  being  hardly  classifiable,  major  stakeholders of a f o r e s t ( H i g m a n et a l . , 1 9 9 9 ) a r e :  20  •  Forest  managers.  Their  objective  is  to  fulfill  the  owner's  objectives t h r o u g h i n t e r v e n t i o n s of t h e f o r e s t . •  O w n e r s . T h e y pursue objectives such as profit  maximization,  steady i n c o m e , aesthetic quality, etc. •  Forest w o r k e r s . T h e y depend on t h e w a g e s resulting f r o m forest management.  •  Residents/visitors. People w h o live in or near t h e f o r e s t , and people w h o live f u r t h e r a w a y and w h o c o m e to t h e forest. These people can be directly affected by f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t .  •  E n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s . They often do not live in or near t h e forest, but  influence  other  stakeholders  on  environmental  conscientiousness. •  Forestry  officials and  politicians. They  set t h e  rules for  the  c o n t e x t in which forest m a n a g e m e n t occurs. •  National and global citizens. These people are f r o m a c o u n t r y (on national boundaries).  issues) or f r o m t h e w o r l d Some  of  these  (issues t h a t  are  surpass  organized  (e.g.  environmentalists). •  Consumers.  They  consume  products  resulting  from  forest  management. Each forest s y s t e m presents a particular c o n f i g u r a t i o n of stakeholders. Concerns a b o u t t h e m a n a g e m e n t of an u n i n h a b i t e d f o r e s t will probably rise  from  environmentalists,  as  pristine  forests  are  among  the  e m b l e m a t i c issues on which e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s engage people (Mercier, 1 9 9 7 ) . Conversely, t h e m a n a g e m e n t of a highly inhabited forest will mostly  concern  people  living  in  it,  who  drink  water  from  its  w a t e r s h e d s , e n j o y its scenery, and m a k e t h e i r income f r o m it. To  21  identify  the  ecosystem  main  stakeholders  is difficult  (Bass,  when  2001).  managing As t h e  a particular  World  Bank  forest  (1996)'s  Participation S o u r c e b o o k s t a t e s , n o t all parties can a u t o m a t i c a l l y be assumed to be r e l e v a n t or irrelevant. For e v e r y d e v e l o p m e n t concern being a d d r e s s e d , a broad s p e c t r u m of s t a k e h o l d e r s exists,  ranging  f r o m directly affected parties to individuals or institutions w i t h indirect interests. The s p e c t r u m of stakeholders in a s y s t e m is not rigid, but changes, mainly because of w h a t Mercier ( 1 9 9 7 ) and D u e r r ( 1 9 8 2 a ) refer to as c o n s t a n t e v o l u t i o n of m o t i v a t i o n s and values of people respect t o t h e i r relationship w i t h f o r e s t s , and because n e w  people  become i n v o l v e d . Forests  affect  people  and  people  impact  forests.  This  close  relationship leads t o t h e widely spread view of people as c o m p o n e n t s of ecosystems (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA, 1 9 9 9 ; C h r i s t e n s e n , 1 9 9 7 ; Meyer, 1 9 9 7 ; Suzuki a n d McConnell, 1 9 9 7 ; Wodley et a l . , 2 0 0 0 ) . A l t h o u g h m a n y h u m a n actions i m p a c t forest e c o s y s t e m s , only s o m e of t h e m disturb t h e m . From Franklin and Forman ( 1 9 8 7 ) a f o r e s t is d i s t u r b e d only if modified. when  Verification of modifications in an e c o s y s t e m , even  possible t h r o u g h  tests  of e c o s y s t e m  integrity  ( e . g . loss  of  n u t r i e n t s , loss of d i v e r s i t y ) , is v e r y difficult ( T r e w e e k , 1 9 9 9 ; Holling et al.,  1987).  Ultimately,  assessing  significance  of  impacts  on  ecosystems requires an intricate collective h u m a n j u d g e m e n t (Garling and Evans, 1 9 9 1 ; UNEP, 1 9 9 6 ) . W h a t s o m e individuals perceive as significant m i g h t be non-significant f o r o t h e r s . As K i m m i n s  (1997)  notes, scientists and t h e public c o m m o n l y do not agree a b o u t w h a t h u m a n actions d i s t u r b t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . Forest m a n a g e r s are challenged to explain t o o t h e r s t a k e h o l d e r s t h e actual  significance  of  their  management  (Sheppard,  2001).  With  respect t o e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues, h o w e v e r , people's k n o w l e d g e  -and  22  managers'  knowledge-  is s o m e t i m e s  distorted,  more  than  being  i n c o m p l e t e . This m a k e s it difficult t o reach a g r e e m e n t s . A n o t h e r issue t h a t m a n a g e r s deal w i t h is t h e t e n d e n c y o f people t o n o t internalize the  fact  potentially  that  capturing  disturbs  benefits  these  from  ecosystems  t h e forests (Mercier,  impacts and  1997).  Criticisms  against i n t e r v e n t i o n in forests are directed n o t only a t t h e w a y in which these i n t e r v e n t i o n s are d o n e , b u t also a t t h e m e r e fact of intervention.  For e x a m p l e ,  more  than  170 f o r e s t  stakeholders  cosponsored t h e bill " N a t i o n a l Forest Roadless Area C o n s e r v a t i o n A c t " introduced in t h e U.S. House o f Representatives in June 2 0 0 2 . I n c o n f r o n t i n g t h e s e challenges, m a n a g e r s have t o deal w i t h stakeholders.  These  are  not  "external  factors"  multiple  that  affect  m a n a g e m e n t , b u t a c o m p o n e n t o f m a n a g e m e n t itself.  2.5.3.1 Dealing with Stakeholders Engaging  stakeholders  is essential  in v a r i o u s  stages  o f decision-  m a k i n g in f o r e s t r y . Bass e t a l . ( 2 0 0 1 ) describe m u l t i p l e benefits o f doing  s o , such  as i m p r o v i n g  credibility  of objectives  and targets,  m a k i n g use o f a b r o a d e r range of ideas, skills a n d i n p u t s , ensuring practicality a n d focus o f resulting s t a n d a r d s , o b j e c t i v e s a n d t a r g e t s , and  building  a  stronger  foundation  of  stakeholder  trust  and  accountability. However,  managing  Stakeholders  present  stakeholder' different  involvement rights,  is a  capacities,  difficult  task.  responsibilities,  interests, r e w a r d s , a n d relationships w i t h o t h e r g r o u p s ( D u b o i s , 1 9 9 8 ; Bass e t a l . , 2 0 0 1 ; Foteau e t a l . , 1 9 9 8 ) , a n d t h e r e are a n u m b e r o f potential c o n s t r a i n t s t o effective public p a r t i c i p a t i o n . These range f r o m behavioural n o r m s o r cultural practice t h a t inhibit i n v o l v e m e n t o f some g r o u p s , t o legal  systems  that  m a y be in conflict  with  traditional  23  s y s t e m s , and cause confusion a b o u t rights and  responsibilities  for  resources ( B u r k e and T r a h a n t , 2 0 0 0 ; Mercier, 1 9 9 7 ; UNEP, 1 9 9 6 ) . To surpass  these  difficulties,  managers  consider  different  modes  of  p a r t i c i p a t i o n , such as c o e r c i o n , c o - o p t i o n , c o m p l i a n c e , c o n s u l t a t i o n , cooperation,  co-learning  and  joint  action,  and  collective  action  (Cornwall, 1 9 9 6 ; Bass et a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) . As t h e p e r f o r m a n c e of each of these m o d e s varies f r o m s t a k e h o l d e r to s t a k e h o l d e r , selecting t h e best c o m b i n a t i o n of t h e m challenges m a n a g e r s . From simple i m p r o v e m e n t s in public i n v o l v e m e n t in d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , m a n a g e r s are being pressed to use highly e l a b o r a t e d tools t h a t allow t h e visualization of simulated f u t u r e scenarios resulting f r o m harvesting ( S h e p p a r d , 2 0 0 1 ) .  2.5.4 Complexity in the Forest Policy Subsystem Forest  policy  refers t o t h e  purposive  course  of action or  inaction  followed in dealing w i t h t h e use of forest resources (Cubbage et a l . , 1993).  It  guides  how  forests  are  managed,  what  resources  are  p r o d u c e d , a n d w h o benefits f r o m forests. According t o D u e r r ( 1 9 8 2 b ) , t h e forest policy s u b s y s t e m comprises an i n t e r r e l a t e d  hierarchy  of  means and ends. I t includes not only particular f o r e s t procedures and objectives, but also n u m e r o u s o t h e r e n v i r o n m e n t a l , e c o n o m i c , social  procedures  stakeholders'  and  objectives.  motivations,  choices,  Forest and  policy  is  selections.  made  and  up  of  According  to  S t a n b u r y and V e r t i n s k y ( 2 0 0 0 ) and ( H o b e r g , 2 0 0 1 ) , it considers goals and specific o b j e c t i v e s t h a t derive f r o m t h e reasons t h a t m o t i v a t e t h e g o v e r n m e n t t o i n t e r v e n e , i n s t r u m e n t s t h a t best help t h e s e goals and o b j e c t i v e s , and t h e selected f o r m t h a t i n s t r u m e n t s acquire. Each one of these include  results multiple  from  complicated  actors  (e.g.  decision-making  policy  makers,  processes  forest  that  managers,  24  environmentalists)  and  an  array  of  values  (e.g.  environmental  p r o t e c t i o n , e c o n o m i c efficiency, social effectiveness). I n addition t o t h e widely described five steps in f o r e s t policy m a k i n g ( e . g . Howlett and R a m e s h , 1 9 9 5 ) , Anderson ( 1 9 9 4 ) includes an initial step, ' p r o b l e m f o r m a t i o n ' . Many issues concern s t a k e h o l d e r s , but f o r these issues t o acquire t h e status of p r o b l e m s in t h e view of policym a k e r s , intricate p o w e r interactions b e t w e e n s t a k e h o l d e r s m u s t occur. Issues t h a t concern one g r o u p of people do n o t necessarily concern another. As Cubbage  et al. ( 1 9 9 3 )  note, stakeholders  struggle  to  impose t h e i r v a r i o u s priorities, and this priority can be to keep t h e status quo f r o m w h i c h benefits are being o b t a i n e d . Hellstrom ( 1 9 9 7 ) reports a n u m b e r of instances in which f o r e s t r y conflicts have been constructive e l e m e n t s of t h e f o r e s t policy cycle. For f o r e s t m a n a g e r s t o know these  priorities and processes, and f r o m t h e r e  predict  what  p r o b l e m s will e v e n t u a l l y lead t o w h a t f u t u r e f o r e s t policy i n s t r u m e n t s is difficult. These f u t u r e policy i n s t r u m e n t s will s t r o n g l y influence t h e way in which m a n a g e m e n t is done. For e x a m p l e , if i n s t r u m e n t s are coercion-focused ( S t a n b u r y and V e r s t i n s k y , 2 0 0 0 ) , or " c o m m a n d and c o n t r o l " as r e f e r r e d by Pearse ( 2 0 0 0 ) , t h e b e h a v i o u r of m a n a g e r s will be restricted by legal provisions (Cubbage et a l . , 1 9 9 3 ) . I f t h e y are incentive-focused  instruments  (Stanbury  and V e r s t i n s k y ,  2000),  or  economic i n s t r u m e n t s (Pearse, 2 0 0 0 ) , m a n a g e m e n t will be d r i v e n by economic  incentives  to  perceive.  If  reference-focused  instruments  ( S t a n b u r y and V e r s t i n s k y , 2 0 0 0 ) , m a n a g e r s b e h a v i o r will be modified by m e a n s of altering t h e i r preference o r d e r i n g .  2.5.4.1 Dynamics of Forest Policy Policy processes conclude w i t h policy e v a l u a t i o n . Hoberg ( 2 0 0 1 ) and Cubbage ( 1 9 9 3 ) c o n n e c t t h e results of this step w i t h t h e beginning of  25  the policy cycle t h r o u g h feedback. Forest s t a k e h o l d e r s m a y be critical of t h e c u r r e n t o u t c o m e s of a f o r e s t policy ( e . g . u n e x p e c t e d increase in costs of o p e r a t i o n , weakness in protecting f o r e s t a t t r i b u t e s ) . These criticisms are concerns t h a t can e v e n t u a l l y result in p r o b l e m s t h a t a refined forest policy has to deal w i t h . The ability of s t a k e h o l d e r s to have  their  concerns  included  in t h e  forest  policy  agenda  varies.  According to Cobb et a l . ( 1 9 7 6 ) , t h e agenda can be established by an outside initiation m o d e l , which means t h a t e n v i r o n m e n t a l groups raise issues t h a t  are  taken  and  expanded  by  many  stakeholders,  and  eventually passed t o p o l i c y - m a k e r s t h a t include t h e m into t h e a g e n d a ; by a mobilization m o d e l , which means t h a t issues are placed directly into t h e agenda by p o l i c y - m a k e r s ; or by inside initiation m o d e l , which means t h a t issues are p r o m o t e d by certain s t a k e h o l d e r s t h a t do not seek to have t h e m e x p a n d e d by o t h e r s t a k e h o l d e r s . perceive  these  issues  and  eventually  incorporate  Policy-makers  them  into  the  agenda. Forest m a n a g e r s have t o be k n o w l e d g e a b l e a b o u t t h e issues t h a t stakeholders w i t h particular interests are t r y i n g t o i n t e g r a t e into the policy a g e n d a . Various i n s t r u m e n t s constrain m a n a g e r s ' actions, but also present w i t h other  opportunities  for  benefit t h r o u g h  incentives.  Complying  with  constraints and t a k i n g a d v a n t a g e of o p p o r t u n i t i e s requires a g r e a t deal of k n o w l e d g e . I f forests are not m a n a g e d according t o c u r r e n t laws and r e g u l a t i o n , e v e n t u a l l y  punitive  m e a s u r e s against t h e  manager  result. I n a d d i t i o n , if a d v a n t a g e is not t a k e n of incentives offered t o manage  forests  in  a  given  way,  managers  may  lose  valuable  opportunities.  26  2.6 Conclusion Forests are s y s t e m s m a d e of e c o s y s t e m , resource, s t a k e h o l d e r and policy s u b s y s t e m s . Multiple c o m p o n e n t s and t h e i r interactions m a k e a forest s y s t e m a c o m p l e x adaptive s y s t e m . M a n a g e m e n t of this s y s t e m , including all its s u b s y s t e m s which are in c o n s t a n t c h a n g e , is difficult. Sufficient  knowledge  is  required  for  planning  and  implementing  m a n a g e m e n t actions t h a t are t h e best ecologically, economically and socially  for the  present  and f u t u r e . As this  knowledge  is  always  i n c o m p l e t e , f o r e s t planning is done under u n c e r t a i n t y .  27  CHAPTER I I I . UNCERTAINTY AND BETTER FOREST PLANNING WITH INCOMPLETE KNOWLEDGE 3.1 Uncertainty. A kind of Ignorance uncertainty  Although  ignorance  and  are  frequently  considered  s y n o n y m s (Vercelli, 1 9 9 8 ) , as S m i t h s o n ( 1 9 8 9 ) a r g u e s , u n c e r t a i n t y is not as broad a c o n c e p t . The O x f o r d Dictionary defines ignorance as lack of k n o w l e d g e . Both ignorance and k n o w l e d g e are c o n s t r u c t s , so are  determined  by  people  (Golledge,  1991).  Once  something  is  considered valid k n o w l e d g e , unawareness of it is considered ignorance in t h e c o n t e x t and t i m e in which its validity was d e t e r m i n e d . I g n o r a n c e varies  in  kind.  something  due  Intentional to  ignorance  personal  arises  convenience  or  from social  inattention taboo.  to  Some  knowledge is considered irrelevant or u n d e s i r a b l e , and learning it is neglected. I n c o n t r a s t , d i s t o r t i o n and incompleteness of k n o w l e d g e are unintentionally  created  ignorance.  Some  ideas  and  concepts  are  considered r e l e v a n t , and are acquired as k n o w l e d g e . I f this knowledge includes  bias,  inaccuracies  and  confusion,  it  is d i s t o r t e d .  If  it  is  i n c o m p l e t e , it is u n c e r t a i n ( S m i t h s o n , 1 9 8 9 ) . Uncertainty  refers t o a state of incomplete  k n o w l e d g e . Ideas  and  concepts are p r e s e n t b u t in a v a g u e , probabilistic, a m b i g u o u s , fuzzy or non-specific state ( S m i t h s o n , 1 9 8 9 ) . Uncertain k n o w l e d g e , t h e r e f o r e , has t h e potential t o be m o r e c o m p l e t e . I t reflects t h e confidence w i t h which  any  estimate  can  be  accepted  as  representing  the  future  o u t c o m e of a process (U.S. EPA, 1 9 9 9 ) .  28  3.1.1 Origin, Assessment and Representation of Uncertainty A s y s t e m is not u n c e r t a i n , but c o m p l e x . U n c e r t a i n t y arises f r o m a h u m a n incapability of having complete k n o w l e d g e a b o u t t h e s y s t e m due to its c o m p l e x i t y (Viegas, 1 9 8 2 ; Holling et a l . , 1 9 8 7 ) . I n c o m p l e t e knowledge impedes u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e original states of f o r e s t s , and predictions of t h e i r f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t . This h a m p e r s wise decisionm a k i n g ( H o l l o w a y , 1 9 7 9 ) . A l t h o u g h a necessary task ( e . g . u n c e r t a i n t y can  be  so  large  that  predictions  are  irrelevant),  assessment  of  u n c e r t a i n t y is generally difficult ( S m i t h s o n , 1 9 8 9 ) . As S t e w a r t ( 2 0 0 0 ) states, in s o m e cases assessing t h e u n c e r t a i n t y prediction  is m o r e  Mathematical  technically  difficult t h a n  associated w i t h a  making the  prediction.  approaches f o r assessing u n c e r t a i n t y include probability  t h e o r y (La Place, 1 8 2 0 ) , classical set t h e o r y C a n t o r ( 1 8 8 3 ) , fuzzy set t h e o r y and fuzzy m e a s u r e t h e o r y (Bellman and Z a d e h , 1 9 7 0 ) , and rough set t h e o r y (Pawlak and S k o w r o n , 1 9 9 9 ) . A l t h o u g h t h e widely  used  (Sutton,  1982;  Klir,  1994;  Isukapalli,  1999),  most these  approaches are not t h e only w a y to e s t i m a t e t h e d e g r e e of u n c e r t a i n t y in specific decision situations. Sarewitz et al. ( 2 0 0 0 ) indicate t h a t apart of being difficult, one of t h e disadvantages of using purely probabilistic approaches t o describe u n c e r t a i n t y is t h a t probabilities are built upon mostly uncertain a s s u m p t i o n s . This fact leads Ritchie and (1993) another  to  argue  that  uncertainty.  uncertainty In  spite  of  cannot this,  the  be  described  public,  Marshall based  managers  on and  scientists s e e m t o b e t t e r t r u s t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f u n c e r t a i n t y t h a t use mathematics  (Fahey  and  Randall,  1998).  Forest  managers  are  f r e q u e n t l y t e m p t e d t o m a n a g e based on official m a t h e m a t i c a l models leaving aside t h e i r instinct, and even s o m e t i m e s , t h e i r c o m m o n sense. As Ascher ( 1 9 8 1 ) a n d Pielke e t al. ( 2 0 0 0 ) a r g u e , t h e last t e s t of a prediction of a f u t u r e o u t c o m e  is t o evaluate  its accuracy  against  29  actual o u t c o m e s as t h e y u n f o l d . Sufficient feedback m a k e s assessment of u n c e r t a i n t y a m o r e s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d m a t t e r ( S t e w a r t , 2 0 0 0 ) . Past predictions can be m a t c h e d w i t h c u r r e n t data t o assess f i t . A l t h o u g h challenging, as Rayner ( 2 0 0 0 ) discusses, " r e t r o d i c t i n g " past events has been central t o t h e assessment of climate change m o d e l s , f o r e x a m p l e . T o g e t h e r w i t h a d e q u a t e feedback, assessing u n c e r t a i n t y can involve j u d g m e n t  (Stewart,  2000). Through  experience,  ranges of  u n c e r t a i n t y can be l e a r n e d , a n d t h e associated risk can be t a k e n in t o consideration d u r i n g decisions.  3.1.2 When Uncertainty becomes Risk Risk  has n u m e r o u s  definitions,  as a c k n o w l e d g e d  by Ritchie a n d  Marshall ( 1 9 9 3 ) , Cool ( 1 9 9 9 ) , and T r e w e e k ( 1 9 9 9 ) . Most definitions, h o w e v e r , s e e m t o c o n v e r g e o n t w o k e y e l e m e n t s : loss caused by an e v e n t , and probability o f occurrence of t h e e v e n t ( e . g . a probability between 0 and 1 ) . As knowledge  a b o u t a forest system's f u t u r e  is i n c o m p l e t e ,  many  o u t c o m e s are n o t k n o w n . For e x a m p l e , as Cool ( 1 9 9 9 ) s t a t e s , if a t least one of these possible o u t c o m e s represents a loss, t h e n t h e r e is risk i n v o l v e d . Risk t h e r e f o r e arises f r o m u n c e r t a i n t y . T h e u n c e r t a i n t y about  the  undesirable  future  leaves  consequences  people  worried  over  which  of  several  m a y result (Ritchie a n d Marshall, 1 9 9 3 ;  Holzheu and W i e d e m a n n , 1 9 9 3 ) . How w o r r i e d people feel, and t h e i r willingness t o cope w i t h a n uncertain f u t u r e , varies a m o n g individuals ( S t a r r , 1 9 8 0 ) . People also change t h e i r perception a n d willingness t o take  risks  Chociolko,  when 1994).  confronted Acquisition  with of  different adequate  situations  (Leiss  knowledge  and  reduces  u n c e r t a i n t y , a n d can e v e n t u a l l y change p e r c e p t i o n o f risk itself (Ritchie and Marshall, 1 9 9 3 ; Rescher, 1 9 8 3 ) . As w i t h u n c e r t a i n t y ,  feedback 30  and j u d g m e n t is useful for e s t i m a t i n g and e v a l u a t i n g risk. Evaluation of past t h r e a t e n i n g situations and vulnerabilities, t h e i r o u t c o m e s and associated losses, help t o plan responses to potential d a m a g i n g events occurring in t h e s y s t e m being m a n a g e d . Mathematical quantification of risk is c o m m o n . Probabilities of losses due t o change in m a r k e t s ( e . g . Ritchie and Marshall, 1 9 9 3 ) , and natural d i s t u r b a n c e s such as beetle attacks ( e . g . Shore and Safranyik, 1 9 9 2 ) , fire ( e . g . T h o m p s o n et a l . , 2000),  windthrow  ( e . g . Mitchell at a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) , and  landslide  (e.g.  Anbalagan et a l . , 1 9 9 6 ) is knowledge available t o f o r e s t m a n a g e r s . Retrodicting past e v e n t s t o learn f r o m previous d a m a g i n g events in a systematic w a y , h o w e v e r , is less r e p o r t e d .  3.1.3 Crippling and Overlooked Uncertainty I f there was no u n c e r t a i n t y , m a n a g e r s w o u l d always know  exactly  w h a t course of action t o t a k e and exactly w h e n , w h e r e , w h y and how to  take  it. T h o u g h  frequently worries  overlooked.  and  eventually  (Georgantzas common  a fact  and  life, t h e  Conversely, cripples  Acar,  approach  of  of  uncertainty  The  in  wait-and-see  natural  uncertainty  about  decision-making  1995).  in m a n a g i n g  effects  resources  the  future  certain  people  approach (Rayner,  Some s t a k e h o l d e r s propose strict i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of t h e principle  are  is  a  2000).  precautionary  as t h e best w a y of dealing w i t h situations of u n c e r t a i n t y in  f o r e s t r y . As D u n t o n ( 1 9 9 8 ) discusses, t h e y suggest t h a t no action should  be  taken  if t h e r e  is any  likelihood,  however  small,  that  e n v i r o n m e n t a l d a m a g e could occur. Fear of u n c e r t a i n t y n a r r o w s options f o r risk a v e r t i n g m a n a g e r s , who wish  to  be  certain  about  no  possibility  of  losses  before  making  decisions (Ritchie and Marshall 1 9 9 3 ) . C o u r t n e y et al. ( 1 9 9 9 ) state that  assuming  that  the  world  is  completely  uncertain  can  lead  31  managers  to  abandon  analytical  rigor  when  planning  and  base  decisions purely on instinct. H o w e v e r , instinct c a n n o t be excluded f r o m decision-making description  of  (Fahey the  and  Randall,  "intuitive  logic"  1998).  approach  I. to  Wilson's scenario  (1998) planning  i m p l e m e n t e d by D u t c h / S h e l l in t h e 1970s illustrates t h e i m p o r t a n t role t h a t gut feeling occupies in d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . Other  managers  complete  make  decisions  ( C h a m b e r s and Taylor,  presuming  that  knowledge  is  1999). They overlook  uncertainty  a n d , as a result, do not consider t h e chance of loss.  Recognizing  m a n a g e r s ' limited u n d e r s t a n d i n g of forest processes, Nelson recommends "appropriate  incorporating warnings  into analysis of f u t u r e  of  the  inherent  forest  uncertainty  (2001)  conditions in  forest  m a n a g e m e n t , especially t h e m a g n i t u d e of catastrophic events such as fire and insects". As C o u r t n e y et al. ( 1 9 9 9 ) point o u t , u n d e r e s t i m a t i n g u n c e r t a i n t y can lead t o strategies t h a t n e i t h e r d e f e n d against t h r e a t s nor t a k e a d v a n t a g e of o p p o r t u n i t i e s . The i m p o r t a n c e of a c k n o w l e d g i n g u n c e r t a i n t y and e v e n t u a l risk made N e w m a n ( 1 9 8 8 ) t o predict t h a t these tasks w o u l d be t h e n e x t f u n d a m e n t a l issue f o r f o r e s t economists to address. As Brazee and N e w m a n ( 1 9 9 9 ) n o t e , t h e r e has been an explosion of papers on u n c e r t a i n t y and risk in f o r e s t e c o n o m i c s .  3.2 Forest Decision-Making Under Uncertainty A decision is t h e selection of a course of action ( R o w e , 1 9 9 2 ) . Forest decisions range in scope f r o m those concerning d a y - t o - d a y activities, to those concerning t h e v e r y l o n g - t e r m f u t u r e of t h e f o r e s t , and f r o m small stands of trees t o entire forest regions ( B u o n g i o r n o and Gilles, 1987).  At  nearly  every  level  in forest  decision-making  there  are  a l t e r n a t i v e s t o be w e i g h e d ( D u e r r , 1 9 8 2 c ) . As Holloway ( 1 9 7 9 ) s t a t e s , when  alternatives  have  known  outcomes,  and  consequences  are  32  described, t h e n m a k i n g decisions is a simple t a s k . This rarely occurs in f o r e s t r y . F u r t h e r m o r e , Rowe ( 1 9 9 2 ) argues t h a t full k n o w l e d g e at a given point in t i m e could assure one good individual decision at t h a t t i m e , but not all successive decisions. W h e n m a k i n g decisions, diligent forest m a n a g e r s collect t h e best available i n f o r m a t i o n and analyze it. From t h i s , t h e y learn a b o u t t r e n d s and p a t t e r n s , a n d can infer m u c h about  the  future.  However,  uncertainty  remains.  Courtney  et  al.  ( 1 9 9 9 ) classify this u n c e r t a i n t y into f o u r levels: 1. A  clear-enough  future.  The  manager  can  develop  a  single  forecast o f t h e f u t u r e - o r scenario- t h a t is precise e n o u g h f o r planning m a n a g e m e n t . 2. A l t e r n a t e f u t u r e s . The m a n a g e r can describe t h e f u t u r e as one of a few a l t e r n a t e scenarios. I f t h e scenario w e r e predictable, some o f t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e plan would c h a n g e . 3. A range of f u t u r e s . The m a n a g e r can identify a r a n g e of possible f u t u r e s . T h e r e are no naturally discrete scenarios, and planning has t o be flexible e n o u g h to adequate to any changing conditions and resulting scenario. 4. True trends  ambiguity. that  Possible  define  the  futures  future  cannot  cannot  be  be  identified.  identified,  or  Even their  behavior p r e d i c t e d . Planning will hardly drive m a n a g e m e n t , but has t o be flexible t o i n c o r p o r a t e k n o w l e d g e once p r o d u c e d . As these a u t h o r s a r g u e , m o s t decisions t h a t m a n a g e r s m a k e fall into the  categories  "alternate  futures"  and  "a  range  of  futures".  A  preliminary step in f o r e s t d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g is t o identify t h e level of u n c e r t a i n t y t h a t s u r r o u n d s t h e decisions being m a d e , as each level of u n c e r t a i n t y d e m a n d s a d i f f e r e n t approach t o deal w i t h (Ritchie and Marshall, 1 9 9 3 ) .  33  From w h a t S t e w a r t ( 2 0 0 0 ) describes as t h e general e n v i r o n m e n t f o r decision-making  and  prediction,  the  environment  in  which  forest  d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g occurs can be conceptualized as: t h e forest s y s t e m itself;  the  information  c h a n n e l , which  brings i n f o r m a t i o n  from  the  s y s t e m t o t h e m a n a g e r ; and t h e decision c o n t e x t , t h a t influences t h e way  in  which  decision-making  is  done  (Figure  3.1).  Uncertainty  pervades f o r e s t r y due t o t h e c o m b i n a t i o n of p r o p e r t i e s of these t h r e e elements.  Figure 3.1  The e n v i r o n m e n t for forest d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g .  34  3.2.1 The I n f o r m a t i o n Channel The i n f o r m a t i o n channel includes i n s t r u m e n t s , o b s e r v e r s , data links, and various displays of data ( S t e w a r t , 2 0 0 0 ) . All these help m a n a g e r s to u n d e r s t a n d t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m . According t o Z u c c h e t t o and Janson ( 1 9 8 5 ) , people t e n d to organize t h e i r conception of ( e . g . u n d e r s t a n d ) the e n v i r o n m e n t w i t h t h e aid of some f o r m of m o d e l . A model is an abstract r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a s y s t e m or process ( T u r n e r and Johnson, 2 0 0 1 ) , a simple r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a given u n d e r s t a n d i n g  (Chambers  and Taylor, 1 9 9 9 ) , o r an a b s t r a c t i o n o f h o w w e t h i n k n a t u r e operates (DeAngelis and W a t e r h o u s e , 1 9 8 7 ) . Managers use m o d e l s t o simplify forest s y s t e m s in o r d e r to u n d e r s t a n d t h e m . Models have m a n y uses in f o r e s t r y , and guide t h e o b s e r v a t i o n and representation  of ecological  phenomena  (Haag  and  Kaupenjohann,  2 0 0 1 ; T u r n e r and J o h n s o n , 2 0 0 1 ) . As models are t o be used  for  specific p u r p o s e s , t o decide which to use is a challenge ( B o t k i n , 2 0 0 1 ; Shenk and Franklin, 2 0 0 1 ) . Continuous evaluation of models should be a key issue in f o r e s t r y . As Caswell and Trevisan ( 1 9 9 4 ) and T u r n e r and Johnson ( 2 0 0 1 ) a r g u e , evaluation should be m a d e in t e r m s of how well t h e y are m e e t i n g o b j e c t i v e s and agreeing w i t h empirical o b s e r v a t i o n s . Sensitivity analyses are r u n , and t h e relative i m p o r t a n c e of particular p a r a m e t e r s w i t h i n t h e model is e v a l u a t e d . U n c e r t a i n t y analysis is also done (Ricotti a n d Z i o , 1 9 9 9 ) . Botkin ( 2 0 0 1 ) points o u t t h a t a central challenge in m o d e l i n g is to i m p r o v e c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e o r y and  observation.  Landsberg  (2001)  argues  that  managers  and  scientists need t o find c o m m o n g r o u n d in this r e g a r d . Many c u r r e n t efforts in m o d e l i n g a i m t o b e t t e r capture t h e particular f e a t u r e s of the forest s y s t e m . As LeMay and Marshall ( 2 0 0 1 ) s t a t e , m o d e l s have new demands.  Shifts  in f o r e s t  management  have  changed  information  needed to m a k e i n f o r m e d decisions in f o r e s t r y . I n using only t h e best  35  available m o d e l s , m a n a g e r s can i m p r o v e k n o w l e d g e a b o u t t h e forest system. Mathematical  models,  however,  are  not t h e  only  possible  way  of  getting t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e forest s y s t e m . Managers should use o t h e r approaches w h e n cause-effect relations are t o o u n c e r t a i n ( T h o m p s o n , 1 9 6 7 ) . J u d g m e n t , i m a g i n a t i o n , and instinct as sources of knowledge are widely r e p o r t e d ( T h o m p s o n , 1 9 6 7 ; M u m p o w e r and S t e w a r t , 1 9 9 6 ; S c h w a r t z , 1 9 9 6 ; Fahey and Randall, 1 9 9 8 ; S t e w a r t , 2 0 0 0 ) . I n learning public a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s f o r e s t s , f o r e x a m p l e , t h e i n f o r m a t i o n channel should include d i f f e r e n t i n s t a n c e s . o f direct c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h t h e stakeholders  of  the  forest  system.  Possibly,  however,  the  most  i m p o r t a n t w a y of acquiring knowledge f r o m a f o r e s t s y s t e m to m a n a g e is direct m o n i t o r i n g o f t h e o u t c o m e s o f m a n a g e m e n t actions. Problems  in t h e  certainty,  and  information  produce  channel  ignorance  promote  through  confusion,  distortions.  decrease  Failures  in  m a n a g i n g n a t u r a l resources resulting f r o m a w e a k i n f o r m a t i o n channel are widely r e p o r t e d ( e . g . Sarewitz et al. 2 0 0 0 ) . A good e x a m p l e in BC f o r e s t r y is t h e r e p o r t d u r i n g t h e last round of t h e t i m b e r supply review that  revealed  that  many  of  site  predictions w e r e based w e r e poor.  index  estimates  on  which  yield  Generally site index has been  u n d e r e s t i m a t e d (Site Productivity W o r k i n g G r o u p , 1 9 9 7 ) .  3.2.2 The Context for Decision-Making The c o n t e x t f o r d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g is m a d e - u p of t h e p r o c e d u r a l , social and bureaucratic issues t h a t s u r r o u n d forest m a n a g e r s w h e n m a k i n g decisions. As  Rowe  (1992)  points  out,  decision-making  is not  an  isolated psychological a c t i v i t y , b u t a process t h a t t a k e s place in groups and involves conflict. T h o m p s o n ( 1 9 6 7 ) argues t h a t w h a t is decided  36  and f e a t u r e s of t h e c o n t e x t t h a t affect how this is decided are equal concerns t o m a n a g e r s . Procedures used t o m a k e decisions m a y be specified and be rigid. As I v e r s o n ( 1 9 9 8 ) e x p l a i n s , forest d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g is often forced into rigid  straightjackets  such  as  rational  planning,  or  command  and  control d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . As an e x a m p l e of how f o r e s t r y decisions are framed  by  a  institutional  context,  inflexibility  Nyberg and  (1999)  reluctance  identifies of  regulatory  institutions  to  and  change  practices, objectives or opinions as m a j o r barriers t o a d a p t i v e forest m a n a g e m e n t . The f r a m e w o r k of goals and m a n a g e m e n t  procedures  for public assets are particularly rigid, especially in public forests which are expected to g e n e r a t e a wide sort of benefits. Binkley ( 1 9 9 7 ) , for e x a m p l e , discusses how forest t e n u r e s can impose a rigid and u n i f o r m grid  that  constrains  management.  Other  examples  are  given  by  Daniels and W a l k e r ( 1 9 9 7 ) and Solberg and Miina ( 1 9 9 6 ) in describing how v e r y specific r e q u i r e m e n t s for involving s t a k e h o l d e r s  in forest  decisions create all s o r t of t e m p o r a l constraints. Elements  of  the  context  for  decision-making  also  constrain  the  i n f o r m a t i o n c h a n n e l , specifically how and w h e r e t o obtain i n f o r m a t i o n from  the  forest  requirements  are  system set  in  when many  making  instances,  decisions. such  as  Information  BC,  in  where  m a n d a t o r y i n f o r m a t i o n t o be included in f o r e s t planning is specified by t h e Section 10 o f t h e BCFPC and Sections 1 8 - 2 0 of t h e Operational Planning Regulation (BCMOF, 1995 and 1 9 9 8 b ) . Rigidity goes f u r t h e r , in legally defining " k n o w n i n f o r m a t i o n " to be included in f o r e s t plans in the  Province.  processes  more  Requirements than  on  that  results  information also challenge  focus the  on  specific  acquisition  of  k n o w l e d g e . I n instances, acquiring k n o w l e d g e is c o n s t r a i n e d by an array of " o f f i c i a l " sources of i n f o r m a t i o n , such as national statistics,  37  public forest c o v e r s , and public e n v i r o n m e n t a l m o n i t o r i n g d a t a . This i n f o r m a t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s t h e basis o v e r w h i c h t h e r e s t o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n has t o be built up. Managers have to fit t h e i r k n o w l e d g e w i t h this official i n f o r m a t i o n , and if t h e official i n f o r m a t i o n is w r o n g m u s t defend their own knowledge. The acceptability of u n c e r t a i n t y and risk is also reflected in t h e c o n t e x t for d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g .  Stakeholders  can be risk a v e r s e , and this  is  passed on t o m a n a g e r s (Ritchie and Marshall, 1 9 9 3 ) . S o m e c o n t e x t s will be m o r e t o l e r a b l e t o type  two errors,  assume t h e risk of type one errors  while o t h e r s will p r e f e r t o  on predictions of f u t u r e o u t c o m e s .  In the c o n t e x t f o r f o r e s t decisions, w h e r e ecological risk is p e r c e i v e d , it is a p p r o p r i a t e t o e x p e c t t h a t managers t r y t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t t h e i r m a n a g e m e n t will not h a r m ecosystems. But on t h e o t h e r side, as Treweek  (1999)  describes,  regulators  set t h r e s h o l d s f o r t y p e  two  errors. Policies in t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m reflect t h e t o l e r a n c e to risk t h a t g o v e r n m e n t s are able t o accept. Democratic g o v e r n m e n t s are under g r e a t e r scrutiny and t e n d t o have low tolerance of failure. As described in BCMOF's ( 1 9 9 9 a ) " M a n a g i n g Risk Within a S t a t u t o r y  Framework",  forest policy s o m e t i m e s allows f o r discretion in d e t e r m i n i n g acceptable and unacceptable levels of risk. And g o v e r n m e n t s usually assume a risk-avoiding p o s i t i o n , w h i c h increases c o n s t r a i n t s t o f o r e s t decisions. Managers' decisions are also influenced by v a r i o u s social c o n v e n t i o n s , restrictions, or incentives. Decisions can be influenced by praise or criticisms received f o r recent successful or unsuccessful  predictions  and decisions ( S t e w a r t , 2 0 0 0 ) . Forest m a n a g e r s are increasingly under public  scrutiny,  and  are  professionally  accountable  for their  work  ( R a t t r a y , 1 9 9 9 ) . As k n o w l e d g e a b o u t e l e m e n t s of t h e forests s y s t e m commonly agreements  differs on  between  many  the  decisions  public  and  are difficult.  forest  Managers  managers, are  almost  38  certain a b o u t m a n y t h i n g s t h a t t h e public are u n c e r t a i n or broadly ignorant a b o u t , and vice v e r s a . For m a n y people, f o r e x a m p l e , t h e biological processes t h a t follow harvesting are not clear  (Kimmins,  1 9 9 7 ) , and concepts such as sustainable forest m a n a g e m e n t can have a completely d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g . I n c o m p e t i t i v e business e n v i r o n m e n t s , f o r e s t m a n a g e r s ' bosses can consider risky decisions t h a t result in positive o u t c o m e s w o r t h t a k i n g , and will provide incentives t o t a k e t h e m . H o w e v e r , these same bosses are less likely t o accept t h e downside of these s a m e risky decisions, and this puts m a n a g e r s u n d e r stress. Changing conditions w i t h i n t h e forest s y s t e m also constrain t h e f r e e d o m f o r m a k i n g decisions. For e x a m p l e , C h a m b e r s and T a y l o r ( 1 9 9 9 ) describe t h e pressure for rapid r e t u r n on i n v e s t m e n t s w h e n m a r k e t conditions c h a n g e . Responding to natural d i s t u r b a n c e s in forests is a n o t h e r e x a m p l e of having t o m a k e decisions w i t h a v e r y n a r r o w range of possibilities, as t h e response t o t h e present e p i d e m i c of bark beetle in BC forests shows  (BCMOF,  2001a). These rigidities in t h e c o n t e x t f o r d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e flexibility t h a t f o r e s t planning processes should be g r a n t e d t o occur in. Kimmins ( 1 9 9 7 ) relates wise decisions a b o u t how forests are m a n a g e d to careful p l a n n i n g . A n d , as Fahey and Randall ( 1 9 9 8 ) a r g u e , b e t t e r planning occurs in a flexible and adaptive f o r e s t planning scheme t h a t allows for c o n s t a n t l e a r n i n g .  3.3 Better Forest Planning: A Constant Learning Process Planning is an integral and f u n d a m e n t a l c o m p o n e n t of f o r e s t r y ( D u e r r , 1 9 8 2 c ) . The  FAO ( 1 9 9 8 )  describes  planning  as an active  process  requiring careful t h o u g h t a b o u t w h a t could or should happen in t h e f u t u r e and t h a t involves t h e coordination of all r e l e v a n t activities for 39  the purpose of achieving specified goals and o b j e c t i v e s . C h a m b e r s and Taylor ( 1 9 9 9 ) identify t h e stages in planning as: 1. Review and u n d e r s t a n d i n g . I n this stage m a n a g e r s incorporate knowledge about the system. 2. Goal f o r m u l a t i o n . Having identified t h e s y s t e m , goals for it are formulated. 3. Problem  formulation.  The  specific  problem  to  approach  is  identified and c h a r a c t e r i z e d . 4. Plans. A n u m b e r of solutions to t h e p r o b l e m are p r e p a r e d . 5. Evaluation. Consequences of each plan are m e a s u r e d . Plans are c o m p a r e d in t e r m s of t h e i r a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of goals preset. 6. Selection. The best plan is chosen f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . 7. I m p l e m e n t a t i o n  and  c o n t r o l . The  plan  is put  in place  and  monitored. As Rowe other.  (1992)  Planning  described  asserts, d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g eventually  as a n y t h i n g  results  between  and  planning feed  in w h a t Johnston  a series  of a r b i t r a r y  et al. or  each  (1967)  dogmatic  decisions, and a critical and sophisticated investigation into t h e whole range of possible choices open to m a n a g e r s . U n c e r t a i n t y goes t o g e t h e r with these decisions. Setting a d e q u a t e o b j e c t i v e s and selecting t h e best w a y of achieving these in an e v e r - c h a n g i n g s y s t e m has to be learned t h r o u g h practical experience  (Fedkiw,  1998).  As  Henriksson  (1999)  states,  better  planning involves c o n s t a n t learning ( e . g . acquisition of k n o w l e d g e ) . Kolb ( 1 9 8 4 ) has suggested f o u r stages in a learning cycle (Figure 3 . 2 ) .  40  Concrete Experience (Implementing the plan)  Active Experimentation (Improvements to the planning  Reflective Observation  process)  (Assessing planning  performance)  Abstract Conceptualization (Weakness and strength of planning)  Planning and t h e learning cycle (based on Kolb, 1 9 8 4 )  Figure 3.2  Learning as a c o m p o n e n t of planning is widely r e p o r t e d as a condition for successful m a n a g e m e n t (Rowe, 1 9 9 2 ; Ritchie and Marshall, 1 9 9 3 ; De Geus, 1 9 9 7 ; H e n r i k s s o n , 1 9 9 9 ; M i n t z b e r g , 2 0 0 0 ; Mintzberg et a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) . As  Rowe  (1992)  discusses,  some  managers  abstract conceptualization o v e r reflective o b s e r v a t i o n s  benefit  from  (pragmatists),  while o t h e r s prioritize reflective observation o v e r concrete experience ( t h e o r i s t s ) . I n f o r e s t r y , W e e t m a n (personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , February, 2 0 0 2 ) and Baskerville (personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , March 2 0 0 2 ) s u p p o r t the need of c o n t i n u o u s l e a r n i n g , and references in articles are not scarce ( e . g . W a l t e r s , 1 9 8 6 ; K i m m i n s , 1 9 9 7 ; W o l l e n b e r g et a l . , 2 0 0 0 ) . Adaptive  forest  management  has  been  inspired  in  this  need  for  constant learning and incorporation of new k n o w l e d g e (Taylor et a l . , 1 9 9 7 ) . H o w e v e r , planning as a learning process has not received t h e same a t t e n t i o n f r o m m a n a g e r s as adaptive m a n a g e m e n t has. Adaptive management  within  rigid  planning  will  not  be  successful. To  be  41  efficacious, m a n a g e m e n t has t o incorporate a flexible a n d adaptive planning  process  that  can be constantly  improved  after  showing  weaknesses. This results n o t only in b e t t e r c u r r e n t f o r e s t plans, b u t also in plans t h a t can drive adequate m a n a g e m e n t in t h e f u t u r e .  3.3.1 Better Present and Future Forest Plans Forest plans state f o r w h a t purposes forests will be m a n a g e d and how ( D u e r r , 1 9 8 2 c ) . W e e t m a n ( 2 0 0 0 ) r e c o m m e n d s t h a t plans have certain desired f e a t u r e s , such as being credible, i m p l e m e n t a b l e ,  auditable,  and t o c o n f o r m w i t h c o n t i n u o u s learning a n d i m p r o v e m e n t adaptive specific  management. requirements  Dunster  and Gibson  f o r adequate  forest  (1989)  plans,  through  discuss  such  more  as h a v i n g :  measurable a n d attainable objectives f o r t h e a c t i v i t i e s ; analysis of impediments overcoming  to  achieving  these  these  impediments;  objectives; schedules  explicit of  means  operations  of for  i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e p l a n ; measures t o d e t e r m i n e t h e efficacy of these actions in m o v i n g t o w a r d s t h e desired o b j e c t i v e s of t h e forest activities; and m e a n s of evaluating actual progress relative t o desired progress t o w a r d t h e a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of t h e o b j e c t i v e s of t h e forest activities. Plans directing t h e m a n a g e m e n t of forests t h a t do n o t acknowledge u n c e r t a i n t y a r e fragile ( D u i n k e r and Hay, 1 9 9 4 ; A b e r e t a l . , 2 0 0 0 ) . Experience in m a n y disciplines, such as e c o n o m i c p l a n n i n g , fisheries and ecology o f climate change shows h o w d a n g e r o u s it can be t o rely t o o heavily o n a plan based o n predictions a b o u t u n c e r t a i n  future  outcomes  Marsh  (1998),  (e.g. Schwartz, for example,  predictions  about  1 9 9 6 ; Fahey a n d Randall, 1 9 9 8 ) .  reports  future  energy  how wrong availability.  have  been  In another  traditional example,  Ringland ( 1 9 9 8 ) r e p o r t s h o w a g r o u p of scientists w e r e asked in 1 9 6 6  42  to predict t h e state of t h e w o r l d t w e n t y years a h e a d . These scientists elaborated  335  predictions. T w e n t y  prediction  was  wrong.  As  a  years f r o m t h e n , nearly  result,  Sarewitz  and  Byerly  every (1999)  r e c o m m e n d t h a t predictions not be considered as p r o d u c t s , but r a t h e r processes w i t h i n d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . Courtney et al. ( 1 9 9 9 ) propose alternative approaches t o deal w i t h u n c e r t a i n t y in p l a n n i n g . From t h e s e , b e t t e r forest plans respond to t h e a m o u n t and kind of u n c e r t a i n t y s u r r o u n d i n g t h e k n o w l e d g e of t h e forest s y s t e m u n d e r m a n a g e m e n t . When t h e f u t u r e is clear e n o u g h , a plan should be based in a single forecast, and o b j e c t i v e s and actions should be built t o w a r d this a l m o s t certain f u t u r e . W h e n a f e w a l t e r n a t e futures  are  predicted,  plans  should  identify  the  possible  futures  o u t c o m e s and t o clarify t h e paths to reach those a l t e r n a t i v e f u t u r e s . I f a range of f u t u r e o u t c o m e s are i d e n t i f i e d , t h e n plans should not only recognize these  potential f u t u r e o u t c o m e s  but equally  importantly,  t h e y should focus on t h e t r i g g e r events or p a t t e r n s t h a t could give an indication t h a t change is going t o w a r d one or a n o t h e r scenario. Finally, if m a n a g e r s have no clue a b o u t probable f u t u r e o u t c o m e s or scenarios of t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m , and planning deals w i t h t r u e a m b i g u i t y , plans should identify at least a subset of variables t h a t will d e t e r m i n e t h e f u t u r e . Plans also should identify indicators of t h e e v o l u t i o n of these variables. An interesting (Section 3 . 2 . 1 )  experiment  in addressing  level 2 and 3  uncertainty  is u n d e r w a y at t h e McGregor Model Forest,  near Prince G e o r g e , BC, and one of t h e  located  1 1 f o r e s t models in t h e  Canadian Forest Model N e t w o r k . McGregor's a p p r o a c h t o sustainable forest  management  consists of t h r e e  linked c o m p o n e n t s :  planning, strategic and operational planning s u p p o r t , and and  adaptive  management  (McClain,  2002).  At  the  scenario indicators  tactical  level,  43  alternative f u t u r e scenarios are e x p l o r e d , bringing f o r e s t s t a k e h o l d e r s ' interests t o g e t h e r . W h a t is needed t o achieve a g r e e d f u t u r e scenarios is assessed. From t h e n , t h e best tools for m o d e l i n g , forecasting and visualization are selected to assess t h e likely implications of different management  strategies.  Operational  plans  can  be  developed.  Indicators are used t o m o n i t o r measurable forest a t t r i b u t e s t o ensure compliance  between  planned  objectives  and  actual  performance  (McGregor Model Forest Association, 2 0 0 1 ) . This actual p e r f o r m a n c e , therefore,  refers  management,  to  and  management planning,  is  effectiveness. not  assessed.  Efficiency Better  of  future  m a n a g e m e n t results f r o m plans t h a t incorporate c o n t i n u o u s evaluation not only of t h e planning efficacy ( e . g . effectiveness and efficiency), but also of t h e factors t h a t affect this efficacy.  3.3.2  Forest  Plan  Efficacy  and  Indication  of  Planning  Uncertainty The p e r f o r m a n c e of a plan should be t r a c k e d in t e r m s of its efficacy. The forest plan is supposed to c o n t r i b u t e to certain o u t c o m e s ( e . g . to produce sufficient t i m b e r according to a defined o b j e c t i v e q u a n t i t y ) . Its effectiveness, f r o m O'Connor ( 1 9 8 3 ) and H o d g e t t s ( 1 9 8 2 ) , refers to how well its i m p l e m e n t a t i o n c o n t r i b u t e s t o w a r d s these o u t c o m e s ( e . g . t h e plan is effective if allows t h e m a n a g e r to o b t a i n t h a t a m o u n t of timber).  I t s efficiency, f r o m  Hodgetts  (1982)  refers to t h e  inputs  required t o reach t h e o u t c o m e s ( e . g . an efficient plan is one t h a t uses relatively  little  efforts  to  produce t h e  desired  amount  of  timber).  Efficiency can be expressed in relative t e r m s ( e . g . this year's forest plan is m o r e efficient t h a t t h e one of t h e past y e a r ) . Efficiency can also be specified in a b s o l u t e t e r m s ( e . g . this y e a r ' s f o r e s t plan required 2 0 % less t i m e t o be i m p l e m e n t e d ) . An efficacious f o r e s t plan should  44  be both effective and efficient. Further, it has t o p e r f o r m well in t h e f u t u r e and in response t o  contingencies.  Assessment of plan p e r f o r m a n c e is a necessary stage in i m p r o v i n g planning and plans (Rowe 1 9 9 2 , De Geus, 1 9 9 9 ) . The g r e a t e r t h e discrepancy  between  actual  and  planned  outcomes,  the  more  uncertain was t h e k n o w l e d g e t h a t t h e m a n a g e r had w h e n designing t h e plan, and w h e n i m p l e m e n t i n g it. This lack of k n o w l e d g e can t h e n be  strengthened  performance. ecological,  for  the  Planning  social,  next  is  and  plan,  done  to  economic  thus  better  targets.  improving conform  Proving  planning  with  that  agreed  harvesting  occurs as p l a n n e d , t h e n , should represent a key e f f o r t in f o r e s t r y . Assessment of criteria and indicators should be used not t o t r a c k forest m a n a g e m e n t efficacy, b u t t o help refining t a r g e t s .  3.3.3 Estimation of Planning Uncertainty: A Spatial Approach A forest plan has a spatial c o m p o n e n t . For e x a m p l e , harvesting is proposed  f o r specific  outcomes), geographic  which  geographic  can  be  distribution  areas  of t h e  mapped.  Actual  the  landscape  in  landscape  harvesting  (planned  has  (actual  also  a  outcomes).  Overlapping of planned and actual o u t c o m e s allows f o r identification of specific areas of t h e landscape w h e r e h a r v e s t i n g differentiates  from  w h a t o n e , o r m o r e t h a n o n e , forest plan(s) p r o p o s e ( s ) . I n this thesis these  areas  of t h e  landscape  are  referred  as " a r e a s  of  planning  d i s c r e p a n c y " (Figure 3 . 3 ) . Areas o f planning discrepancy are due t o either  planned  harvesting  that  did  not  take  place,  or  unplanned  harvesting t h a t did t a k e place ( e . g . salvage).  45  Figure 3.3 Discrepancies b e t w e e n t h e 1995 f o r e s t d e v e l o p m e n t plan (red line) and 1 9 9 8 h a r v e s t i n g . As  discussed  by  Lang  (1998)  and  O'Looney  (2000),  Geographic  I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s ( G I S ) can assist forest m a n a g e r s in designing plans  and  in  monitoring  the  outcomes  of  forest  management.  Uncertainty in f o r e s t s y s t e m s has also a spatial d i m e n s i o n , and can be represented  and  analyzed  using  GIS  tools.  When  concern  shifts  t o w a r d s a particular wildlife species, f o r e x a m p l e , t h e range of this species is r e p r e s e n t a b l e in t h e landscape. The g e o g r a p h i c distributions of " o l d " and " n e w " concerns can be m a p p e d , and analysis respect to constraints  to  forest  planning  can  be  done.  Following  the  same  principle, t h e effect of a change in pulpwood prices on stand values can be m a p p e d , as can t h e effects of new policies, and new forest resources. U n c e r t a i n t y becomes much m o r e concrete w h e n visualized  46  as an  area  of  landscape  (Buttenfield,  2001).  Once  mapped,  the  influence o f sources o f u n c e r t a i n t y can be m a t c h e d w i t h m a p s of areas of planning discrepancy, t o look for causes to explain t h e m . Analysis of areas of t h e landscape w h e r e planned o u t c o m e s w e r e not  reached  provides  Planning  feedback  for  the  planning  of  next  outcomes.  processes m a y well change f o r these areas ( e . g . t o use d i f f e r e n t tools for  predicting  occurrence  of  natural  disturbances;  to  improve  c o m m u n i c a t i o n tools f o r dealing w i t h people's c o n c e r n s ) , and t a r g e t s of m a n a g e m e n t m a y be redirected t o fit newly k n o w n e l e m e n t s of t h e system.  3.4 C o n c l u s i o n The c o m p l e x i t y of t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m , difficulties in characterizing it, and a c o n t e x t t h a t i m p e d e s acquisition of this k n o w l e d g e m e a n s t h a t u n c e r t a i n t y pervades f o r e s t r y . As c o m p l e t e k n o w l e d g e is impossible at any  moment  straightforward learning  in  time,  assessment  of  uncertainty  is  not  as  as e x p e c t e d , better planning has t o be a c o n s t a n t  process.  management  and  under  This a  produces broad  range  forest of  plans  futures.  that When  can plans  drive fail,  i m p r o v e m e n t s can be m a d e if these failures are d e t e c t e d . Evaluating plan efficacy spatially, a n d t h e association o f u n c e r t a i n t y w i t h areas o f t h e landscape, can c o n t r i b u t e to c o n s t a n t i m p r o v e m e n t .  47  CHAPTER IV. FOREST PLANNING I N BRITISH COLUMBIA, CANADA. A CASE FOR BETTER PLANNING 4.1 I n t r o d u c t i o n t o Forest Planning in BC In BC, 9 5 % of f o r e s t land is publicly o w n e d , and f o r e s t h a r v e s t i n g is licensed to f o r e s t c o m p a n i e s . Under t h e present legislation, licensees must prepare detail  Forest D e v e l o p m e n t  specific  describes stages:  how  areas  proposed  forest  practices  pre-regulation  Plans (FDPs), w h i c h describe  for in  harvest. BC have  -before  1909-,  in  The  BCMOF  (1994)  gone  through  several  early  regulation  and  e s t a b l i s h m e n t of t h e f o r e s t industry - 1 9 0 9 t o 1 9 4 0 - , sustained yield f o r e s t r y and g r o w t h of t h e f o r e s t i n d u s t r y - 1 9 4 0 t o 1 9 7 0 - , multiple use f o r e s t r y and limits to g r o w t h - 1 9 7 0 to 1 9 8 4 - , and t o w a r d s broad sustainability - a f t e r 1 9 8 4 - . The i n t r o d u c t i o n in 1 9 7 9 of t h e MOF Act and t h e Forest Act m a r k e d a t u r n i n g point f o r f o r e s t p l a n n i n g . A m o n g o t h e r initiatives, t h e Acts introduced a m u l t i p l e - u s e planning process, and  requirements  licensees  were  prescription  for  for  public  required approval  to  review  and  prepare  prior t o  participation. a  receiving  pre-harvest a cutting  From  1987,  silviculture permit.  This  prescription o u t l i n e d how e n v i r o n m e n t a l and social values would be a c c o m o d a t e d on h a r v e s t e d areas (BCMOF, 1 9 8 8 ) . A b o u t t h e  same  t i m e , the g o v e r n m e n t established the first c o m p r e h e n s i v e processes to plan f o r land use at strategic levels, such as t h e S o u t h Moresby Land Use A g r e e m e n t in 1 9 8 8 (BCMOF, 1 9 9 3 ) . The i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e Forest Practices Code of BC (BCFPC) in 1994 established new r e q u i r e m e n t s , and consolidated e x i s t i n g o n e s , f o r f o r e s t planning in BC. Presently, forest planning in BC is hierarchically s t r u c t u r e d w i t h t h r e e levels:  48  1) Strategic land use planning ( e . g . strategic plans, regional land use plans, subregional land use p l a n s ) . A f r a m e w o r k f o r public land use decisions o v e r a broad region is p r o v i d e d . Stakeholders assign  priority  to  land  use  activities,  define  objectives  and  strategies f o r an a r e a . 2) Tactical p l a n n i n g ( e . g . resource m a n a g e m e n t zone o b j e c t i v e s , landscape unit o b j e c t i v e s , sensitive area o b j e c t i v e s ) . Objectives f o r specific landscape units are set, w h i c h are legally binding on s u b s e q u e n t operational activities. 3) Operational p l a n n i n g ( e . g . FDP, silviculture p r e s c r i p t i o n s , stand management  prescriptions).  Site-specific  objectives  and  strategies f o r o p e r a t i o n a l activities in an area are designed in o r d e r to be consistent w i t h higher level plans. I n this  scheme  operational  for  planning  p l a n n i n g . These  in  BC, FDPs are t h e  plans, u p d a t e d  annually  cornerstone or e v e r y  of two  years, describe h o w f o r e s t m a n a g e r s i n t e n d t o access, h a r v e s t , renew and protect an area  under  license o v e r t h e  n e x t five years.  FDP  approval of a c u t b l o c k allows f o r its h a r v e s t i n g a f t e r a c u t t i n g p e r m i t has been issued and a silvicultural prescription a p p r o v e d . The Forest D e v e l o p m e n t Plan G u i d e b o o k (BCMOF, 2 0 0 1 b ) states t h e t w o p r i m a r y goals of FDPs: 1) To provide i n f o r m a t i o n covering a f i v e - y e a r period on t h e features  of  proposed  actions,  demonstrates  management  conservation,  water,  fish,  for  in  a  biological  wildlife,  and  manner  which  diversity, other  soil  forest  r e s o u r c e s , a n d recognizes t h e e c o n o m i c and cultural needs of peoples and c o m m u n i t i e s .  49  2) To describe how higher-level plans f o r t h e area will be carried t h r o u g h in subsequent operational plans. As a key vehicle f o r i n t e r - a g e n c y and public c o n s u l t a t i o n , FDPs enable resolution of multiple interests and d e m a n d s on t h e BC forest land base.  FDP  information,  preparation which  requires  is specified  considerable by t h e  amount  BCFPC and  its  of  detailed  Operational  Planning Regulation (Figure 4 . 1 ) .  Whether cutblocks are clearcut, or another silvicultural system  Existing and proposed roads which provide access t o t h o s e cutblocks  Size, s h a p e a n d location of proposed cutblocks over the next five years  Information on streams, wetlands, lakes. Objectives for W a t e r s h e d s and riparian m a n a q e m e n t zones  Forest c o v e r a n d t o p o g r a p h y of t h e area. Terrain s t a b i l i t y and forest health information  Fish and fish h a b i t a t inventory. Terrain resource inventory. Levels of r e t e n t i o n for coarse woody d e b r i s a n d wildlife trees  Figure 4.1 Main i n f o r m a t i o n requested f o r FDP p r e p a r a t i o n . (Based on BCMOF, 1 9 9 8 b ) . As discussed in C h a p t e r I I I , w h e n preparing FDPs, m a n a g e r s  have  incomplete k n o w l e d g e of t h e c u r r e n t and f u t u r e states of t h e forest system.  From  Haddock  and  Brewster  (1998),  managers  preparing  FDPs have t o acquire spatial knowledge on c o m p l e x biophysical issues of t h e f o r e s t ( e . g . n a t u r a l d i s t u r b a n c e s ) . And issues such as p r o t e c t e d areas, wilderness a r e a s , sensitive areas established in accordance w i t h  50  the  BCFPC, wildlife  growth  habitat  management  areas, forest e c o s y s t e m  areas, scenic areas, u n g u l a t e  networks, winter  old  ranges,  c o m m u n i t y w a t e r s h e d s , c o m m u n i t y w a t e r s u p p l y intakes a n d related w a t e r supply i n f r a s t r u c t u r e s , fish s t r e a m , riparian class of s t r e a m s and wetlands  and  lakes,  temporary  or  permanent  barriers  to  vehicle  access, o b j e c t i v e s f o r k n o w n ungulate w i n t e r r a n g e s , and w a t e r quality objectives  for  complete, the landscape  community  spatial d i s t r i b u t i o n  would  opportunities selected  watersheds.  for  allow  for  to  best  this  knowledge  were  of forest s y s t e m f e a t u r e s  identification  h a r v e s t i n g . The  according  If  best  of  constraints  alternative  visualized  future  in t h e  plans  and  would  scenarios  be  under  u n c e r t a i n t y . Candidate harvesting areas w o u l d be t h e n located, and cutblocks proposed in previous FDPs would be r e f i n e d . Weaknesses in t h e allocation of c u t b l o c k s , a n d f u r t h e r , in t h e planning processes, w e r e identified in t h e mid 1990's (BCFPB, 1999 and 2 0 0 0 ) . In  response,  introduced  the  Operational  significant  Planning  amendments  to  Regulation planning  of  the  BCFPC  regulations,  and  specifically t o cutblock r e q u i r e m e n t s in 1 9 9 8 . An i m p o r t a n t aim of these  amendments  was t o  increase  certainty  during  the  planning  process, specifically t o reduce t h e likelihood t h a t h a r v e s t i n g would be rejected a f t e r licensees incurred planning costs and received approvals  (Haddock  and  Brewster,  1998).  Various  initial  categories  of  cutblocks w e r e i n t r o d u c e d . Despite t h i s , and o t h e r changes to planning processes perform  in  BC,  uncertainty  ecologically,  remains.  economically,  Forest  plans  often  do  not  and socially as desired  by  the  multiple s t a k e h o l d e r s in BC forests. I n consequence, f o r e s t plans fail to drive forest m a n a g e m e n t .  51  4.2 Current Challenges to Forest Development Planning in BC Recent headlines  in BC newspapers give a sense of t h e array  of  changing c i r c u m s t a n c e s in which forest planning o c c u r s : "Forest  fires  "Land-use  break  issue  claim  area" ;  forest  fight  out" ;  inflamed"*; "One  5  owl  changing" ;  be changed" ;  "Logging  "Forestry  market  faces  beetle  "Court cuts  "Forest  7  6  "Pine  2  epidemic  halts  logging" ; 6  tenure,  companies access  3  logging  in  land-  "Parameters  in  logging  await  triples" ;  review  rules of  could AAC" ; 9  uncertainties" . 10  I m p l e m e n t i n g FDPs u n d e r these circumstances is difficult. Frequently, expected o u t c o m e s ( e . g . harvesting of cutblocks) have t o be d e l a y e d , or even d i s c a r d e d . As e x a m p l e s , t h e Coulson G r o u p ( 2 0 0 1 a ) r e p o r t s , "This p e r m i t is nearly 1 0 0 % hembal and was put on hold late 1997 after t h e hemlock m a r k e t collapsed. I t has been in t h e bank waiting for markets  to  improve".  Slocan  Forest  Products  (2001)  reports,  "Compliance w i t h t h e (Forest Practices) Code has increased operating costs  and  administrative  requirements  for  companies...and  has  resulted in delays in certain of a c t i v i t i e s . . . " The s a m e licensee adds, "...such situations (road blockades) cause delays in access to t i m b e r . . . " On t h e o t h e r h a n d , f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t o u t c o m e s are often t h e result of i n t e r v e n t i o n s t h a t w e r e not-originally p l a n n e d . Contingencies force  2  National Post 0 5 / 2 3 / 2 0 0 1  3  National Post 1 1 / 1 1 / 2 0 0 0  4  V a n c o u v e r Sun 0 9 / 0 4 / 2 0 0 1  5  V a n c o u v e r Province 0 8 / 0 6 / 2 0 0 0  6  The Daily News 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 0 0 1  7  V a n c o u v e r Sun 0 8 / 1 0 / 2 0 0 0  8  The Daily News 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 0 1  9  Creston Valley Advance 0 6 / 0 8 / 2 0 0 0  1 0  The Northerner 0 3 / 1 3 / 2 0 0 1  52  managers t o change t h e original plans. The CLMA/NFPA Mountain Pine Beetle Emergency Task Force ( 2 0 0 0 ) r e p o r t s : Licensees on t h e f r o n t lines of t h e ( m o u n t a i n pine beetle) infestation  are  allowable  annual  2000/2001  redirecting  season  cut  to  up t o beetle  in an a t t e m p t  100 per cent of  their  management  in  the  t o get ahead  of  the  infestation. When  not  efficacy.  adequately  Expected  addressed,  actions  are  not  uncertainty carried  out,  affects and  forest  plan  non-expected  actions are carried o u t . As concluded in an a u d i t m a d e by t h e BCFPB ( 1 9 9 9 ) , " T h e positions a n d shapes of a substantial n u m b e r o f cutblocks approved in f o r e s t d e v e l o p m e n t plans... w e r e modified t o a m o d e r a t e or m a x i m u m d e g r e e in s u b s e q u e n t c u t t i n g p e r m i t s u b m i s s i o n s " . The a p p a r e n t weaknesses of forest d e v e l o p m e n t  planning in addressing  u n c e r t a i n t y and a c c u r a t e l y forecasting f o r e s t i n t e r v e n t i o n s challenge not only f o r e s t m a n a g e r s , but also o t h e r s t a k e h o l d e r s in t h e forest s y s t e m . T r a d i t i o n a l planning is being q u e s t i o n e d . The BCFPB ( 2 0 0 0 ) concludes in its Review of t h e Forest D e v e l o p m e n t Planning Process in BC: The reliance on m a j o r a m e n d m e n t s t o o b t a i n a p p r o v a l of planned d e v e l o p m e n t and harvesting m a y not ensure t h a t forest  resources  are  being  adequately  managed  and  conserved... The e f f o r t spent in preparing and reviewing a detailed original FDP m a y not be t h e best use of limited resources, given t h a t m a j o r a m e n d m e n t s will drive forest harvesting"... t h e cost of t h e m a j o r a m e n d m e n t was  identified  licensees highly  as an inefficiency  working dynamic  in  highly  by s o m e districts  dynamic  environments  process  environments...  (e.g.,  bark  and in  beetle  53  infestations and natural disturbances such as ice s t o r m s ) , FDPs c a n n o t m e e t t h e i n t e n t of providing an o r d e r l y plan for d e v e l o p m e n t of roads and h a r v e s t i n g and a m e a n i n g f u l o p p o r t u n i t y f o r public review and comment.... I n spite of these o b s e r v a t i o n s , t h e actual m a g n i t u d e of t h e effect t h a t uncertainty  is having  Province-wide.  Neither  on forest have  planning  has  sources of this  not  been  uncertainty  quantified and  their  features been i n v e s t i g a t e d .  4.3  Province-wide  Quantification  of  How  Uncertainty  is  Affecting Forest Planning in BC Given t h a t u n c e r t a i n t y is strongly affecting f o r e s t planning efficacy in BC, it was considered r e l e v a n t t o q u a n t i f y its effect on t h e part of licensees  preparing  FDPs and  on t h e  governmental  agencies  that  review t h e plans. The approach t a k e n was t o directly survey  FDP  producers and r e v i e w e r s , asking t h e m to identify and c o m m e n t  on  issues t h a t are related w i t h t h e effects of u n c e r t a i n t y on planning. The results provide an o v e r v i e w o f t h e c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n a t t h e provincial level.  4.3.1 Methods Between S e p t e m b e r and October of 2 0 0 1 an email s u r v e y (Appendix 2) was c o n d u c t e d t h r o u g h o u t BC. The objectives of t h e s u r v e y w e r e : 1) To d e t e r m i n e t h e n u m b e r of FDP submissions and a m e n d m e n t s per y e a r  in t h e  Province, and t o o b t a i n an e s t i m a t e  of t h e  a v e r a g e cost o f p r o d u c i n g t h e m and r e v i e w i n g t h e m ; and 2) To identify  uncertainty  promoting  amendments  to  FDPs, and  strategies used by licensees to deal w i t h it.  54  The survey (Cariboo,  was sent  Kamloops,  by email to t h e Nelson,  Prince  six  BCMOF Forest  Rupert,  Prince  Regions  George,  and  V a n c o u v e r ) . I n s o m e cases, officials asked t h e s u r v e y t o be directly sent to s o m e of t h e f o r t y BCMOF Forest Districts p r o v i n c e - w i d e . The survey was also s e n t t o five r a n d o m l y selected licensees throughout  BC (Slocan  Forest Products L t d . , G o r m a n  operating  Bros  Lumber  Ltd., Kalesnikoff L u m b e r C o m p a n y , Riverside Forest p r o d u c t s L t d . , and UBC Research Forests). The s u r v e y consisted of t w o d i f f e r e n t sets of questions. Similar questions w e r e asked t o b o t h licensees and t h e BCMOF,  with  some  special  questions  for  each  party.  BCMOF  Regions/Districts w e r e a s k e d : 1. How m a n y FDP's are s u b m i t t e d annually t o y o u r Region/District? 2. W h a t is t h e e s t i m a t e d cost in t h e R e g i o n / D i s t r i c t for reviewing an FDP? 3. How m a n y t i m e s are a p p r o v e d FDPs a m e n d e d ( m a j o r and m i n o r ) - o n a v e r a g e - by licensees in t h e Region/District? a n d W h a t are t h e m a i n causes of these a m e n d m e n t s ? 4. W h a t is t h e e s t i m a t e d cost for reviewing a m e n d m e n t s to FDPs? (total $ , $ / m , or $ / h a ) . 3  Licensees w e r e a s k e d : •  W h a t is t h e e s t i m a t e d cost of producing an FDP?  •  W h a t are t h e m a i n causes, and costs, of a m e n d m e n t s  (major  and m i n o r ) t o y o u r FDP? •  Is u n c e r t a i n t y actually c o m p r o m i s i n g t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of y o u r FDP a p p r o v e d blocks and cutting permits?  •  Do y o u assess FDP i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ?  •  Do y o u t r a c k f o r e s t planning p e r f o r m a n c e ?  55  •  Do y o u have any strategies to deal w i t h u n c e r t a i n t y  affecting  FDP i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ? All f o r t y BCMOF Forest Districts responded directly or t h r o u g h regional officials  that  compiled  the  information  for  the  region . 1 1  The  five  licensees s u r v e y e d also r e s p o n d e d . These answers w e r e compiled and categorized. Due t o t h e difficulties a c k n o w l e d g e d by BCMOF officials and licensees on relating budgets to FDP p r e p a r a t i o n and revision, estimations  of  costs  were  made  with  caution.  However,  e s t i m a t e s of t o t a l costs involved in FDP processes m a d e  rough  by  each  BCMOF r e g i o n / d i s t r i c t did not differ greatly ( A p p e n d i x 2 ) .  4.3.2 Results About  301  FDPs  are  reviewed  each  year  province-wide  by  the  B C M O F . A regional split shows variance a m o n g f o r e s t regions (Figure 12  4.2).  VANCOUVER  CARIBOO 12%  Figure 4.2 Percentage of FDPs reviewed by BCMOF Forest Regions.  I n s o m e cases t h e s e r e s p o n s e s did n o t include a n s w e r s t o all q u e s t i o n s . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e BCMOF Forest Practices Branch 5 0 0 FDPs a r e r e v i e w e d per y e a r in B C From t h e i n f o r m a t i o n c o l l e c t e d t h r o u g h t h e s u r v e y , 3 0 0 FDPs are r e v i e w e d p e r y e a r . A cause f o r t h i s d i s c r e p a n c y , as m a n i f e s t e d by m a n y BCMOF r e g i o n s , can be t h a t m o s t of FDPs are now g e t t i n g 2 - y e a r a p p r o v a l s , a n d t h e r e f o r e , are n o t r e v i e w e d e a c h y e a r . 1 1  1 2  56  The review o f each FDP involves staff t i m e a n d capital costs ( e . g . offices, c o m p u t e r s , s o f t w a r e , air p h o t o s ) . The t o t a l cost f o r reviewing each  FDP is a b o u t  assessment,  $11,000.  as occurs  If there  in a b o u t  is t h e  one t h i r d  of  need  of  extra  field  revisions, this  cost  increases t o $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ( f o r helicopters to access r e m o t e sites, vehicles, a c c o m m o d a t i o n , e t c ) . Annual costs involved in r e v i e w i n g FDPs in BC are t h e r e f o r e a p p r o x i m a t e l y $ 5.8 million. Adding o t h e r costs involved in FDP review ( e . g . appeals, m o n i t o r i n g , BCFPB a u d i t s ) this annual cost rises t o a b o u t $ 6.6 million. For licensees t o produce a FDP costs b e t w e e n $ 3 0 , 0 0 0 a n d $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 . Adding costs of t h e review (e.g.  public  participation,  publishing, field  assessments),  process licensees  e s t i m a t e t h a t t h e s e costs are at least double. Annual costs involved in producing FDPs in BC w o u l d be a p p r o x i m a t e l y $25 m i l l i o n . About 2 7 0 0 a m e n d m e n t s BCMOF. I n d i v i d u a l  to  FDPs are r e v i e w e d each y e a r by  FDPs have an average of 2 m a j o r  the  amendments  ( u n d e r Section 4 1 ( 1 ) o f t h e BCFPC Act) per year. These a m e n d m e n t s range f r o m reshaping cutblock boundaries in a w a y t h a t e n v i r o n m e n t a l a t t r i b u t e s can be affected ( e . g . new boundaries i n c o r p o r a t e a s t r e a m not originally c o n s i d e r e d ) , t o deleting o r a d d i n g w h o l e cutblocks. I n BCMOF  Forest  Regions  of  high  contingency  (e.g.  with  beetle  epidemics) an individual FDP can have t e n m a j o r a m e n d m e n t s . For t h e BCMOF, t h e r e v i e w o f each m a j o r a m e n d m e n t costs b e t w e e n $ 2 , 5 0 0 and $ 7 , 0 0 0 . For licensees t o put t o g e t h e r a m a j o r a m e n d m e n t , and to comply  with  the  required  public  participation  and  First  consultation t h a t m a j o r a m e n d m e n t s r e q u i r e , costs b e t w e e n  Nations $4,000  and $ 6 , 0 0 0 . I n s o m e instances m a j o r a m e n d m e n t s are e q u i v a l e n t to a new FDP, in w h i c h case t h e cost of such a m e n d m e n t is closer to t h a t of t h e original FDP.  57  According t o t h e BCMOF and licensees, t h e principal causes of m a j o r amendments  to  FDPs are  natural  d i s t u r b a n c e s , changes  in  timber  m a r k e t s , and lack of higher level plans, social conflicts and  policy  changes (Figure 4 . 3 ) .  Policy, First Nations, and social conflicts 15%  Block layout 10%  Beetle, \ windthrow, defoliators, fire 50%  Changes in timber markets 25%  Figure 4.3 Principal causes of m a j o r a m e n d m e n t s t o FDPs in BC. As an e x a m p l e , a BCMOF District official in t h e Cariboo Forest Region states: We are c u r r e n t l y dealing w i t h a pine beetle e p i d e m i c in t h e district so m o s t licensees s u b m i t n u m e r o u s  amendments  e v e r y y e a r . We have processed in t h e o r d e r of 3 0 0 FDP amendments  each  year  for  the  last  three  years...  we  a m e n d each FDP b e t w e e n 50 and 100 t i m e s per year. In addition t o t h e 300 FDP a m e n d m e n t s we also process as many  harvest  authorities  that  are  exempt  from  FDPs  ( m i n o r salvage o p e r a t i o n s t h a t do not need t o be a m e n d e d into and FDP before t h e y can be logged)...  58  A n o t h e r District official in t h e V a n c o u v e r Forest Region r e p o r t s : Lack  of  Higher  Level  Plans  and  objectives  provokes  a m e n d m e n t s . As we establish higher-level o b j e c t i v e s f o r wildlife  h a b i t a t areas, ungulate w i n t e r  range a r e a s , old  g r o w t h m a n a g e m e n t areas, etc, t h e o r e t i c a l l y t h e task of balancing resource interests will be easier... A District official in t h e Prince George Forest Region a d d s : As  First  Nation  operational  issues  also  don't  planning timeframes,  always  so s o m e  fit  into  the  development  proposals m a y have t o be a m e n d e d later once consultation has been c o n c l u d e d . Individual FDPs have an average of 6 to 10 m i n o r a m e n d m e n t s ( u n d e r Section 4 3 ( 1 ) of t h e BCFPC Act) per year. These a m e n d m e n t s include small changes to cutblock boundaries, in a w a y t h a t  environmental  a t t r i b u t e s are not affected ( e . g . changing t h e access t o t h e cutblock, a c c o m m o d a t i n g b o u n d a r i e s t o fine-scale f e a t u r e s of t h e landscape). For t h e BCMOF, t h e revision of each m i n o r a m e n d m e n t costs b e t w e e n $ 2 5 0 and $ 2 , 5 0 0 . For licensees t o produce each m i n o r  amendment  costs b e t w e e n $ 4 0 0 and $ 2 , 0 0 0 . According t o t h e BCMOF and licensees, m o s t m i n o r a m e n d m e n t s are due t o " f i n e t u n i n g " d u r i n g t h e l a y o u t of cutblocks in t h e field. O t h e r causes are e x p e d i t e d salvage and reshaping of blocks t o a c c o m m o d a t e social concerns (Figure 4 . 4 ) .  59  Beetle, windthrow, defoliators, fire  80% Figure 4.4  Principal causes of m i n o r a m e n d m e n t s t o FDPs in BC.  As an e x a m p l e , a District official in t h e Cariboo Forest Region s t a t e s : ...the n u m b e r one cause (of m i n o r a m e n d m e n t s ) is t h a t licensees s u b m i t an FDP having only done a m a p analysis. A f t e r t h e blocks are a p p r o v e d , t h e y lay t h e m o u t in t h e field and apply f o r an a m e n d m e n t to a p p r o v e d road and block changes. T h e y are reluctant t o do t o o m u c h f i e l d w o r k up f r o n t  because of t h e cost. I f t h e y  invest t o o  m o n e y and do not g e t a p p r o v a l , it is a loss... A t ninety  much least  p e r c e n t of t h e CP applications t h a t c o m e in are  a c c o m p a n i e d w i t h at least a m i n o r a m e n d m e n t . Uncertainty is not expressly dealt in producing FDPs. FDPs are seen as living plans to be a m e n d e d as i n f o r m a t i o n is i m p r o v e d . As a licensee states: The purpose of (licensee) FDPs is to provide o p p o r t u n i t i e s for h a r v e s t , w i t h t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t it is a coarse filter for weeding o u t t h o s e blocks w h e r e t h e h a r v e s t i n g o p p o r t u n i t y is v e r y limited f r o m a social perspective. 60  Uncertainty is dealt w i t h indirectly t h r o u g h t w o main strategies used by  licensees. The  sufficient  supply  first of  is t o " g e t  annual  ahead  allowable  cut  on  p l a n n i n g " , so t h a t  in  FDP  is  ensured  a by  m a i n t a i n i n g a stock of FDP a p p r o v e d and CP issued blocks. Licensees are typically keeping a stock of 3 to 5 years of area a p p r o v e d for harvesting in t h e i r FDPs. One licensee reports having 10 years of FDP a p p r o v e d blocks. A n o t h e r licensee s t a t e s : (On having  a stock of a p p r o v e d w o o d ) , if we  propose  d e v e l o p m e n t in a sensitive a r e a , we can plan at a slower rate and s p e n d m o r e t i m e educating t h e public on  our  proposals w i t h t h e hopes of e l i m i n a t i n g f e a r and suspicion around our development. The  second  strategy  is t o  shorten  the  period  between  cutblock  proposal in an FDP and c u t t i n g p e r m i t issuance. This allows licensees to pass as soon as possible t h e situations in w h i c h , at least in f o r m a l t e r m s , cutblocks can be rejected or r e s t r i c t e d . As a licensee s t a t e s : With  the  development  status  we  have  (only)  some  c e r t a i n t y as t h e s e blocks can still be pulled back by t h e agencies. So we t r y to know w h a t rules are we  playing  w i t h and once we s t a r t d e v e l o p m e n t (intense field w o r k and a s s e s s m e n t ) on a block t r y t o g e t it to t h e  permit  stage as quickly as possible. No licensee r e p o r t e d t r a c k i n g p e r f o r m a n c e in FDP i m p l e m e n t a t i o n .  4.3.3 Discussion and conclusions from survey results Forest d e v e l o p m e n t planners  (licensees)  assembling  and  planning represents considerable costs to and  reviewing  reviewers original  (BCMOF). FDPs are  Although  important,  both  costs in  of  certain  61  districts of t h e Province t h e y can eventually be less significant t h a n t h e total costs of a m e n d m e n t s ( e . g . Cariboo BCMOF Forest Region). The total annual cost of producing and r e v i e w i n g FDPs in BC is a b o u t $ 3 1 million. The t o t a l annual cost involved in producing and reviewing a m e n d m e n t s ( m a j o r and m i n o r ) is a b o u t $ 12 m i l l i o n . Clearly, a w a y of reducing costs f o r t h e forest d e v e l o p m e n t planning process as a whole w o u l d be t o reduce t h e n u m b e r of a m e n d m e n t s t o FDPs. The results of t h e s u r v e y s u p p o r t t h e BCFPB's concerns a b o u t t h e efficacy of FDPs in areas of high contingency discussed in Section 4 . 2 . There  is  a  development  lack  of  incentives  planning  planning, c o n t i n g e n c y  through  to  address  direct  uncertainty  methods,  such  in  as  m o d e l s , etc. Minor a m e n d m e n t s  forest  scenario  represent a  lower cost f o r licensees t h a n assembling accurate FDPs, which should include s o m e c o m p l i c a t e d and expensive field a s s e s s m e n t s . A licensee states: Many of t h e assessments required at t h e FDP stage require a g r e a t deal of up f r o n t w o r k and risk in o r d e r t o e n t e r t a i n approvals... assessments  you  cannot  -Visual  develop  Impact  accurate  Assessment,  and  effective  for  example-  unless y o u r cutblock design is i m p l e m e n t e d in t h e field. Rather, licensees p r e f e r to keep a large stock of a p p r o v e d blocks in t h e i r FDP, t o have r o o m t o deal w i t h u n c e r t a i n t y . This h o w e v e r would not be t h e  best a l t e r n a t i v e  f r o m a social p e r s p e c t i v e . The  BCFPB  ( 2 0 0 1 b ) , c o n c e r n e d a b o u t potential constraints t o f u t u r e high level planning, r e p o r t s : ...(although)  there  is  no  restriction  on  including  more  cutblocks t h a n can be logged in t h e period of t h e p l a n , (approvals of m o r e cutblocks t h a n can be logged in t h e  62  period) m a y restrict f u t u r e options for strategic  planning  and f o r e s t resource m a n a g e m e n t . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e Board suggests t h a t t h e g o v e r n m e n t : ...initiate  changes  to  the  (BCFPC)  Operational  Planning  Regulation t o limit t h e n u m b e r of cutblocks t h a t can be protected t o be a p p r o x i m a t e l y five y e a r s ' w o r t h of v o l u m e unless an a p p r o v e d landscape unit plan allows p r o t e c t i o n beyond five y e a r s . A final conclusion relates to t h e fact t h a t no licensee r e p o r t e d t r a c k i n g forest planning p e r f o r m a n c e ( e . g . efficacy), e v e n t h o u g h s o m e of t h e m expressed interest in k n o w i n g it. Plans surpassed by contingencies are seen as a " f a c t of life". As s t a t e d by a licensee: ...the o v e r - r i d i n g influence on forest d e v e l o p m e n t planning here in recent years has been t h e o n g o i n g Mountain Pine Beetle  epidemic.  The  beetle  is essentially  determining  w h e r e o p e r a t i o n s are conducted - if not f o r 1 0 0 % of t h e c u t , certainly f o r close t o all of it. This seems closely related w i t h t h e lack of incentives f o r  accurate  planning. The p r e s e n t c o n t e x t for d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g w o r k s in a w a y t h a t accurate planning by s t r e n g t h e n i n g t h e i n f o r m a t i o n channel can signify bigger costs to licensees versus salvage. Since salvage rates are lower, is a cost-effective a l t e r n a t i v e . This c o m p r o m i s e s t h e i r willingness t o adopt i n n o v a t i v e w a y s t o i m p r o v e planning p e r f o r m a n c e . I f m o t i v a t e d to do so, b e t t e r efficacy would government  to  save  not only enable licensees and  resources/time,  but also w o u l d  benefit  the  other  stakeholders in t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m .  63  4.4 Conclusion The c u r r e n t planning approach in BC is not efficacious. Planning costs are higher t h a n t h e y could be, and t h e private and public  budgets  would be b e t t e r s p e n t u n d e r a r e f o r m e d planning s y s t e m .  Current  planning is based on t o o n a r r o w a view of forests as s y s t e m s and does not  directly  incorporate  uncertainty.  Forest  systems  in  BC  are  e x t r e m e l y c o m p l e x , and m o r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e planning approaches are needed t o build realistic plans t h a t account f o r t h e d y n a m i c nature of these s y s t e m s . The use of tools t h a t help acquiring k n o w l e d g e a b o u t t h e d y n a m i c of t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m ( e . g . f i r e , beetle, and hazard  models;  innovative  public  participation  schemes;  windthrow economic  forecasting) could be b e t t e r directed to address specific sources of uncertainty  previously  detected.  Eventually,  plans should  be  more  specific in t h e i r t a r g e t s , allowing f o r m o r e flexibility and discretion in processes.  64  C H A P T E R V . A M E T H O D F O R S P A T I A L L Y A N A L Y Z I N G FOREST P L A N N I N G EFFICACY A N D UNCERTAINTY (SAFEPLAN METHOD). A CASE S T U D Y  5.1 The Need for the S A F E P L A N Method Private and public b u d g e t s , and public and c o n s u m e r confidence are being significantly affected by t h e failure of f o r e s t planning in BC t o address  uncertainty.  towards  innovative  Agreement  forest  on t h e need  planning  to  redirect  is b r o a d e n i n g , m a k i n g  efforts planning  processes m o r e f l e x i b l e , r e s u l t - o r i e n t e d , a n d accountable t o t h e public. More detailed  information  about  outcomes  of f o r e s t  planning and  explanations f o r t h o s e o u t c o m e s will be needed in a c o n t e x t in which licensees need t o d r a m a t i c a l l y i m p r o v e p e r f o r m a n c e t o reduce costs, and g o v e r n m e n t officials are even m o r e pressed t o provide j u s t i f i c a t i o n for h a r v e s t a u t h o r i z a t i o n s . I n a m o r e flexible c o n t e x t f o r p l a n n i n g , t h e public is e x p e c t e d t o ask f o r m o r e c e r t a i n t y t h a t t h e e n v i r o n m e n t is not being d a m a g e d a n d d e m a n d m o r e accountability o f planners. The d e m a n d f o r m a n a g e r s t o produce reliable plans a n d t o b e t t e r explain unexpected o u t c o m e s will rise. The m e t h o d f o r Spatially A n a l y z i n g  Forest P L A N n i n g  efficacy a n d  u n c e r t a i n t y (SAFEPLAN) w a s developed in response t o these needs. I t is based  on t h e basic concepts f o r b e t t e r  planning  i n t r o d u c e d in  chapters t w o a n d t h r e e .  5.2 Goals and Objectives of the S A F E P L A N Method SAFEPLAN is a G I S - b a s e d process f o r c o n t i n u o u s e v a l u a t i o n of forest planning p e r f o r m a n c e , a n d t h e relationship o f this p e r f o r m a n c e w i t h  65  sources  of  uncertainty.  Desired  outcomes  of f o r e s t  management,  specifically w h i c h areas are t o be h a r v e s t e d , and w h i c h are t o be left undisturbed harvesting  are  in  plans.  outcomes  Comparison  reveals  the  efficacy  of  planned  of  with  actual  performance.  Where  discrepancies have o c c u r r e d , corrections t o planning procedures and future  plans  are  proposed.  Throughout  this  cycle  sources  of  u n c e r t a i n t y are identified and addressed. Matching  planned  outcomes  of  harvesting  forest  is only one of t h e  management.  Other  kinds  possible of  desirable  outcomes  are  profitability, e m p l o y m e n t , protection of e n v i r o n m e n t a l v a l u e s , social support  for  forestry,  performance though  etc.  Monitoring  on accomplishing  (e.g.  BCMOF,  1994;  of  forest  these o u t c o m e s BCFPB,  2002).  management  is widely Planning  reported,  efficacy  on  harvesting as p l a n n e d is m u c h less r e p o r t e d . The BCFPB has pioneered monitoring  performance  of  planning  with  respect  to  location  of  harvesting in BC (BCFPB, 1 9 9 9 ) . The lack of m e t h o d s t o do so in a m o r e s y s t e m a t i c and cost-effective w a y has c o m p r o m i s e d  monitoring  p e r f o r m a n c e in a b r o a d e r t e m p o r a l and special scale. The specific o b j e c t i v e s o f SAFEPLAN a r e : 1) t o assess f o r e s t planning efficacy t h r o u g h c o m p a r i n g  planned  and actual h a r v e s t i n g ; 2) t o  identify  contribute  factors to  -components  discrepancies  of  the  between  forest  system-  planned  and  that actual  harvesting;  66  3) t o  evaluate  associations  between  factors  contributing  to  discrepancy a n d physical a t t r i b u t e s of t h e landscape; a n d 4) t o provide f e e d b a c k w i t h i n t h e planning process, i m p r o v i n g t h e i n f o r m a t i o n channel a n d adding n e w k n o w l e d g e .  5.3 Description of the SAFEPLAN Method The SAFEPLAN m e t h o d consists of five consecutive s t e p s : Step  1. Compilation  of information.  Maps  o f planned  a n d actual  harvesting are c o m p i l e d in ArcView®. I n t h e c u r r e n t scheme f o r forest p l a n n i n g , planned h a r v e s t i n g is r e p r e s e n t e d b y proposed  cutblocks  contained in a m a p a t t a c h e d t o an FDP s u b m i t t e d f o r a p p r o v a l t o t h e BCMOF. Once  digitized,  these  proposed  cutblocks  form  layer  number  1.  Digitizing cutblocks f r o m successive FDPs produces l a y e r n u m b e r 2 , 3, and so o n . Actual h a r v e s t i n g is represented by cutblocks harvested in a given year. These cutblocks are identified f r o m BCMOF forest cover maps,  high-resolution  inventories.  Once  digital  orthophotos,  d i g i t i z e d , these  actual  aerial  photos,  cutblocks  form  and field layer l a .  Digitizing cutblocks h a r v e s t e d in successive years produces layers 2 a , 3 a , and so o n (Figure 5 . 1 ) .  67  Figure 5.1  C o m p i l a t i o n of planned and actual h a r v e s t i n g in ArcView®  A d a t a - t a b l e describing legal and biological f e a t u r e s of cutblocks is associated  with  each  resulting  layer.  Layers  of  annually  planned  cutblocks link t o d a t a tables w i t h cutblock I D , cutblock c a t e g o r y ('A p r o p o s e d ' , 'A a p p r o v e d ' , ' S a l v a g e ' , ' C u t t i n g P e r m i t ' ) , c u r r e n t y e a r , and year in which h a r v e s t i n g is e x p e c t e d . Layers of annual harvesting link to data tables w i t h cutblock I D and c u r r e n t year. Step 2. Preparation of grid cells and centroids. Geographic boundaries of the area of planning are digitized in a new layer. This layer is t h e n gridded ( 1 0 0 * 1 0 0 m e t r e s ) using t h e ' c o n v e r t t o g r i d ' tool in ArcView® Spatial Analyst e x t e n s i o n (McCoy and J o h n s t o n , 2 0 0 1 ) . The result is a raster m a p of l h a cells. Finally, t h e whole raster is c o n v e r t e d to a point shapefile using t h e ArcView® Raster t o V e c t o r Conversion script which  makes  use  of  the  asPointFtab,  asPolyLineFtab,  and  68  asPolygonFtab a v e n u e s t o c o n v e r t a grid t o e i t h e r a point line, or polygon shape file (McVay, 1 9 9 8 ) . Each l h a cell inherits a centroid (Figure 5 . 2 ) .  Figure 5.2  Preparation of grid cells and centroids  Step 3. A t t a c h m e n t of f e a t u r e d a t a . I m a g e layers and data tables resulting f r o m Step 1 are j o i n e d to t h e 1 ha cells resulting f r o m Step 2 using  ArcView®  Assign  Data  by  Location  function.  This  function  provides t h e ability t o p e r f o r m a spatial j o i n b e t w e e n t w o  selected  t h e m e s (ESRI, 1 9 9 8 ; O r m s b y and Alvi, 1 9 9 9 ) . As a result, clicking on any  central  point  within  the  area  of  planning  displays  a  window  describing planned and actual h a r v e s t i n g , legal history and biological features of t h e cell (Figure 5 . 3 ) .  69  i  7640 350-1  _ Point ID Cutblock  \3  P  1995 FDP status  1998  _ 1995 FDP year Years in plan 1  / P  R. Changes 95-96 _ 1996 FDP status 1996 FDP year Years in plan 2 R. Changes 96-97  3 W. Reserve  _ 1997 FDP status  A  1997 FDP year  1999 4  Years in plan 3 _ R. Changes 97-98  Beetle  _ 1999 FDP status  CP (90-9)  Years in plan 4  5  4  Figure 5.3  1997  Harvested • M  1999  hi  I  HI  A t t a c h m e n t o f f e a t u r e data t o cells  Step 4 . Q u e r y i n g d a t a . The data table resulting f r o m Step 3 is queried using ArcView® Q u e r y Builder. This tool allows creation of an equation to e x a m i n e particular t h e m e s and to a n s w e r specific questions (ESRI, 1 9 9 8 ) . Potential questions t o analyze using ArcView® Q u e r y  Builder  include: Which cells w e r e proposed f o r harvesting? Which of these were a p p r o v e d f o r  h a r v e s t i n g and f o r which c u t t i n g  permits  were  issued? Which are harvested? How long did it t a k e t o h a r v e s t a p p r o v e d cells? W h e r e w e r e a p p r o v e d cells deleted w i t h o u t being  harvested?  Where are cells t h a t are n o t - a p p r o v e d f o r h a r v e s t i n g cut? (Figure 5 . 4 ) .  70  | [Charge 8753 (Rj^j _[1 933.FDP Statu?! [Years in Plan$4| (Wndthrow] [Insects]  ;  |T]|17]|^d]  000 •00 0  Value; 1935 1936 1397 1333 199?"  ..J-  2000  1  Update Values  | (1935 FOP Status] - ""1 and f|199b FD P S talus] = a i d ||1997FDP Status] = '"*] and Q1999 FDP Status] - ' " ] and ([Logged] >« 1935)  New Set Add To Set Select From SeJ  Figure 5.4 Data q u e r y . I n this e x a m p l e , cells t h a t w e r e w i t h o u t been proposed in a n y FDP, are identified. From t h e a n s w e r s t o these questions, indicators o f f o r e s t  harvested  planning  u n c e r t a i n t y a r e calculated. T h r o u g h ratios these indicators q u a n t i f y t h e m a g n i t u d e o f u n c e r t a i n t y affecting t h e d i f f e r e n t stages o f t h e planning cycle. T h e h i g h e r t h e ratios, t h e d e e p e r t h e w a y in w h i c h efficacy o f planning has been c o m p r o m i s e d by u n c e r t a i n t y . These ratios a r e : •  P/H, t h e ratio o f t h e set o f cells proposed ( p l a n n e d harvesting) to h a r v e s t e d cells (actual h a r v e s t i n g ) .  •  P/A, t h e ratio o f t h e set o f cells proposed  to approved for  h a r v e s t i n g cells ( a p p r o v e d h a r v e s t i n g ) . •  A / H , t h e ratio o f t h e set o f cells a p p r o v e d f o r harvesting t o h a r v e s t e d cells.  71  •  A/CP, t h e ratio of t h e set of cells a p p r o v e d f o r h a r v e s t i n g to cells w i t h c u t t i n g p e r m i t issued ("ready t o g o " h a r v e s t i n g ) .  •  CP/H, t h e ratio of t h e set of cells w i t h c u t t i n g p e r m i t issued to h a r v e s t e d cells.  •  T i m e b e t w e e n P and H, t h e average period of t i m e in years b e t w e e n t h e proposal of a cell and its h a r v e s t i n g .  •  T i m e b e t w e e n A and H, t h e average period of t i m e in years b e t w e e n t h e a p p r o v a l for harvesting of a cell and its h a r v e s t i n g .  •  Time b e t w e e n CP and H, t h e average period of t i m e in years between  the  issuance  of  cutting  permit  for  a  cell  and  its  harvesting. These indicators of planning u n c e r t a i n t y can be calculated yearly (i.e. 1 9 9 5 , 1 9 9 6 , 1 9 9 7 , 1 9 9 8 , 1 9 9 9 , 2 0 0 0 ) , or f o r a period of t i m e (i.e. 1995 t o 2 0 0 0 ) . As FDPs in BC are s u b m i t t e d y e a r l y or e v e r y t w o y e a r s , and t h e y propose h a r v e s t i n g w i t h a horizon o f five y e a r s , periods o f t i m e for analysis can be considered in m a n y w a y s . One FDP can be considered alone and indicators can be e s t i m a t e d f o r its specific five years horizon of p l a n n i n g . Several successive FDPs can be considered individually,  or  considered  together  overlapping  their  horizons  of  planning. Either w a y , t r e n d s in u n c e r t a i n t y can be e s t i m a t e d . The planning area can be stratified according t o characteristics of interest and indicators of u n c e r t a i n t y can be calculated and t h e n c o m p a r e d f o r different planning areas. Step 5. I n v e s t i g a t i n g causes of unexpected o u t c o m e s . For areas of discrepancy  (planned  harvesting  does  not  occur  or  unplanned  harvesting does o c c u r ) , or w h e r e indicators of f o r e s t u n c e r t a i n t y are  72  too  high,  causes  are  investigated.  Natural  disturbances  (i.e.  w i n d t h r o w , beetle o u t b r e a k s , f i r e s ) , social concerns (i.e. c o m m u n i t y watersheds,  visually  sensitive  areas,  old-growth  forests)  and  ecosystem a t t r i b u t e s (i.e. forest t y p e s , wildlife r a n g e s , s t r e a m s ) within the planning area are added as new layers into t h e Arcview® view. Patterns  of association  between  these  disturbances,  concerns  and  a t t r i b u t e s , a n d areas o f discrepancy are i n v e s t i g a t e d by visual s c r u t i n y of t h e displayed o r t h o p h o t o s  and t h e m e s , and  by analysis of t h e  results f r o m q u e r y i n g t h e data tables, and c o n t i n g e n c y tables and Chi square tests if n e e d e d . S o m e p a t t e r n s of association can be fairly o b v i o u s ( e . g . m o s t n o n planned h a r v e s t i n g can occur in beetle o u t b r e a k a r e a s , or an A / H ratio can be especially high in an area w i t h low value t i m b e r and costly access). O t h e r p a t t e r n s , t h o u g h , are less o b v i o u s , and m o r e research has to be d o n e . Using t h e ArcView® Query Builder, new questions are posed ( e . g . cells t h a t w e r e a p p r o v e d f o r h a r v e s t i n g and w e r e harvested t h a t are located in c o m m u n i t y  watersheds).  not  Information  f r o m FDP d o c u m e n t s , c u t t i n g p e r m i t s s u b m i s s i o n s , BCMOF's approval and rejection l e t t e r s , and c o m m e n t s f r o m t h e public c o m p l e m e n t t h e GIS analysis in this s t e p . Forest m a n a g e r s and officials are i n t e r v i e w e d to d e t e r m i n e t h e reasons f o r specific o u t c o m e s . On these interviews orthophotos Contingency  are tables  displayed, can  be  allowing used  to  for  confirm  easier  visualization.  association  between  variables and o u t c o m e s . Results f r o m this analysis lead t o conclusions and r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s . Conclusions refer t o w h a t is going w r o n g and w h a t is going well in t h e planning process, and w h a t are t h e causes f o r t h o s e ( e . g . deficiencies of t h e i n f o r m a t i o n c h a n n e l , challenges in t h e c o n t e x t f o r decision-  73  m a k i n g ) . R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s provide feedback t o t h e planning process to i m p r o v e w h a t is going w r o n g and t o reinforce w h a t is going well (e.g.  improve  m a p s , databases, a n d identification  of where  tools,  research, and new processes are w a r r a n t e d t o reduce u n c e r t a i n t y ) .  5.4 Data Requirements for the SAFEPLAN Method I m p l e m e n t a t i o n of t h e m e t h o d does n o t require g e n e r a t i o n of spatial data o t h e r t h a n t h a t  required f o r traditional  planning  in BC. This  consists of: •  FDP m a p s ( 1 : 2 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 : 5 0 , 0 0 0 ) s h o w i n g cutblocks by status ( p r o p o s e d , a p p r o v e d , and w i t h c u t t i n g p e r m i t s issued). Cutblock a t t r i b u t e s ( e . g . legal history, natural d i s t u r b a n c e s ,  harvesting)  are in databases linked t o t h e m a p s ; •  forest  cover  (1:20,000),  which  follows  t h e BC Geographical  S y s t e m (BCGS) o f m a p p i n g . This cover stratifies t h e landscape into polygons a n d f o r each one of t h e s e , stand a t t r i b u t e s and general d i s t u r b a n c e history a r e described (BCMOF, 1 9 9 8 a ) ; •  o r t h o p h o t o s f o r t h e planning a r e a . Scale d e p e n d s on t h e issues to be dealt w i t h . As e x a m p l e s , t h e BC Land Use Coordination Office  (LUCO)  Landscape  uses  Units  1 : 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 aerial  a n d Biogeoclimatic  photographs Zones;  to  1:63,000  identify aerial  p h o t o g r a p h s t o elaborate regional hazard m a p s f o r landslides, snow  avalanching,  areas  of  active  erosion,  and  active  f l o o d p l a i n s ; a n d 1 : 1 5 , 8 4 0 f o r forest i n v e n t o r y (BCLUCO, 1 9 9 9 ) . On t h e o t h e r  h a n d , Mitchell e t a l . ( 2 0 0 1 )  recommend  using  1 : 1 5 , 0 0 0 scale color aerial p h o t o g r a p h s f o r w i n d t h r o w d e t e c t i o n ;  74  •  specific  legal  information  f o r each  cutblock.  Submissions f o r  a p p r o v a l a n d p e r m i t s , a p p r o v a l s , r e j e c t i o n s , issues o n public consultation  a n d agency  review.  D o c u m e n t s t h a t contain t h e  rationale f o r changing plans f o r proposed o r a p p r o v e d cutblocks. Most of this data is already in t h e possession of licensees;  however  t h e r e m a y be p r o b l e m s w i t h accuracy a n d d a t e d i n f o r m a t i o n (Sierra Systems, 2001).  5.5 Test of the SAFEPLAN Method in the Lemon Landscape Unit 5.5.1 Introduction to the Case Study The Lemon Landscape Unit ( L e m o n ) is located w i t h i n t h e area covered by t h e A r r o w IFPA w i t h i n t h e A r r o w T i m b e r Supply A r e a . T h e 4 1 , 0 0 0 h a unit is set in a m o u n t a i n o u s area in t h e s o u t h w e s t portion of t h e Nelson Forest Region, i m m e d i a t e l y a d j a c e n t t o t h e t o w n o f Slocan in southeast BC (Figure 5 . 5 ) .  Figure 5.5  Aerial view  o f Lemon  Landscape  Unit a n d location of  Lemon in BC.  75  Forestry  activities  occur  throughout  the  unit  at  lower  and  mid-  elevations, and e n v i r o n m e n t a l , social and e c o n o m i c values are key drivers of f o r e s t  m a n a g e m e n t . The forest s y s t e m  includes  diverse  ecosystems including i n t e r i o r c e d a r - h e m l o c k and E n g e l m a n n s p r u c e subalpine fir forests ( A r r o w IFPA, 1 9 9 9 ) , wildlife ranges and a variety of natural d i s t u r b a n c e r e g i m e s , such as f i r e , w i n d t h r o w , insects and other  pathogens,  availability  and  is diverse  landslides in these  (BCMOF, 2 0 0 1 c ) . ecosystems.  Forest  Different  resource  sites  present  particular y i e l d , e c o n o m i c p o t e n t i a l , and social sensitivity f o r t i m b e r , wildlife  ranges,  stakeholders  water  are  very  quality, active  and  visual  in d e m a n d i n g  attributes. participation  Multiple in  forest  d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g and appreciate n u m e r o u s n o n - t i m b e r v a l u e s , such as recreation areas, and c o m m u n i t y  and d o m e s t i c w a t e r s h e d s  (Arrow  IFPA, 2 0 0 0 ) . These concerns, and t h e a t t i t u d e s , values and behaviour of  people  are  being  surveyed  by  the  Collaborative  for  Advanced  Landscape Planning at t h e University of British Columbia (Meitner et a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) . The high level of public concern m e a n s t h a t this  area  " u n d e r t h e m i c r o s c o p e " , as r e p o r t e d by McDonald ( 1 9 9 9 ) , is one of t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l " h o t s p o t s " in BC. Policy in Lemon also has a particular relevance in shaping t h e forest s y s t e m . The BC Chief Forester in t h e rationale f o r AAC d e t e r m i n a t i o n in A r r o w T i m b e r Supply Area (TSA), w i t h i n w h i c h t h e A r r o w occurs, a c k n o w l e d g e d  " f o r this d e t e r m i n a t i o n  I am  IFPA  m i n d f u l of t h e  difficulties of locating h a r v e s t i n g operations in t h e A r r o w TSA as a result of t h e v a r i o u s pressures e x e r t e d on t h e land b a s e " (BCMOF, 2 0 0 1 c ) . This recognition led t o t h e A r r o w Forest License Group being a w a r d e d an I n n o v a t i v e Forest Practices A g r e e m e n t (IFPA) in 1998 to help " i n c r e a s i n g t h e w o o d s u p p l y f o r f o r e s t licensees while at t h e s a m e t i m e ensuring t h e  m o s t advanced and sustainable  forest  practices  76  possible"  (Arrow  management  IFPA,  activities  1999). in  As part  Lemon  are  of t h e carried  Arrow using  IFPA,  an  forest  ecosystem  m a n a g e m e n t a p p r o a c h . The IFPA's w o r k i n g definition o f e c o s y s t e m management  includes " a process of d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , t h a t uses an  u n d e r s t a n d i n g of local and regional i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t ecological and h u m a n social processes, f u n c t i o n s , s t r u c t u r e and c o m p o s i t i o n , and t h e interconnections  between  them"  (Arrow  IFPA,  1999).  Scenario  planning is a f u n d a m e n t a l c o m p o n e n t in this m a n a g e m e n t  process.  Different f u t u r e scenarios are forecasted and t h e i r sustainability assessed  based  on  criteria  and  indicators  of. f o r e s t  is  management  sustainability. The Lemon Landscape Unit was selected as a case s t u d y due to t h e c o m p l e x i t y of t h e s y s t e m in which forest m a n a g e m e n t occurs. A n o t h e r factor was t h e explicit focus on i m p r o v i n g f o r e s t planning approaches t h a t are being t a k e n in t h e a r e a . As m a n i f e s t e d at t h e g o v e r n m e n t a l and licensee l e v e l , w h a t is being looked f o r in t h e A r r o w IFPA is a m o r e flexible and accountable approach to planning ( A r r o w IFPA, Scenario  planning  and  criteria  and  indicators  projection  1999).  based  on  m o d e l s , need to include underlying u n c e r t a i n t y .  5.5.2 Objectives of the Case study The  SAFEPLAN  method  was  applied  in  Lemon  with  the  general  objective of e v a l u a t i n g t h e p e r f o r m a n c e of h a r v e s t planning during t h e period 1 9 9 5 - 2 0 0 0 , and t h e sources o f u n c e r t a i n t y affecting it. Specific objectives w e r e : •  to  describe  planned  and  actual  outcomes  of  FDP  proposed  h a r v e s t i n g b e t w e e n 1 9 9 5 and 2 0 0 0 ;  77  •  t o identify ecological, social, e c o n o m i c , a n d policy sources of u n c e r t a i n t y , w h i c h c o n t r i b u t e t o discrepancies  between  these  planned and actual o u t c o m e s ; •  to evaluate  associations  between  sources o f u n c e r t a i n t y and  e c o s y s t e m o r g e o g r a p h i c a t t r i b u t e s , and t o review t h e process of cutblock a p p r o v a l a n d c u t t i n g p e r m i t issuance, identifying t h e s o c i a l / r e g u l a t o r y issues t h a t o c c u r r e d , h o w t h e y w e r e r e s o l v e d , or if u n - r e s o l v e d t h e causes and potential s o l u t i o n s ; •  t o identify w h e r e - a n d h o w - i n f o r m a t i o n sources and predictive tools  could  be used  by managers  t o reduce  uncertainty  in  planning; and •  t o describe t h e s u p p o r t i v e role t h a t SAFEPLAN could have w i t h respect t o b e t t e r planning in L e m o n .  5.5.3 Methodology of the Case study Application of t h e SAFEPLAN m e t h o d in Lemon consisted of t h e five consecutive steps described in section 5 . 3 . S o m e f e a t u r e s , h o w e v e r , were specific t o this case s t u d y . Paper and digital m a p s f o r Lemon were obtained f r o m various sources. O r t h o p h o t o s , f o r e s t health s u r v e y s , forest c o v e r s , a n d salvage p e r m i t m a p s , w i t h e c o s y s t e m a t t r i b u t e s and d i s t u r b a n c e s , w e r e obtained f r o m t h e BCMOF. FDPs s u b m i t t e d in 1 9 9 5 , 1 9 9 6 , 1 9 9 7 a n d 1 9 9 9 , aerial photos, c u t t i n g p e r m i t s , application a n d a p p r o v a l l e t t e r s , a n d m a p s of community from  watersheds  Slocan  Forest  Slocan Forest P r o d u c t s h a r v e s t i n g in L e m o n Unit. 1 3  a n d visually sensitive Products  was t h e only  Ltd.  (SFP) . 13  Licensee s u b m i t t i n g  areas w e r e This  obtained  material  FDP's d u r i n g  was  1995-1999 for  78  s u p p l e m e n t e d w i t h t h e FDP t e x t s received f r o m t h e BCMOF and SFP, and  clearcut  photographs.  edge  windthrow  Interviews  mapped  from  the  w i t h forest m a n a g e r s and  1998  aerial  BCMOF officials  provided i n f o r m a t i o n f o r specific o u t c o m e s . Maps showing proposed and actual harvesting b e t w e e n 1 9 9 5 - 2 0 0 0 in Lemon w e r e added as t h e m e s in ArcView®. Further i n f o r m a t i o n proposed h a r v e s t i n g was obtained f r o m t h e FDPs s u b m i t t e d  on  during  1 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 9 . Actual h a r v e s t i n g was t a k e n f r o m t h e BCMOF 1998 and 2 0 0 0 forest c o v e r m a p s , which were checked and corrected August  2000  identification,  orthophotos. area,  Data-tables  development  status,  containing  years  in  plans,  using  cutblock planned  harvesting y e a r , actual h a r v e s t i n g y e a r w e r e a t t a c h e d t o these maps. The a g g r e g a t e d digital i n f o r m a t i o n consisted of five layers: Layers 1 to 4 described proposed cutblocks in t h e 1995 FDP, 1 9 9 6 FDP, 1997 FDP and 1999 FDP respectively. Layer 5 described actual cutblocks on t h e landscape f o r t h e p e r i o d . Just as t h e sources of t h e s e layers v a r i e d , so did t h e quality of t h e i r d a t a . Duplicate m a p s existed - m a p s for t h e same FDP y e a r f r o m t h e BCMOF and t h e licensee- f o r s o m e years. Data f r o m t h e t w o sources was c o m p a r e d , and d o u b l e - c h e c k e d w i t h 1 m e t e r pixel resolution 1998 digital o r t h o p h o t o s f o r L e m o n . The high resolution of t h e s e o r t h o p h o t o s allowed identification of activities on t h e landscape. I n 3 0 % of cases, cutblocks in successive plans had t h e same shape but w e r e shifted relative to each o t h e r or t o t h e cutblock on t h e o r t h o p h o t o (Figure 5 . 6 ) . These w e r e considered t o be obvious mapping shifts and w e r e re-located t o m a t c h t h e cutblock locations on t h e o r t h o p h o t o s t o avoid influencing s u b s e q u e n t analysis. Data q u a l i t y , t h o u g h , was a p r i m a r y source of u n c e r t a i n t y f o r planning in L e m o n . I t s consequences are discussed below.  79  Figure 5.6  An e x a m p l e of obvious m a p p i n g shifts.  The area w i t h i n t h e borders of Lemon was g r i d d e d ( 1 0 0 * 1 0 0 m e t e r s ) , resulting in 4 0 , 9 8 1 1-hectare cells. This grid t h e m e was c o n v e r t e d t o a point shapefile. On a t t a c h i n g f e a t u r e d a t a , t h e data was linked to each one of t h e 4 0 , 9 8 1 points at t h e centre of t h e cells. A click on anyone of t h e points w i t h i n t h e boundaries of Lemon opens t h e history of t h e cell between 1995 and 2 0 0 0 . On  querying  answered,  the  such  point as:  data  How  table,  many  a  number  ha were  of  proposed  questions for  were  harvesting  between 1 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 9 in Lemon? How m a n y of t h e m w e r e approved? How m a n y c u t t i n g p e r m i t s were issued?  How m a n y of t h e m  were  actually harvested? How m a n y years passed b e t w e e n t h e proposal and the h a r v e s t i n g areas? Were t h e r e delays? W h y w e r e blocks d e l e t e d , r e - s h a p e d , m a d e larger or smaller? For each q u e r y , each cell was  80  counted once. I f a cell w a s proposed f o r h a r v e s t in consecutive FDPs, it was a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e y e a r w h e n first p r o p o s e d . Results w e r e displayed in charts t o help t h e visualization of d i s t r i b u t i o n s a n d t r e n d s in t h e d a t a . The results o f t h e s e queries enabled calculation o f t h e indicators of planning u n c e r t a i n t y described in section 5 . 3 . These indicators show how u n c e r t a i n t y affected planning efficacy in Lemon b e t w e e n 1 9 9 5 and 2000. Where areas o f discrepancy o c c u r r e d , and indicators of u n c e r t a i n t y w e r e h i g h , causes o f discrepancies a n d u n c e r t a i n t y w e r e i n v e s t i g a t e d . Printed o r t o p h o t o s f o r Lemon were displayed t o m a n a g e r s a n d reasons for specific o u t c o m e s w e r e a s k e d . Discrepancies w e r e spatially related with  themes  featuring  windthrow,  fire,  and  beetle  outbreaks,  c o m m u n i t y w a t e r s h e d s , visually sensitive areas, f o r e s t t y p e s , a n d old g r o w t h f o r e s t s . T h e p a t t e r n of association of these f e a t u r e s w i t h cells showing u n e x p e c t e d o u t c o m e s was e v a l u a t e d .  5.5.4 Results and Discussion of the Case Study The SAFEPLAN m e t h o d w a s applied f o r a single 5 - y e a r t i m e s p a n . T h e d a t a , t h e r e f o r e , w a s in s o m e cases limited in scope. T h e analysis, t h e r e f o r e , used special precaution in analysing results, a n d additional data w a s o b t a i n e d f o r s o m e stages of analysis. W h e n results were unclear,  they  were  clarified  with  interviews  and  bibliographical  research. Yearly analysis can be done f o r 5 - y e a r - o r o t h e r t i m e s p a n m o v i n g f r a m e s , w h i c h w o u l d enable identification of s t r o n g e r t r e n d s .  81  5.5.4.1 Proposed and Approved Harvesting I n t h e f o u r FDPs s u b m i t t e d b e t w e e n 1995 and 1 9 9 9 a t o t a l of 1,914 ha were proposed f o r h a r v e s t i n g in L e m o n . The area proposed each year dropped b e t w e e n 1995 and 1999 (Figure 5 . 7 ) .  1995 FDP  1996 FDP  1997 FDP  1999 FDP  Figure 5.7 Proposal of h a r v e s t i n g in FDPs b e t w e e n 1 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 9 . One y e a r a f t e r t h e s u b m i s s i o n , 4 4 % of ha p r o p o s e d f o r h a r v e s t i n g was d r o p p e d , and 1 4 % w e r e a p p r o v e d . 8 0 % of d r o p p e d ha w e r e w i t h i n blocks t h a t w e r e w h o l l y discarded and 2 0 % w e r e w i t h i n blocks t h a t were r e s h a p e d . During  the  period  1995-2000,  513  ha  (27%  of  proposed)  were  a p p r o v e d . A l t h o u g h t h e y had been a p p r o v e d , 2 5 % of t h e ha w e r e d r o p p e d before t h e n e x t p l a n . Of t h e s e , 2 5 % w e r e w i t h i n blocks t h a t were discarded and 7 5 % w e r e in blocks t h a t w e r e r e - s h a p e d .  82  Very  few  approved  of t h e in t h e  blocks 1996  proposed  in t h e  FDP. Of t h e  827  1995 ha  FDP appeared  proposed, 4 0 %  as  were  dropped and only 9 % w e r e a p p r o v e d one y e a r a f t e r t h e submission. From this 9 % of a p p r o v e d h a , nearly half ( 4 5 % ) of t h e m w e r e dropped before t h e 1997 FDP. Proportionally, a p p r o v e d s t a t u s ha w e r e dropped m o r e f r e q u e n t l y t h a n proposed status ha (Figure 5 . 8 ) .  33 ha Dropped •  1997  1996 FDP  FDP  Issuance:  Figure 5.8 History of ha proposed in t h e 1995 FDP. 5.5.4.2 Cutting Permit Issuance From t h e t o t a l area of 1,914  ha proposed f o r h a r v e s t i n g  between  1 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 9 , c u t t i n g p e r m i t s had been issued f o r only 3 8 4 ha ( 2 0 % ) by March 2 0 0 1 . Including blocks proposed before 1 9 9 5 , and blocks proposed t h r o u g h a m e n d m e n t s t o FDPs d u r i n g 1 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 9 , c u t t i n g p e r m i t s w e r e issued for 8 8 6 ha b e t w e e n 1995 and 2 0 0 0 . Sixty t h r e e percent of these ha received a c u t t i n g p e r m i t w i t h i n t w o years a f t e r s u b m i s s i o n . From t h e 827 ha proposed in t h e 1995 FDP, only 2 4 % g o t a c u t t i n g  permit  83  within t h e n e x t 5 y e a r s a f t e r submission. For L e m o n , t h e stock of area under c u t t i n g p e r m i t varied f r o m y e a r to y e a r , m o r e t h a n doubling in recent years (Figure 5 . 9 ) .  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  Figure 5.9 Area u n d e r CP in Lemon b e t w e e n 1 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 9 5.5.4.3 Harvesting During t h e period 1 9 9 5 - 2 0 0 0 a total of 6 0 8 ha was h a r v e s t e d , which represents less t h a n 1.5% of t h e gross area of Lemon and 3 . 8 % of its harvesting land base. From  the  total  area  proposed  for  harvesting  between  1995-1999  ( 1 , 9 1 4 h a ) , 2 7 % was h a r v e s t e d . An additional 80 ha was harvested 14  w i t h o u t being proposed in any FDP, either because of m i n o r salvage, or because o f b o u n d a r y modifications prior t o CP issuance t h a t did n o t appear in any FDP. From t h e 513 ha t h a t o b t a i n e d a p p r o v e d s t a t u s ,  The blocks percentage.  proposed  for  harvesting  previous  to  1995  were  not  considered  in  this  84  4 6 % w e r e h a r v e s t e d . From 220 ha t h a t received a CP prior 1 9 9 8 , 1 5  68%  had  been  harvested  before  March 2 0 0 1  (Figure  5.10).  After  receiving a c u t t i n g p e r m i t , 3 7 % had been h a r v e s t e d a f t e r one year, 5 6 % after t w o y e a r s , and 8 3 % after t h r e e y e a r s .  Proposed  Aproved  CP Issued  Figure 5.10 Harvesting f o r p r o p o s e d , a p p r o v e d and CP issued ha. Prior to  1998,  FDP's w e r e  required t o  include  a detailed  harvest  s c h e d u l e . Of t h e 8 2 7 ha proposed in t h e 1 9 9 5 FDP f o r h a r v e s t i n g 16  during t h e n e x t 5 y e a r s , only 1 7 % were cut according t o t h e proposed schedule. For t h e 1 9 9 6 and 1 9 9 7 FDP's t h e s e rates w e r e 8 % and 1 2 % respectively.  5.5.4.4 Indicators of Forest Planning Uncertainty Quantification of discrepancies b e t w e e n planned and actual o u t c o m e s of  planning  in  Lemon  allowed  for  estimation  of  indicators  u n c e r t a i n t y . These indicators refer to t h e level in w h i c h  of  uncertainty  affected t h e efficacy of t h e planning process (Figure 5 . 1 1 and 5 . 1 2 ) . 1 5  1 6  Only CP issued b e f o r e 1 9 9 8 w e r e c o n s i d e r e d f o r t h i s e s t i m a t i o n . This r e q u i r e m e n t f o r FDPs w a s d r o p p e d by t h e 1 9 9 8 BCFPC a m e n d m e n t s  85  7.3  7.3 ha w e r e p r o p o s e d for e a c h h a h a r v e s t e d  3.7  3.7 h a w e r e p r o p o s e d for each ha a p p r o v e d  2.2  2.2 h a w e r e a p p r o v e d for each ha h a r v e s t e d  1.3  1.3 h a w e r e a p p r o v e d f o r e a c h ha w i t h C P i s s u e d  1•5  1..5 h a o b t a i n e d C P for each ha h a r v e s t e d  Figure 5.11 I n d i c a t o r s o f forest planning u n c e r t a i n t y ( e f f o r t made t o complete p l a n n i n g ) f o r Lemon Landscape Unit  Time between P- M t \ m m betw e&n A- H 1mm between CP- H  *  4.5 years  IK  4.0 years  ^  2.2. years  i •  Figure 5.12 I n d i c a t o r s o f forest planning u n c e r t a i n t y ( t i m e required t o complete p l a n n i n g ) f o r Lemon Landscape Unit  86  5.5.4.5 Analysis of Sources of Uncertainty Affecting Planning 5.5.4.5.1 The Forest System as a Source of Uncertainty From one y e a r t o t h e n e x t , t h e n u m b e r of ha proposed varied g r e a t l y . Entire cutblocks w e r e d i s c a r d e d , and new ones w e r e a d d e d . O t h e r cutblocks w e r e r e - s h a p e d , reduced or increased in size. Of t h e ha t h a t were proposed and discarded before t h e n e x t FDP, or a p p r o v e d and discarded before t h e n e x t FDP, a b o u t half of t h e cases w e r e due to rejection  by  governmental  agencies.  Complexity  in  the  policy  s u b s y s t e m was a key d e t e r m i n a n t in planning. Rules c h a n g e d , t h e y were not clear, and t h e licensee had to respond t o this new reality. After t h e e n a c t m e n t of t h e BCFPC in 1 9 9 5 , t h e BCMOF asked t h e licensee to s u b m i t a 1 9 9 6 FDP substantially c o m p l i a n t w i t h t h e new regulations, especially w i t h t h e ones referring to biodiversity.  This  accounted f o r t h e m a j o r i t y of t h e a p p r o v e d blocks discarded f r o m t h e 1995 FDP. The licensee c o m p l e t e d considerable f i e l d w o r k d u r i n g 1995 and  1996  (including t e r r a i n  m a p p i n g , h y d r o l o g y , fish and  wildlife,  visual i m p a c t , and operational a s s e s s m e n t s ) , and r e - w o r k e d t h e FDP to be consistent w i t h t h e newly imposed biodiversity regulations. The effects of t h e BCFPC w e r e fully reflected in t h e 1 9 9 7 FDP. Several new areas w e r e p r o p o s e d , and m a n y of t h e areas proposed and a p p r o v e d in earlier FDP's w e r e c o m p l e t e l y discarded. While it was a m a j o r f a c t o r disrupting t h e c o n t i n u i t y of t h e planning process d u r i n g t h e first half ( 1 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 7 ) of t h e period of s t u d y , policy change was not t h e only source of u n c e r t a i n t y in L e m o n .  Identification of t h e m a i n sources of u n c e r t a i n t y was c o m p l e t e d for t h e 226 ha t h a t o b t a i n e d FDP approval f o r h a r v e s t i n g status and were discarded  in consecutive  FDP or had  not  been  harvested  after  3  87  years  . For 2 0 % of t h e s e ha no reasons w e r e r e p o r t e d or could be  ascertained.  From  FDP d o c u m e n t s ,  BCMOF c o r r e s p o n d e n c e ,  public  participation and i n t e r v i e w s w i t h m a n a g e r s , it was possible t o evaluate sources of u n c e r t a i n t y f o r t h e remaining 8 0 % of t h e cases. These sources were e c o n o m i c and o p e r a t i o n a l , social, legal and ecological (Figure 5 . 1 3 ) .  Figure 5.13 Sources of u n c e r t a i n t y for discarded and n o n - h a r v e s t e d approved ha. Economic and o p e r a t i o n a l reasons explained 4 0 % of cases. Stands with marginal m e r c h a n t a b i l i t y were not h a r v e s t e d because t h e y either could not be h a r v e s t e d economically due t o low pulp prices or t h e y contain m o s t l y n o n - c o m m e r c i a l t r e e species. Social constraints explained 3 5 % of cases. These a p p r o v e d ha were not h a r v e s t e d a f t e r social pressure ( e . g . t h r e a t of appeals to c o u r t s , boycotts and Even  when  blockades f r o m the  licensee  had  people expressing been  For t h i s p a r t i c u l a r a n a l y s i s , h a r v e s t i n g d u r i n g 2001 o b t a i n e d CP w e r e n o t c o n s i d e r e d . 1 7  granted  their  approval  disapproval). status  for  w a s r e c o r d e d a n d a p p r o v e d cells t h a t  88  harvesting,  these  areas  were  set  aside  either  because  of  the  impracticality of actually h a r v e s t i n g or to p r e v e n t m o r e social conflicts and p r e v e n t f u r t h e r d a m a g e t o c o m p a n y ' s i m a g e . Legal/wildlife r e q u i r e m e n t s explained 1 5 % of cases. These approved ha were not h a r v e s t e d as a direct result of r e q u i r e m e n t s arising f r o m the e n a c t m e n t of t h e BCFPC. Some entire blocks w e r e d i s c a r d e d , and others  were  reshaped  to  accommodate  BCFPC  requirements  for  reserves. Response t o t i m b e r d a m a g e d by natural d i s t u r b a n c e s explained 1 0 % of the cases. These a p p r o v e d ha were discarded a f t e r t h e field layout work  showed  that  beetle  infestations  and w i n d t h r o w  had  reduced  m e r c h a n t a b i l i t y . These areas w e r e discarded and not salvaged due to low value w o o d and o t h e r h a r v e s t i n g priorities. I n some cases, u n c e r t a i n t y had m o r e t h a n one source. As an e x a m p l e , the 1999 FDP s u b m i t t e d by t h e licensee describes h o w : A previous h e m l o c k looper attack is e v i d e n t in t h e area on Wragge Face w h i c h is bounded by Valhalla Park and Slocan Lake...  (the  program  licensee)  f o r this area  had  intended  to  have  a  in 1 9 9 3 , h o w e v e r due t o  concern r e g a r d i n g t h e visual m o d i f i c a t i o n s , t h e was cancelled  1 8  salvage public  program  .  Uncertainty affected t h e planning cycle n o t only a t early stages ( e . g . b e t w e e n t h e proposal and t h e cutting p e r m i t issuance). Even after FDP approval and CP issuance, revisions to ha w e r e c o m m o n . Of t h e ha  The results d e s c r i b e d are t h e m a i n source of u n c e r t a i n t y in cases w h e r e t h e r e is m o r e t h a n one s o u r c e . I n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r e x a m p l e , cell-ha w e r e c o u n t e d u n d e r social c o n c e r n s . 1 8  89  under c u t t i n g p e r m i t , 3 2 % w e r e not h a r v e s t e d d u r i n g  1995-2001 . i y  Most of this p e r c e n t a g e was due to cutblock r e - s h a p i n g or re-sizing. Of this 3 2 % , 1 1 % had not been harvested by 2 0 0 1 but intentions were to proceed as in t h e original c u t t i n g p e r m i t . For 1 5 % of t h e ha no reasons were r e p o r t e d . From FDP d o c u m e n t s , BCMOF c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , public participation and i n t e r v i e w s w i t h m a n a g e r s , it was possible t o evaluate sources of u n c e r t a i n t y for t h e r e m a i n i n g 7 4 % of t h e cases. These sources w e r e : •  economic  and  operational  reasons, especially  unforeseen  low  pulp prices, f o r 5 5 % of cases; •  new legal/wildlife r e q u i r e m e n t s , resulting f r o m e n a c t m e n t of t h e BCFPC, f o r 2 9 % of cases;  •  natural d i s t u r b a n c e s , especially pine beetle o u t b r e a k s , in 6 % of t h e cases; and  •  unresolved  social  issues, especially concerns due to  drinking  w a t e r q u a l i t y , in 1 0 % of cases. For 2 0 %  of approved  and  15%  of CP issued  ha t h a t  were  not  h a r v e s t e d , a key issue was considered t o be block l a y o u t in t h e field. The fine scale used in this analysis ( 1 ha) allowed t o t r a c k differences between final l a y o u t and proposed boundaries of cutblocks. I n t e r v i e w s with  managers  supported  this  assumption,  and  analysis  of  the  in  any  i n f o r m a t i o n channel discussed below seems t o c o n f i r m it. As s t a t e d , s o m e  80  ha w e r e  cut w i t h o u t  being  proposed  previous FDP. Endemic pest problems t h a t occurred in Lemon d u r i n g 1 9 9 5 - 2 0 0 0 are m o u n t a i n pine beetle, douglas fir bark beetle, spruce 1 9  For t h i s p a r t i c u l a r a n a l y s i s , h a r v e s t i n g d u r i n g 2001  was recorded.  90  bark  beetle, g r e y  spruce  looper,  white  pine  blister  r u s t and  root  disease. Mountain pine beetle r e p o r t e d l y affected j u s t 72 ha in Lemon during t h e p e r i o d , while w i n d t h r o w along clearcut boundaries affected 74 ha. Of this t o t a l area of 146 h a , j u s t 6 ha w e r e harvested as salvage, 3 ha of w h i c h w e r e proposed in FDP's.  5.5.4.5.1.1 Spatial Association of Uncertainty and Landscape Attributes The 1 8 1 FDP-approved ha t h a t were discarded in consecutive FDPs, or had  not  been  uncertainty  harvested  were  after  3 years,  attributed, were  and  to  which  mapped. Their  sources  association  of  with  landscape a t t r i b u t e s w a s e x a m i n e d . The  BCMOF defines  physically  operable  "problem  forest  a n d exceed  low  types"  as  stands  site c r i t e r i a  and  which  are  y e t are  not  c u r r e n t l y utilized or have marginal m e r c h a n t a b i l i t y (BCMOF, 1 9 9 8 a ) . According  to t h e  licensee, these  stands g r o w  sub-alpine  fir,  pure  h e m l o c k , lodgepole pine, h e m l o c k - l e a d i n g and sub-alpine fir -spruce stands g r e a t e r t h a n  140 y e a r s , or deciduous b r o a d - l e a v e d  species.  These areas w e r e identified f r o m t h e 1998 BCMOF f o r e s t cover. Fifty six p e r c e n t of t o t a l a p p r o v e d ha was located in " p r o b l e m forest t y p e s " . From t h e 7 2 ha not cut due t o e c o n o m i c and  operational  reasons  types".  87%  of  these  were  growing  "problem  forest  In  addition m a n y w e r e located in high altitudes and in areas of steep slopes. Access is challenging and is primarily  by helicopter,  which  involves high o p e r a t i o n a l costs. As a result of low pulp log prices, these stands w e r e  not used because t h e y could not be  harvested  economically (Figure 5 . 1 4 ) .  91  Figure 5.14 Example of ha approved in 1 9 9 6 and 1997 and t h e n dropped due t o t h e i r location in low quality s t a n d s . Sixty percent of t o t a l a p p r o v e d  ha were  located e i t h e r in visually  sensitive areas a n d / o r in c o m m u n i t y w a t e r s h e d s . Of t h e 63 ha not cut for social reasons, 7 3 % of these were located w i t h i n scenic areas classified as t o be 'visually s e n s i t i v e ' . S e v e n t y - e i g h t percent of t h e 20  63 ha w e r e located w i t h i n c o m m u n i t y and d o m e s t i c w a t e r s h e d s . Visual and  water  quality  issues  together  accounted  for  90%  of  ha  not  harvested due t o social reasons (Figure 5 . 1 5 ) .  I n t h e A r r o w TSA, scenic a r e a s w e r e officially m a d e k n o w n by t h e D i s t r i c t M a n a g e r in June 1 9 9 8 . Visual Q u a l i t y O b j e c t i v e s h a v e not been e s t a b l i s h e d . 0  92  Figure 5.15 Example of ha a p p r o v e d in 1995 and t h e n d r o p p e d due to concern f o r visual values. 27 ha not h a r v e s t e d  due t o legal/wildlife  uncertainty  were  evenly  scattered t h r o u g h o u t L e m o n , and t h e BCMOF f o r e s t c o v e r showed no common  pattern  legal/wildlife landscape  among  reasons  was  these  that  affected  observed,  including  areas.  No  planning proximity  correlation and to  between  attributes  of  streams  (Figure  2 1  the  5.16).  2 1  W i n t e r r a n g e m a p s w e r e n o t a v a i l a b l e t o be included in t h i s analysis  93  Figure 5.16 Example of ha a p p r o v e d in 1997 and 1999 and t h e n dropped due t o BCFPC r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r wildlife reserves. Fifteen percent of t o t a l a p p r o v e d ha was located e i t h e r in areas of beetle o u t b r e a k s a n d / o r w i n d t h r o w . The 18 ha not h a r v e s t e d due t o t i m b e r d a m a g e d by natural disturbances w e r e c o m p a r e d w i t h  1998  and 1999 beetle o u t b r e a k m a p s . 7 0 % w e r e located in one of these o u t b r e a k areas (Figure 5 . 1 7 ) . A n o t h e r 2 0 % of areas w e r e adjacent to old cutblocks w i t h i n w i n d t h r o w  located  polygons m a p p e d  from  aerial photos. From BCMOF forest cover, beetle o u t b r e a k areas did not relate w i t h any one of t h e f e a t u r e s of individual polygons but species c o m p o s i t i o n . All w i n d t h r o w occurred in t h e edge of polygons w h e r e harvesting had already t a k e n place.  94  Figure 5.17  Example of ha approved in 1 9 9 5 , 1 9 9 6 , a n d 1997 and  dropped d u e t o beetle o u t b r e a k s . Proposed ha w e r e " c h a s i n g beetle".  5.5.4.5.2 The Information Channel as a Source of Uncertainty The  capability  of t h e i n f o r m a t i o n  channel  t o fully  transmit  forest  s y s t e m a t t r i b u t e s is l i m i t e d . Most of t h e i n f o r m a t i o n used in planning in Lemon w a s produced outside of a GIS e n v i r o n m e n t , t h e r e f o r e a n u m b e r of corrections had t o be made prior t o analysis. Frequently, the shapes o f h a r v e s t e d polygons do n o t coincide w i t h t h e cutblock shapes on t h e o r t h o p h o t o s . Examination of digital FDP m a p s revealed o t h e r m a p p i n g discrepancies. A l m o s t 2 0 % of proposed cutblocks were shifted  a n d did n o t correspond  t o t h e actual  locations  on the  o r t h o p h o t o s . I n m a n y cases n o n - c o r r e s p o n d e n c e w a s f o u n d b e t w e e n t h e same block in consecutive FDP's. I n a f e w cases, blocks were proposed f o r h a r v e s t i n g in areas t h a t were already c u t .  95  The BCMOF 1 9 9 8 and 2 0 0 0 forest cover m a p s lack s o m e information.  Some  areas  do  not  show  as  harvested,  current  even  when  harvesting has o c c u r r e d . O t h e r areas show as h a r v e s t e d , even w h e n harvesting has not y e t o c c u r r e d . Natural d i s t u r b a n c e s are also not well d o c u m e n t e d . As a c k n o w l e d g e d by the B C M O F , p r o b l e m s w i t h existing 22  forest databases are n u m e r o u s . Major p r o b l e m s are t h a t BCMOF forest cover  files  do  not  meet  the  requirements  of  modern  geographic  i n f o r m a t i o n s y s t e m s and m o s t existing files do not m e e t t h e standards of quality now defined f o r t h e Province. These p r o b l e m s are r e p o r t e d also  by  Sierra  Systems  (2001).  The  BCMOF  (1999b)  specifically  recognizes t h e need f o r i m p r o v e m e n t s in t h e : ...quality  of  the  standardization,  ministry's  geographic  rationalization  ministry's geographic  and  information  information,  consolidation  (spatial and  of  the the  attribute)  d a t a s e t s , t h e d e v e l o p m e n t and m a i n t e n a n c e of spatial and attribute  integration  links  and  the  integration  of  the  business processes and applications t h a t use g e o g r a p h i c information. As T h r o w e r & Associates ( 1 9 9 9 ) r e p o r t , t h e BCMOF is i m p l e m e n t i n g several  initiatives  spatial and  to  attribute  improve data.  collection, s t o r a g e ,  Eventually these  and  handling  initiatives will  lead  of to  b e t t e r k n o w l e d g e on t h e BC forest s y s t e m s , helping m a n a g e m e n t . But in t h e m e a n t i m e , m a n a g e r s have t o cope w i t h a c o n t e x t of i n f o r m a t i o n data in a d y n a m i c t r a n s f o r m a t i o n .  M e m o r a n d u m 6 6 4 0 - 2 0 / I N C O s e n t by John Ellis, D i r e c t o r BCMOF I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s B r a n c h , t o Regional a n d D i s t r i c t M a n a g e r s in July 1 9 9 7 w i t h r e f e r e n c e : " W h a t is INCOSADA and w h y are we d o i n g it". 2 2  96  Data accessibility was also an issue. Where i n f o r m a t i o n was produced within a GIS e n v i r o n m e n t , it came in t h r e e d i f f e r e n t f o r m a t s : Pamap®, ArcView®, and A r c / I n f o ® , and early FDP m a p s w e r e created  using  MicroStation®. Data needed for planning is o f t e n contained in paper m a p s , non g e o - r e f e r e n c e d digital images and m a p s . Digital data is easier to assemble and filter t h a n paper records, p r o v i d e d t h e f o r m a t s are c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e GIS s o f t w a r e and t h e h a r d w a r e in use. Digital geo-referenced  map-based  files  can  be  easily  incorporated  into  Arcview®. As r e p o r t e d by t h e BC Land Use Coordination Office ( 1 9 9 9 ) , forest digital m a p - b a s e d d a t a in BC is s t o r e d in PAMAP G I S , MOEP Binary  Compressed,  SAIF/ZIP,  Microstation  CAD,  ARC/INFO  and  Arcview® f o r m a t s . While t h e s e p r o b l e m s s o r t t h e m s e l v e s as agencies and licensees m o v e t o fully digital data and reconcile s o f t w a r e , t o translate files into useable data is t i m e - c o n s u m i n g , and can affect t h e accuracy of t h e d a t a . Another  challenge  concerned  the  scaling  of t h e  data.  Stine  and  Hunsaker ( 2 0 0 1 ) c o m m e n t on generation and p r o p a g a t i o n of e r r o r by c o m b i n i n g d a t a w i t h d i f f e r e n t grain a n d extent.  Cutblock l a y o u t ( e . g .  t h e precision of proposed cutblock boundaries) in t h e FDP was not as fine scaled as o t h e r f e a t u r e s t h a t f o r e s t covers described f o r  the  landscape, such as s t r e a m s and existing clearcuts. Natural disturbance map scales w e r e coarse w h e n c o m p a r e d w i t h c o m m u n i t y maps and e v e n coarser w h e n c o m p a r e d  with  stream  watershed  classification  maps. As t h e EPA-California ( 1 9 9 8 ) s t a t e s , " w h i l e spatial data of all m a p scales ( e . g . 1 : 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 to 1 : 1 2 0 0 ) can be displayed in t h e same view by a G I S , t h e i r relative positions w i t h respect t o one a n o t h e r will v a r y greatly due t o t h e i r accuracy". A challenge, discussed by Edwards and Fortin ( 2 0 0 1 ) , is t h a t techniques t o t r a n s f e r d a t a f r o m one scale to a n o t h e r are f r e q u e n t l y c o m p l i c a t e d .  97  Significant new i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t landscape f e a t u r e s was during t h e  period  assessments  and  1 9 9 5 - 2 0 0 0 . The licensee c o m p l e t e d inventories,  assessment, t e r r a i n  stability  such  as an  assessment,  at least  archaeological recreation  obtained  overview  inventory,  visual i m p a c t a s s e s s m e n t , a m o n g o t h e r s . Most of this  20  and  information,  h o w e v e r , r e f e r r e d t o t h e present state of t h e landscape, and neither a c k n o w l e d g e d u n c e r t a i n t y nor predicted f u t u r e s t a t e s . During t h e period s t u d i e d , t h e licensee not only m e t t h e requirements  for  public  participation  (BCFPB,  regulatory  1998b),  but  i m p l e m e n t e d new w a y s of sharing d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g w i t h t h e  also public.  However, this new k n o w l e d g e of t h e " p u l s e " of t h e public did  not  materialize in any tools t o forecast f u t u r e social concerns or behaviors, nor result in m a p s s h o w i n g constraints for h a r v e s t i n g due t o social concerns.  The  numerous  assessments,  inventories  and  public  participation initiatives carried out during t h e period by t h e licensee signified a g o o d basic k n o w l e d g e of t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m being m a n a g e d . However,  m o s t of this new knowledge was t o c o m p l y w i t h  newly  enacted regulations and did not identify significant changes to t h e planning processes f o r increasing c e r t a i n t y .  5.5.4.5.3 The Context for Decision-Making as a Source of Uncertainty Decisions m a d e in L e m o n are constrained by n u m e r o u s p r o c e d u r a l , social and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f a c t o r s . As an e x a m p l e , in preparing  the  1998 FDP t h e licensee had to respond to t h e f o l l o w i n g : •  The BCFPC Act, regulations and g u i d e b o o k s .  98  •  O t h e r f e a t u r e s objectives or t h i n g s m a d e k n o w n by t h e District Manager prior t o April 3 0 , 1 9 9 8 .  •  The Kootenay B o u n d a r y Land Use Plan and its i m p l e m e n t a t i o n strategy.  •  The 1998 FDP M e m o r a n d u m of U n d e r s t a n d i n g b e t w e e n BCMOF and BCMELP.  • The  The District Manager's instruction f o r p r e p a r i n g t h e 1 9 9 8 FDP. procedural  and  administrative  framework  is  rigid,  and  was  especially so d u r i n g t h e period 1 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 8 . The licensee has a v e r y good record on acting w i t h i n this f r a m e w o r k , as r e p o r t e d by t h e BCFPB ( 1 9 9 8 a ; 1 9 9 8 c ) . The Board c o n c l u d e d : ...(the licensee's) practices complied w i t h t h e Code in all significant respects. There is a high d e g r e e of compliance in an o p e r a t i n g area w i t h eleven c o m m u n i t y  watersheds  and steep t e r r a i n . I n t h e s a m e audit it is suggested t h a t t h e licensee goes f u r t h e r t h a n c o m p l y i n g w i t h legal r e q u i r e m e n t s . I n spite of c o m p l y i n g w i t h  this  f r a m e w o r k , h o w e v e r , t h e resulting plans still did not obtain a social license. The  FDP process  during  the  first  half of t h e  period  (1995-1998)  required a schedule of h a r v e s t i n g . The r e q u i r e m e n t t o specify t h e y e a r of h a r v e s t w a s e l i m i n a t e d in 1 9 9 8 , b u t t h e r e q u i r e m e n t f o r describing specific location of blocks r e m a i n s . The level of detail of i n f o r m a t i o n requested at t h e FDP stage generates u n c e r t a i n t y . The licensee c a n n o t have c o m p l e t e k n o w l e d g e a b o u t issues t h a t location of h a r v e s t i n g will generate until t h e v e r y last stage of p l a n n i n g . The discussion a b o u t  99  management strategies,  approaches,  etc.  continues  block to  the  design, cutblock  wildlife layout  management  and  prescription  phase, instead of being dealt w i t h during higher level p l a n n i n g . The assessments of landscape a t t r i b u t e s c o m p l e t e d by t h e  licensee  during 1 9 9 5 - 2 0 0 0 required a g r e a t deal of up f r o n t w o r k . Accurate and effective assessments and simulations of cutblock i m p a c t s on such things as visual q u a l i t y or habitat supply c a n n o t be developed unless cutblock design is c o m p l e t e . This creates an adversarial climate  in  which t h e licensee m u s t t a k e on t h e risk of c o m p l e t i n g t h e m a j o r i t y of t h e design w o r k in t h e field and t h e n presenting t h e i n f o r m a t i o n to t h e g o v e r n m e n t and t h e public f o r review. I n a rigid s c h e m e t h a t requires v e r y precise location of h a r v e s t i n g , once blocks are laid o u t on t h e g r o u n d , it is costly t o t h e licensee to m a k e changes requested by t h e reviewers and t h e public. Rather t h a n focusing all of t h e  planning  effort on individual c u t b l o c k s , it would be preferable f o r licensees to engage  the  public  and  agencies  in  planning  for  desired  conditions. These conditions should be n e g o t i a t e d f o r t h e  forest  landscape  unit and s u b - u n i t scale. The t e s t for operational plans becomes t h e i r consistency w i t h these desired conditions. Legal r e q u i r e m e n t s are not t h e only ones f r a m i n g d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g in Lemon. Unfulfilled social expectations create legal challenges and add c o m p l e x i t y t o this c o n t e x t . As reported by t h e BCFPB ( 2 0 0 1 a ) : The  Board  finds t h a t ,  at t h a t  time  (1996),  watershed  assessments did not have to be done unless t h e district m a n a g e r specifically required t h e m . I f an a s s e s s m e n t was r e q u i r e d , t h e r e was no legal r e q u i r e m e n t f o r  water-user  representation.  Watershed  Although  the  Code's I n t e r i o r  A s s e s s m e n t Procedure g u i d e b o o k , t h e K o o t e n a y - B o u n d a r y  100  Land Use Plan a n d local practices created s o m e expectations  for water-user  participation  in  public  watershed  a s s e s s m e n t s , t h e y w e r e not legally r e q u i r e d . Even t h o u g h t h e stages  in t h e FDP and CP a p p r o v a l  process are  s o m e t i m e s v i e w e d as o n e - w a y 'gates' ( e . g . w i t h increased c e r t a i n t y as each  gate  regulations  is  passed),  along  with  unresolved responses  social  to  issues  market  and  changing  fluctuations  lead  to  a m e n d m e n t s a n d deferral o f h a r v e s t i n g . T h e rigidity of FDP processes does n o t allow f o r simple a m e n d m e n t s t o FDPs once s o m e of these factors  arise.  Numerous  amendments  practically  constitute  whole  FDPs, a n d are proposed in advanced stages of t h e planning cycle. The licensee gets c e r t a i n t y t h r o u g h flexibility, f r o m  keeping a stock of  a p p r o v e d cutblocks a n d issued cutting p e r m i t s . T h e r e is no restriction on including m o r e cutblocks t h a n can be h a r v e s t e d in t h e period of an FDP. H o w e v e r , as discussed, t h e BCFPB ( 2 0 0 1 b )  has r e p o r t e d t h e  d r a w b a c k s of this a p p r o a c h . F u r t h e r m o r e , self-discarding of a p p r o v e d areas  by t h e licensee  can lead  to  better  compliance  w i t h new  regulations a n d b e t t e r response t o social c o n c e r n s , b u t a t t h e price o f wasted effort.  5.5.5 Conclusions and Recommendations from the Case study Application revealed  of SAFEPLAN  t h e efficacy  of  method  f o r analyzing  planning  and the  planning  principle  outcomes sources  of  u n c e r t a i n t y in Lemon Landscape Unit in S o u t h e a s t e r n BC. T h e case study c o n f i r m s a p p r e h e n s i o n s s u r r o u n d i n g c u r r e n t planning processes identified in t h e provincial s u r v e y described in C h a p t e r I V . From this application o f t h e m e t h o d o n a small scale it w a s possible t o m a k e numerous  recommendations  recommendations  also  to  include  improve measures  planning that  in  L e m o n . The  should  be t a k e n t o 101  i m p r o v e t h e policy c o n t e x t in which planning is c u r r e n t l y conducted in BC. Planning  in Lemon  appears to  be reactive. I n s t e a d  of a  strategic  rationale d e r i v e d f r o m a higher-level plan d r i v i n g h a r v e s t i n g proposals t o w a r d s given t a r g e t s , various c o n t i n g e n t factors influence w h a t is harvested and w h a t is not h a r v e s t e d . These factors i n c l u d e d : • t h e e n a c t m e n t of new regulations in 1995 t h a t  dramatically  c h a n g e d t h e c o n t e x t in which f o r e s t r y was practiced in L e m o n ; • low w o o d prices which put large areas of Lemon below t h e economic margin; • unresolved social c o n c e r n s ; • bark beetle o u t b r e a k s and some w i n d t h r o w ; and • t h e r e q u i r e m e n t f o r additional resource i n f o r m a t i o n . The net effect of these factors was substantial revisions in plans f r o m year  to  year,  including  removal  of  substantial  numbers  of  FDP  a p p r o v e d blocks f r o m t h e plans, and a large n u m b e r of a m e n d m e n t s to FDP's. A n u m b e r of conclusions and r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s result f r o m this case s t u d y . These refer not only to i m p r o v e m e n t s in planning by the  licensee,  but  also  to  improvements  in t h e  context  in  which  planning occurs in BC. A first conclusion is t h a t planning efficacy is significantly affected in Lemon by u n a d d r e s s e d u n c e r t a i n t y . As t h e indicators of u n c e r t a i n t y show, only 1 o u t of 7 hectares proposed in FDPs was h a r v e s t e d . The m a j o r loss of h e c t a r a g e occurs b e t w e e n FDP proposal and a p p r o v a l , but 2 5 % of FDP a p p r o v e d hectares are d r o p p e d prior t o t h e CP stage.  102  From t h e licensee's perspective it could be a r g u e d t h a t these  high  ratios indicate a d e q u a t e effectiveness because t h e y show t h a t t h e y are being responsive t o social expectations and ecological conditions of the landscape.  Since  the  system  is d y n a m i c ,  having  large  stocks  of  a p p r o v e d blocks, f o r e x a m p l e , will lead t o t h e need t o revisit t h e m and i m p r o v e m a n a g e m e n t . This will m a k e easier t o reach legal objectives. These  ratios,  however,  show  how  uncertainty  has  constrained  efficiency of t h e planning process. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e y show how in t h e c u r r e n t c o n t e x t f o r planning in BC, t h e m o r e effective are licensees, the  less efficient  is t h e i r  p l a n n i n g , and t h e  less efficacious  is t h e  planning process as a w h o l e for o t h e r s t a k e h o l d e r s . Calculating these indicators y e a r l y , and for d i f f e r e n t o p e r a t i n g areas would allow t r e n d s in p e r f o r m a n c e t o be identified and c o m p a r e d . There  is a spatial  uncertainty  pattern  is higher  within  in planning  outcomes  community  in L e m o n .  watersheds  and  in  Social scenic  areas. Economic u n c e r t a i n t y was higher w i t h i n " p r o b l e m f o r e s t t y p e s " . Broader studies of t h e associations of social and e n v i r o n m e n t a l factors w i t h u n e x p e c t e d o u t c o m e s w i t h i n t h e A r r o w TSA w o u l d identify w h e r e predictive m o d e l s w o u l d be useful, and facilitate t h e d e v e l o p m e n t or calibration of these m o d e l s .  Where sources of u n c e r t a i n t y are driving  FDP's, t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n of t h e m o s t a d e q u a t e  predictive  modeling  ( e . g . beetle hazard m o d e l s and w i n d t h r o w risk m o d e l s w h e r e beetles and w i n d are m a j o r agents of disturbance) and i n n o v a t i v e approaches to u n c e r t a i n t y ( e . g . creation of instances f o r e x p e r t j u d g m e n t ,  and  possible f u t u r e scenarios) should be a high p r i o r i t y f o r i m p r o v i n g t h e information channel. Natural  disturbances  were  present  as  a  major  contributor  to  u n c e r t a i n t y w i t h i n t h e period of interest, but did not have m a j o r direct  103  incidence on u n e x p e c t e d o u t c o m e s ( e . g . several blocks w e r e added to t h e FDP because of bark beetle, in w h a t c o n s t i t u t e d a sort of "salvage t h r o u g h FDP" s t r a t e g y ; occurrence of landslides n o t related w i t h forest operations was a key c o m p o n e n t of social concern and subsequently non-harvested approved areas). Social concerns should be identified and i n c o r p o r a t e d into t h e h i g h e r level planning process, as a w a y of addressing t h e m early in t h e FDP process as t a r g e t s t o reach. This has been also suggested by t h e BCFPB ( 1 9 9 8 b ) . Social values surveys of t h e kind of Meitner et al.'s ( 2 0 0 1 ) at t h e h i g h e r level planning stage can help t o identify these social t a r g e t s f o r m a n a g e m e n t . The average t i m e b e t w e e n proposal in FDP a p p r o v a l and CP issuance was  relatively  appear to actually  short  reflect reflect  (2.2  a time the  years) efficient  dropping  for  harvested  planning of  blocks. This  process,  blocks  with  would  but this more  may  difficult  operational/social issues f r o m t h e plan. O v e r t i m e this m e a n s areas t h a t are c o n t r i b u t i n g t o calculation of AAC, area in fact d e f e r r e d f r o m h a r v e s t i n g . This c o n c e n t r a t e s t h e harvest in ' a v a i l a b l e ' portions of t h e landbase. The realism of harvesting and d e f e r r e d areas should  be  addressed, and AAC a d j u s t e d w h e r e necessary. The t w o main aspects of t h e c o n t e x t for d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , which helped to reduce efficacy, w e r e lack of flexibility and lack of c e r t a i n t y . Small modifications t o proposed blocks r e - o p e n e d discussion of t h e entire block. I n s o m e cases t h e incorporation of new i n f o r m a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n resolving  issues, o p e n e d  new  issues and  lead t o t h e  areas  being  d r o p p e d . Frequent a m e n d m e n t s of a p p r o v e d and a u t h o r i z e d activities reduced t h e t r u s t of all parties w h o c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e FDP process including t h e  public. As t h e  BCFPB ( 2 0 0 0 )  s u g g e s t s , s o m e of t h e  104  contents  of  FDPs, such  as objectives  for t h e full  range  of  forest  resources, should be m o v e d to higher level plans (e.g Landscape Unit Plan). These o b j e c t i v e s w o u l d r e p r e s e n t social a g r e e m e n t s . As t h e BCFPB s t a t e s , this w o u l d prepare,  review  duplication".  and  The  degree  reduce " t h e costs and t i m e approve of  FDPs,  cutblock  eliminating  modification  required  to  unnecessary  warranting  FDP  review should be clarified f o r all parties in t h e planning process. The stages in t h e FDP-CP approval process are s o m e t i m e s v i e w e d as 'gates'.  As  involved  blocks  in t h e  pass  planning  each  gate, the  confidence  of t h e  process t h a t t h e block will be  parties  harvested  should increase. The u n c e r t a i n t y ratios indicate t h a t CP issuance added c e r t a i n t y , h o w e v e r , unresolved social issues and c h a n g i n g regulations, along w i t h responses t o m a r k e t f l u c t u a t i o n s , still lead t o a m e n d m e n t s and deferral of h a r v e s t i n g . Mechanisms should be in place to give certainty to CP issued blocks. I f policies change such t h a t these blocks do  not  conform,  there  should  be  a  mechanism  for  review  and  a m e n d m e n t , h o w e v e r t h e r e should also be c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r added costs. The g o v e r n m e n t should stand behind t h e results of t h e planning process and s u p p o r t t h e licensees in resolving situations w h e r e social activism p r e v e n t s h a r v e s t i n g of CP's. The stock of issued CP's m a y appear sufficient, b u t includes blocks in areas w i t h low e c o n o m i c value or unresolved social o b j e c t i o n s . Where CP a p p r o v e d blocks a r e n o t in fact available f o r h a r v e s t , t h e r e is increasing pressure t o rapidly process new proposals, and t h e integrity of t h e planning process is j e o p a r d i z e d . I t w o u l d be preferable for t h e stock  of  CP's  representative  to  include  a  balance  of  economic  opportunities  of t h e landbase included in t h e t i m b e r supply. CP's  should be valid f o r a fixed t e r m .  105  Within t h e f o r e s t i n d u s t r y , t h e r e is a t e n d e n c y t o use GIS only for producing and u p d a t i n g m a p s . The SAFEPLAN m e t h o d illustrates how GIS can be used f o r p r o b l e m analysis, spatially and Forest  planners  uncertainty  to  should  use  mappable  the  full  areas  in  capabilities the  of  non-spatially. GIS  landscape.  to  This  relate spatial  knowledge can be used to identify areas w i t h special challenges for planning, assist w i t h t h e design of specific f u t u r e c o n d i t i o n s , and give direction  to  plans.  performance  GIS  can  be  used  to  routinely  assess  ( e . g . efficacy) o f p l a n n i n g , and t o d e t e c t  the  information  weakness. Under t h e A r r o w IFPA, a new scenario planning approach is being tested ( A r r o w IFPA, 1 9 9 9 ) . These scenarios identify potential f u t u r e stand  and  landscape  conditions  which  meet  specific  management  objectives. These scenarios will have t o account f o r factors t h a t will certainly occur, but t h e y also have to t a k e in consideration uncertain and probabilistic e v e n t s . The GIS-based m e t h o d o l o g y presented in this study  could  play  a supporting  role  in analyzing  the  sensitivity  of  forecasted scenarios t o these sources of u n c e r t a i n t y .  5.6 Conclusion A m e t h o d to address u n c e r t a i n t y t h r o u g h b e t t e r f o r e s t planning in BC is  proposed.  Results  obtained  for  southeastern  BC  confirm  apprehensions respect t o c u r r e n t planning processes, and show how t h e adoption o f this m e t h o d could increase t h e efficacy o f f o r e s t plans, and i m p r o v e t h e cost-effectiveness of t h e whole planning process.  106  CHAPTER V I . FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR FOREST PLANNING I N BRITISH COLUMBIA. A NEW CONTEXT FOR THE SAFEPLAN METHOD 6.1 Forest planning in BC in a time of transition As discussed  in Chapters  II  and I I I , c o m p l e x i t y  of t h e  BC forest  s y s t e m s m a k e s u n c e r t a i n t y an e v e r - p r e s e n t issue. This t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e difficulties o f planning described in Chapters I V a n d V, have led t o t h e g r o w i n g d e m a n d t o change t h e c o n t e x t in which f o r e s t decisionmaking  is d o n e .  The  government  has  recognized  that  "increased  certainty has been a key goal f o r i n d u s t r y , as c o m p a n i e s need t o coordinate p e r s o n n e l , e q u i p m e n t , suppliers, m a r k e t s and financing on a m u l t i - y e a r basis" (BCMOF, 1 9 9 9 c ) . The f o r e s t i n d u s t r y has voiced the  need  for  adaptable,  a  new  enabling  planning  them  to  process  avoid  that  is  losses and  more take  flexible advantage  and of  unforeseen o p p o r t u n i t i e s . Licensees recognize, t h o u g h , t h a t r e g u l a t o r y changes  are j u s t  part  of w h a t  is needed. Slocan  Forest  Products  (2001) acknowledges: While o u r business e n v i r o n m e n t changes daily, c l i m a t e and biodiversity change o v e r m a n y c e n t u r i e s . We u n d e r s t a n d t h a t n a t u r e defines t h e u l t i m a t e limit of w h a t ' s possible in our business e n v i r o n m e n t . Riverside Forest Products ( 2 0 0 0 ) points o u t : Forestry  in  this  province  involves  constant  change.  E v e r y t h i n g f r o m e n v i r o n m e n t a l considerations t o aboriginal land claims affects us. We have t w o o p t i o n s . We can sit back and  w a i t and  see w h a t  happens, or we can  get  involved and help shape change...  107  Coulson Group ( 2 0 0 1 b ) s t a t e s : ...there  are  several variables w i t h i n t h e  wood  products  m a r k e t p l a c e t h a t are o u t of our c o n t r o l , b u t w h a t we can control is o u r daily performance.... Allowing f o r i m p r o v e m e n t s in p e r f o r m a n c e , h o w e v e r , implies changes in t h e c o n t e x t for d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . As t h e g o v e r n m e n t a c k n o w l e d g e s , "For too l o n g , t h e f o r e s t i n d u s t r y has been c a p t u r e d in an inefficient and ineffective legislative maze..." (BCMOF, 2 0 0 2 c ) . The BCFPB ( 2 0 0 0 ) suggests: A m o r e flexible approach m a y be needed t o plan f o r t h e development  of  roads  and  harvesting,  recognizing  the  s h o r t lead t i m e and t h e d y n a m i c nature of o p e r a t i o n s in (highly  dynamic  environments)  circumstances...  g o v e r n m e n t , we m u s t have an a d a p t a b l e ,  results-based  r e g u l a t o r y f r a m e w o r k t h a t makes c o m p a n i e s for  outcomes  but  allows  flexibility  to  from  apply  responsible innovative  technologies and approaches. The forest i n d u s t r y ( C O F I , 1 9 9 9 ) a g r e e s : ...implementing a results and incentive based approach to regulating  forest  practices  that  is  in  line  with  other  j u r i s d i c t i o n s and s u b s t i t u t e s new certification s y s t e m s f o r existing m o n i t o r i n g and a u d i t i n g . I n n o v a t i v e Forestry Practices A g r e e m e n t s (IFPAs) and  Results-Based  Forest Practices Code Pilot Projects are m a j o r initiatives t h a t t h e BC G o v e r n m e n t has t a k e n to a n s w e r to these requests (BCMOF, 1 9 9 7 ) . Further, p r o f o u n d changes t o t h e BCFPC t o w a r d s m o r e  result-based  108  forest  practices  legislation  is  are  being  expected  discussed, and  in  April  2003  implementation  (BCMOF,  of  new  In  the  2002a).  m e a n t i m e , m o r e t h a n 4 4 million hectares of f o r e s t land have been certified Neither  in of  BC  as  these  being  two  managed  innovative  sustainably  approaches,  (BCMOF,  the  IFPA  2002b). and  Pilot  p r o j e c t s , includes explicit evaluation of plan o u t c o m e s in t e r m s  of  achieving t h e specific goals of h a r v e s t i n g . Monitoring efficacy of plan i m p l e m e n t a t i o n is n o t discussed. Both initiatives use detailed sets of indicators  to  track  initiatives  present  environmental potential  for  and  social  addressing  performance.  uncertainty  in  Both forest  p l a n n i n g , t h r o u g h i m p r o v e m e n t s in t h e i n f o r m a t i o n channel (IFPA) and in t h e c o n t e x t f o r d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g (Pilot Projects). The principles for addressing u n c e r t a i n t y and b e t t e r planning upon w h i c h t h e SAFEPLAN m e t h o d is built apply in each one of these initiatives.  6.1.1  Innovative  Forestry  Practices  Agreements  (IFPAs).  A d d r e s s i n g U n c e r t a i n t y by I m p r o v i n g t h e I n f o r m a t i o n C h a n n e l IFPAs are t e n u r e a g r e e m e n t s t h a t are a w a r d e d t o holders of v o l u m e based  licenses  that  enable  to  test  new  and  innovative  forestry  practices t o i m p r o v e f o r e s t p r o d u c t i v i t y . On providing evidence t h a t forestry  practices  will  increase  sustainable  timber  supply  while  addressing all o t h e r resource values, IFPA holders w o u l d increase t h e harvest  levels  u n d e r t h e i r existing  ensure  flexibility  in  forestry  licenses  practices.  (BCMOF, 2 0 0 0 ) .  Practices  that  IFPAs  allow  for  flexibility, h o w e v e r , are l i m i t e d , and include h a r v e s t i n g m e t h o d s or silvicultural silviculture  systems,  activities  treatments,  that  collection  of  result data,  in f r e e - g r o w i n g and  activities  stands, that  will  enhance a n d p r o t e c t n o n - t i m b e r resource values (BCMOF, 1 9 9 7 ) . No flexibility f o r o p e r a t i o n a l planning processes is i n t r o d u c e d .  109  C u r r e n t l y , seven IFPAs are at different stages of i m p l e m e n t a t i o n in BC. Arrow IFPA, in t h e Nelson BCMOF Forest Region, was a w a r d e d the IFPA in 1998 ( A r r o w IFPA, 1 9 9 9 ) . After 4 y e a r s , it is a good e x a m p l e of  some  of  the  advantages  of  collective  working  in  a  complex  e n v i r o n m e n t , but also gives a sense of how changes in BC should go f u r t h e r to allow f o r flexibility. A key r e q u i r e m e n t f o r being a w a r d e d an IFPA is t h e proposal of a f o r e s t r y plan t h a t m a n i f e s t s t h e objectives and strategies of licensees f o r t h e a r e a . The A r r o w IFPA f o r e s t r y plan is based o n : ...the  need f o r  an  innovative  and  balanced  solution  to  address f o r e s t resource issues in t h e A r r o w TSA including d o w n w a r d pressures on s h o r t and long t e r m t i m b e r supply, as well as e n v i r o n m e n t a l and social values ( A r r o w IFPA, 1999). This f o r e s t r y plan is j o i n t proposal by t h e five licensees o p e r a t i n g in t h e area. I t sets strategic and m a n a g e m e n t o b j e c t i v e s , and introduces t h e ecosystem m a n a g e m e n t approach u n d e r t a k e n . I t also introduces initiatives t o be carried o u t to i m p r o v e t h e k n o w l e d g e of t h e a r e a . As acknowledged  by t h e  licensees, t h e y are  not seeking and do  not  expect an i m m e d i a t e increase in AAC. Rather, t h e y e x p e c t t h a t " t h e Province's  Chief  Forester  takes  the  IFPA's  planned  practices  and  expected results into a c c o u n t d e t e r m i n i n g an AAC f o r t h e A r r o w TSA" (Arrow IFPA, 1 9 9 9 ) .  On p u t t i n g t o g e t h e r this f o r e s t r y p l a n , licensees  have  from  received  input  other  stakeholders  in A r r o w ,  what  has  allowed f o r a g r e e m e n t on certain t a r g e t s at t h e tactical level. The fact t h a t this f o r e s t r y plan is not directly related w i t h t h e FDPs t h a t each licensee  has t o s u b m i t t o t h e  opportunities sources  of  of  significantly  uncertainty  still  BCMOF, h o w e v e r ,  improving arise  in t h e  planning proposal  compromises processes.  the  Social  of cutblocks  in  no  conflictive areas ( e . g . c o m m u n i t y  w a t e r s h e d s ) , and in s o m e  cases  licensees have p r o b l e m s h a r v e s t i n g blocks w i t h issued CP. FDPs are still going t h r o u g h f r e q u e n t a m e n d m e n t s a f t e r a p p r o v a l . The c o n t e x t for d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g r e m a i n s p r e t t y m u c h t h e s a m e and is still rigid. W h a t m a k e s A r r o w IFPA an interesting e x p e r i m e n t is its potential for i m p r o v e m e n t s in t h e i n f o r m a t i o n channel f o r p l a n n i n g . Licensees are sharing t h e i r needs f o r k n o w l e d g e , and are c o o r d i n a t i n g t o find ways for i m p r o v i n g it. The A r r o w IFPA's Five Year W o r k Plan ( A r r o w IFPA, 1 9 9 9 ) describes m a n y initiatives being carried o u t u n d e r t h e umbrella of a sustainability p r o j e c t , which provides t h e c o n t e x t f o r t h e IFPA ecosystem m a n a g e m e n t a p p r o a c h . Most of these initiatives, in one way  or  another,  imply  the  acquisition  of  new  knowledge  for  u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e n a t u r a l , social, and e c o n o m i c c o m p o n e n t s of t h e forest s y s t e m s u n d e r m a n a g e m e n t . Good e x a m p l e s of t h e relevance of this new k n o w l e d g e are t h e clarification of social values ( M e i t n e r et a l . , 2 0 0 1 ) , and p a t t e r n s of natural disturbances ( D o r n e r , 2 0 0 1 ) f o r A r r o w . This new  knowledge  is allowing f o r t h e discussion  of t a r g e t s  and  alternative f u t u r e scenarios, and t h e simulation of d i f f e r e n t strategies for dealing w i t h t h e s e . The SAFEPLAN m e t h o d was tested in A r r o w w i t h s u p p o r t f r o m t h e IFPA (Chapter V ) . As d e s c r i b e d , application of t h e m e t h o d to one licensee's operations p r o v i d e d useful knowledge a b o u t t h e f o r e s t s y s t e m u n d e r m a n a g e m e n t . Application of t h e m e t h o d to sample landscape from Arrow  IFPA as a whole would  identify w i t h  m o r e clarity  units the  knowledge needed to m a k e planning and plans m o r e efficacious, and b e t t e r strategies t o g e t it ( e . g . specific m o d e l s , forecasting  efforts,  visualization t o o l s ) .  in  A key c o m p o n e n t of i n n o v a t i v e m a n a g e m e n t in A r r o w is t h e concept of planning t o w a r d s m o r e t h a n one possible f u t u r e scenario ( A r r o w IFPA, 1 9 9 9 ) . T h r o u g h SAFEPLAN, inputs f r o m individual licensees and o t h e r stakeholders can be g a t h e r e d to assess a l t e r n a t i v e f u t u r e  scenarios  ( e . g . due t o level 2 and 3 u n c e r t a i n t y , as described in Section 3 . 2 . 1 ) . These can be spatially c o m p a r e d , u n c e r t a i n t y can be d e s c r i b e d , and most  probable scenarios can be linked t o tactical and  planning.  On  identifying  sources  of  uncertainty  operational  (e.g.  people's  c o n c e r n s ) , and spatially relating t h e m w i t h f e a t u r e s of t h e landscape which w o u l d c o n s t r a i n t location of h a r v e s t i n g , licensees can have a broader s u p p o r t f o r j u s t i f y i n g changes to t h e AAC in A r r o w .  6.1.2  Results-Based  Forest  Practices  Code  Pilot  Projects.  Addressing Uncertainty by I m p r o v i n g the Context for DecisionMaking Results-Based Forest Practices Code Pilot projects are exploring new ways to regulate and enforce BC forest practices t o increase efficiency and save costs f o r b o t h industry and g o v e r n m e n t (BCMOF, 1 9 9 9 d ) . There  are  seven  development,  pilot  around  projects,  the  which  Province.  are  One  at  various  of t h e s e ,  stages  Stillwater  of  Pilot  Project, is t h e m o s t a m b i t i o u s c u r r e n t initiative. Stillwater  encompasses  180,000  hectares  near  Powell  River,  BC,  m a n a g e d u n d e r W e y e r h a e u s e r ' s Tree Farm License 3 9 . According t o t h e licensee, " t h e Pilot Project will r e i n v e n t t h e forest  management  approval p r o c e s s " f o r t h e area ( W e y e r h a e u s e r , 2 0 0 1 a ) . Flexibility is introduced t o t h e c o n t e x t for d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g on allowing t h e licensee to replace t h e sequence of FDPs being s u b m i t t e d y e a r by y e a r , by a single plan t e r m e d t h e "Forest S t e w a r d s h i p Plan". This plan defines agreed f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t strategies and m e a s u r a b l e t a r g e t s f o r t h e 112  system m a n a g e d . I m m e d i a t e benefits of this shift in t h e n u m b e r of plans a r e : focus on landscape incorporation community  of  public  advisor  planning  participation  board,  and  instead of block  in early  flexibility  stages,  to  adapt  a to  planning, permanent changing  conditions in t h e s y s t e m ( W e y e r h a e u s e r , 2 0 0 1 a ) . These issues will allow f o r a m o r e a d a p t i v e m a n a g e m e n t , and will result in clear benefits for t h e licensee and t h e BCMOF, such as reducing cost of producing and a p p r o v i n g plans by a m i n i m u m of 5 0 % , and g e t t i n g c u t t i n g p e r m i t approvals w i t h i n 24 h o u r s . Stakeholders will directly benefit by t h e m a i n t e n a n c e or i m p r o v e m e n t of e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t a n d a r d s for forest management H o w e v e r , as a n o t h e r e x a m p l e of t h e c o n t r o v e r s y s u r r o u n d i n g f o r e s t r y in BC, Stillwater is not e x e m p t f r o m criticisms ( W e y e r h a e u s e r , 2 0 0 1 b ; West Coast E n v i r o n m e n t a l Law, 2 0 0 1 ) . These criticisms r e f e r mainly t o t h e fact t h a t pilot p r o j e c t s focus a l m o s t exclusively on allowing t h e p r o p o n e n t s to reduce or r e m o v e t h e need f o r public consultation and government  involvement,  with  little  or  no  changes  to  the  practices being carried o u t . Critics ( e . g . Forest Caucus of t h e  actual B.C.  Environmental N e t w o r k ) argue t h a t forest planning instead should use t h e p r e c a u t i o n a r y principle w h e r e t h e r e is u n c e r t a i n t y o r  imperfect  i n f o r m a t i o n . I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e s e v i e w s , h o w e v e r , t h e licensee intends t h a t Stillwater will be closely m o n i t o r e d and e v a l u a t e d in t e r m s of its environmental  and  public  participation  performance,  and  economic  efficiency. This c o n t r o v e r s y shows how in a c o n t e x t of m o r e flexibility, w i t h f e w e r instances at t h e operational level f o r public p a r t i c i p a t i o n , m a n a g e r s have t o gain t h e t r u s t o f s t a k e h o l d e r s . All t h e potential f o r acquiring certainty t h a t a m o r e flexible c o n t e x t offers can be j e o p a r d i s e d if people do not t r u s t w h a t is being d o n e .  113  Accountability, t h e r e f o r e , planning  process.  becomes one o f t h e c o r n e r s t o n e s  T h e SAFEPLAN  method  can help  of t h e  managers  in  Stillwater t o spatially evaluate u n c e r t a i n t y d u r i n g plan d e v e l o p m e n t . By retrodicting p e r f o r m a n c e o f past plans, s o m e undesirable o u t c o m e s anticipated a n d c o n f r o n t e d . Uncertainty ( e . g . possible beetle epidemic) can be discussed w i t h t h e public and agencies, a n d potential scenarios can be w o r k e d o u t t o g e t h e r ( e . g . if a Douglas-fir bark beetle epidemic occurs, should  salvage  be allowed  in visually  sensitive  areas?) in  advance. Present u n c e r t a i n t y can be refined in t h e landscape. When amendments explained  t o t h e FSP have  both  to  agencies  t o be m a d e ,  they  and t o t h e public  can be b e t t e r  through  mapped  u n c e r t a i n t y using d o c u m e n t a t i o n developed t h r o u g h SAFEPLAN. Future a m e n d m e n t s will be reduced selecting b e t t e r predictive tools a n d ways of acquiring k n o w l e d g e . On t r a c k i n g plan i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , u n c e r t a i n t y can be d e t e c t e d in an incipient state ( e . g . a social issue t h a t has t h e potential f o r e x p a n d i n g a n d being introduced into t h e f o r e s t  policy  agenda).  6.1.3 A Result-based BCFPC and Better Planning Reducing c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e BCFPC is b e c o m i n g o n e o f t h e key issues in the transition policies  will  in f o r e s t have  is  policy in BC. A l t h o u g h t h e f o r m t h a t new n o t clear  y e t , it  is fair  to  suppose  that  m a n a g e m e n t will be m o r e oriented t o w a r d s achieving certain t a r g e t s , or  outcomes,  than  following  rigid  and mandatory  processes. As  proposed by t h e BCMOF ( 2 0 0 2 c ) , in this c o n t e x t social, economic and ecological t a r g e t s w o u l d be agreed on t h r o u g h t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f landscape  level  zones  and objectives,  and managers  would  be  responsible f o r m a n a g i n g t o w a r d s these t a r g e t s . Areas o f d e v e l o p m e n t (e.g.  development  units)  that  pursue  t h e strategic  objectives  of  114  higher-level plans w o u l d replace specific location of cutblocks in plans. M a n a g e m e n t in these areas would require a Resource Permit  (RDP). The  RDP contains  sufficient  Development  information  BCMOF tests t h a t t h e proposed m a n a g e m e n t  and  meets  respects legal  rights,  complies w i t h land use z o n i n g , and incorporates public input. The f r a m e w o r k f o r f o r e s t practices being described in t h e "ResultBased  Code  Resource Resource  Discussion  Paper"  management  (BCMOF,  Planning:  Development"  A  (BCMSRM,  2002c)  and  Landscape-level 2002)  "Sustainable Strategy  documents  for  recently  proposed c o n s t i t u t e a v e r y serious a t t e m p t f o r m a k i n g m a n a g e m e n t and p l a n n i n g - m o r e efficacious in BC. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e y describe a c o n t e x t w i t h possibilities and risk t o licensees, and o t h e r s t a k e h o l d e r s . They also provide an o p p o r t u n i t y for s t r e n g t h e n i n g t h e principles t h a t better planning should follow. These principles, r e v i e w e d  throughout  the chapters of this d i s s e r t a t i o n , a r e : 1) The  forest  system  comprises  more  than  forest  ecosystems.  Planning should consider ecosystems ( e x t r a c t i o n , c o n s e r v a t i o n ) , resources  (harvesting  techniques,  silvicultural  measures),  s t a k e h o l d e r s ( p a r t i c i p a t i o n , n e g o t i a t i o n ) , and policy s u b s y s t e m s . 2) Multiple complex.  components Planning  and  should  interactions acknowledge  make that  forest  systems  knowledge  will  always be i n c o m p l e t e , and t h a t ignorance and u n c e r t a i n t y will not only be p r e s e n t in t h e planning process, but will pervade t h r o u g h t h e w h o l e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n cycle. 3) An u n c e r t a i n f u t u r e represents both c o n s t r a i n t s due to risk of losses and potential o p p o r t u n i t i e s . Planning should aim not only to  avoid  these  losses  (risk-adverse),  but  also  capturing  unforeseen o p p o r t u n i t i e s ( r i s k - t a k i n g ) .  115  4) Uncertainty  manifests  itself in d i f f e r e n t f o r m s , and affects in  various w a y s f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t . Planning should recognize and characterize  uncertainty,  and  propose  the  best  way  of  addressing each f o r m of it. Planning should be open not only to probabilistic predictions, but also t o guesses, j u d g m e n t s ,  and  scenarios. 5) Setting a d e q u a t e objectives and selecting best w a y s of achieving them  in a c o m p l e x  s y s t e m filled w i t h  uncertainty  has t o  be  learned by practical experience. Planning should be based on c o n s t a n t l e a r n i n g , as a w a y of m a k i n g i n c o m p l e t e  knowledge  m o r e c o m p l e t e . Planners have to a c k n o w l e d g e t h e m o s t efficient w a y t o l e a r n , f r o m t h e i r o w n personal experience ( p r a g m a t i s t s , t h e o r i s t s ) . The planning process should include a process w h e r e feedback on past o u t c o m e s informs f u t u r e p l a n s ; and 6) Efficacious  forest  plans are t h e  ones t h a t  reach t h e i r  goals  ( e f f e c t i v e n e s s ) , and do so w i t h less inputs ( e f f i c i e n c y ) . Planning should  include  performance. excessive  mechanisms  to  routinely  evaluate  I f goals are not being r e a c h e d , or do so  inputs,  planning  should  include  mechanisms  plan with to  address these w e a k n e s s e s . From this new c o n t e x t f o r p l a n n i n g , h o w e v e r , arise new challenges for both m a n a g e r s and agencies. A g r e e m e n t on ecological, and socioeconomic t a r g e t s is not an easy task. W h e n specific processes for m a n a g i n g forests are not specified, t o have t a r g e t s t o w a r d which to aim becomes f u n d a m e n t a l . Questions r e m a i n : Who will assume t h e responsibility f o r assuring t h a t t a r g e t s are in place? I n t h e absence of agreed t a r g e t s , does m a n a g e m e n t occur w i t h o u t restrictions? Or does management  occur  at  all?  If  targets  are  in  place,  how  their  a c c o m p l i s h m e n t will be certified? Where natural e v e n t s conflict w i t h  116  t h e a c c o m p l i s h m e n t o f t a r g e t s , are licensees released f r o m m a n a g i n g t o w a r d s t h o s e t a r g e t s ? How responsible will m a n a g e r s be f o r including information that  leads t o  predicting disturbances?  Will t h e  targets  acknowledge t h e r e t u r n periods of " i n f r e q u e n t " e v e n t s ? How f r e q u e n t l y will t a r g e t s be a m e n d e d t o cope w i t h shifts in social values? None o f these q u e s t i o n s are easy t o a n s w e r . A l t h o u g h changes in policy are e x p e c t e d t o be in place by 2 0 0 3 , t h e s e q u e s t i o n s will r e m a i n f o r a long t i m e . T h e y reinforce t h e need f o r a holistic v i e w o f t h e forest system  and  a  systematic  method  for  addressing  uncertainty  in  planning.  6.2 Conclusion Forest planning in BC is in a t i m e of t r a n s i t i o n . IFPAs a n d Pilot Projects are m a j o r initiatives t o t e s t f o r i m p r o v e m e n t s in c u r r e n t m a n a g e m e n t and planning processes. New f o r e s t legislation t o w a r d s a m o r e flexible f r a m e w o r k f o r planning is e x p e c t e d by 2 0 0 3 . I n this n e w principles  for  better  planning,  and  applications  of  the  context,  SAFEPLAN  m e t h o d , help on a d d r e s s i n g u n c e r t a i n t y , c o n t r o l l i n g p e r f o r m a n c e , and accounting o f o u t c o m e s .  117  V I I . CONCLUSION A forest is a c o m p l e x a d a p t i v e s y s t e m made up of d y n a m i c e c o s y s t e m , resource, s t a k e h o l d e r and policy s u b s y s t e m s . Sufficient knowledge is required f o r planning and i m p l e m e n t i n g m a n a g e m e n t actions t h a t are the best ecologically, economically and socially f o r t h e present and future.  The  complexity  of  the  forest  system,  difficulties  in  characterizing it, and a c o n t e x t t h a t impedes acquisition of knowledge means  that  uncertainty  constant  learning  made  these  failures  of  planning  if  evaluation  pervades  process.  When  are  forestry. plans fail,  detected.  outcomes,  Planning  should  improvements  SAFEPLAN  calculation  can  enables of  be  a be  spatial  indicators  of  u n c e r t a i n t y , and allows investigation of t h e association of u n c e r t a i n t y w i t h a t t r i b u t e s of t h e landscape. From  the  application  of  SAFEPLAN  in  Lemon  Landscape  Unit  in  s o u t h e a s t e r n BC it w a s possible t o m a k e n u m e r o u s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s to i m p r o v e p l a n n i n g . These include measures t h a t t h e Licensee should t a k e , such as selecting new tools f o r m o d e l i n g natural d i s t u r b a n c e s , improving  economic  forecasting,  and  implementing  new  participation s c h e m e s . The r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s also include  public  measures  t h a t should be t a k e n to i m p r o v e t h e c o n t e x t in w h i c h planning occurs in BC. These conditions,  include  to  give  placing g r e a t e r  more  certainty  emphasis  for  on defining  approved  target  harvesting,  and  m o v i n g m o r e o f t h e c o n t e n t s of FDP's t o h i g h e r level plans. The  results  obtained  for  the  southeastern  BC  case  study  were  consistent w i t h results obtained in t h e provincial s u r v e y of planning performance.  Provincially,  frequent  amendments  to  forest  d e v e l o p m e n t plans d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t t h e c u r r e n t planning approach is not efficacious. Planning is based on t o o n a r r o w a view of forests as  118  s y s t e m s , and unaddressed sources of u n c e r t a i n t y affecting  planning  include natural d i s t u r b a n c e s , shifts in social c o n c e r n s , m a r k e t cycles, and changes in policy. Planning costs are higher t h a n t h e y could be, and t h e private and public budgets would be b e t t e r spent under a r e f o r m e d planning s y s t e m . Forest planning in BC is in a t i m e of t r a n s i t i o n . Major initiatives to t e s t improvements under  way.  in c u r r e n t New  forest  management legislation  and  that  planning  provides  processes  a  more  are  flexible  f r a m e w o r k f o r planning is expected by 2 0 0 3 . I t is hoped t h a t this new f r a m e w o r k addresses t h e c o m p l e t e forest s y s t e m . The value of t h e SAFEPLAN m e t h o d in a new planning c o n t e x t r e m a i n s t h e s a m e , to monitor  outcomes,  to  attribute  these  outcomes  to  sources  of  u n c e r t a i n t y , and t o provide feedback f o r s u b s e q u e n t plans.  119  V I I I . REFERENCES A b e r , J . , N. C h r i s t e n s e n , I. Fernandez, J. Franklin, L. Hidinger, M. Hunter,  J. MacMahon,  Slangen  and  H.  D.  Van  Mladenoff,  Miegroet.  J. Pastor,  2000.  D.  Perry,  Applying  R.  ecological  principles t o m a n a g e m e n t o f the U.S. National Forests. Ecological Society of A m e r i c a . Issues in Ecology 6. 22 p. Anbalagan,  R.  and  assessment  B.  Singh.  mapping  of  1996.  Landslide  hazard  mountain  terrain.  A case  and  risk  study  for  K u m a u n H i m a l a y a , I n d i a . Engineering Geology 4 3 : 2 3 7 - 2 4 6 . A n d e r s o n , J. 1 9 9 4 . Public Policy Making: An I n t r o d u c t i o n . 2  n d  Edition.  H o u g h t o n Mifflin, T o r o n t o . Arrow  IFPA.  1999. Arrow  Innovative  Forestry Plan. Slocan, BC. I l l  Forestry  Practices  Agreement  p.  A r r o w IFPA. 2 0 0 0 . Annual W o r k i n g Plan f o r 2 0 0 0 . Slocan, BC. 72 p. Ascher, W. 1 9 8 1 . The forecasting potential of c o m p l e x m o d e l s . Policy Sciences 1 3 : 2 4 7 - 2 6 7 . Attiwill,  P.  M.  1994.  The  disturbance  of  forest  ecosystems:  ecological basis f o r conservative m a n a g e m e n t .  Forest  the  Ecology  and M a n a g e m e n t 6 3 : 2 4 7 - 3 0 0 . Axelrod,  R.  and  M.  D.  Cohen.  2000.  Harnessing  Complexity:  Organizational I m p l i c a t i o n s of a Scientific Frontier. Free Press, New York. 2 5 6 p. Baker, W. L. a n d D. J. Mladenoff. 1 9 9 9 . Progress a n d f u t u r e directions in spatial m o d e l i n g of forest landscapes. I n Spatial Modeling of Forest  Landscape  Change:  Approaches  and  Applications  (Mladenoff, D. J. and W. L. Baker Eds.). C a m b r i d g e  University  Press, UK. Pp: 3 3 3 - 3 4 9 .  120  Barbier, E.B. 1 9 9 6 . I m p a c t o f t h e Uruguay Round o n I n t e r n a t i o n a l Trade  in Forest  Products.  Forest  Products  Division,  Forestry  D e p a r t m e n t , FAO. 4 7 p. Barker, J.A. 1 9 9 3 . Paradigms: T h e Business o f Discovering t h e Future. HarperBusiness, New York. 2 4 0 p. Bass, S., K. T h o r b e r , M. Markopoulos, S. Roberts a n d M. G r e i g - G r a n . 2001.  Certification's  Supply  Chains.  Forestry  Impacts  Instruments  Series,  International  D e v e l o p m e n t , L o n d o n , UK.  on Forests,  Stakeholders and  f o r Sustainable Institute  Private  Sector  For E n v i r o n m e n t a n d  1 3 4 p.  BCFPB. 1 9 9 8 a . A u d i t o f T i m b e r Harvesting a n d Road C o n s t r u c t i o n , Maintenance a n d D e a c t i v a t i o n . Slocan G r o u p - Slocan Division. Forest License A 2 0 1 9 2 . FPB/ARC/10. V i c t o r i a , BC. 2 2 p. BCFPB. 1 9 9 8 b . A d e q u a c y o f t h e Public Review a n d C o m m e n t Period f o r Forest  Development  Plans  in t h e Slocan  Valley.  Complaints  9 5 0 0 6 7 a n d 9 5 0 0 6 9 . FPB/IRC/07. V i c t o r i a , BC. 20 p. BCFPB. 1998c. News Release: Slocan Division Gets Clean A u d i t f r o m the  Forest Practices  Board. Online in  http://www.fpb.gov.bc.ca/news/98-  ll_llb.htm  BCFPB. 1 9 9 9 . Forest D e v e l o p m e n t Planning in t h e Queen  Charlotte  Islands Forest District Between June 1 5 , 1 9 9 5 a n d February 1 5 , 1996.  Special  Investigation  950062,  Complaint  Investigation  9 5 0 0 3 7 . V i c t o r i a , BC. 4 9 p. BCFPB. 2 0 0 0 . A Review o f t h e Forest D e v e l o p m e n t Planning Process in British C o l u m b i a . Special Report FPB/SR/04. V i c t o r i a , BC. 8 6 p. BCFPB.  2001a.  Slocan  Valley  Watershed  Assessments.  Complaint  I n v e s t i g a t i o n 9 5 0 0 8 3 . FPB/IRC/46S. V i c t o r i a , BC. 30 p.  121  BCFPB. 2 0 0 1 b . N u m b e r of Cutblocks in a Forest D e v e l o p m e n t Plan on the  North  Coast  of  BC.  Complaint  Investigation  990207.  FPB/IRC/45. V i c t o r i a , BC. 10 p. BCFPB. 2 0 0 2 . Compliance and E n f o r c e m e n t Audits of Forest Planning and Practices in British C o l u m b i a , 1 9 9 6 - 2 0 0 1 . Special  Report  FPB/SR/10. V i c t o r i a , BC. 11 p. BCLUCO. 1 9 9 9 . Guide t o Spatial Land and Resources I n f o r m a t i o n in LRMP. BC Ministry of Sustainable Resources m a n a g e m e n t , Land Use C o o r d i n a t i o n Office. Victoria, BC. 188 p. BCMOF. 1 9 8 8 . Annual Report of t h e Ministry of Forests and Lands for t h e Fiscal Year Ended March 3 1 , 1 9 8 8 . V i c t o r i a , BC. 90 p. BCMOF. 1 9 9 3 . Annual Report of t h e Ministry of Forests f o r t h e Fiscal Year Ended March 3 1 , 1 9 9 2 . Victoria, BC. 117 p. BCMOF. 1 9 9 4 . Forest, Range and Recreation Resource Analysis. Public Affairs B r a n c h , V i c t o r i a , BC. 308 p. BCMOF.  1995.  Forest  Practices Code of  British  Columbia.  Queens  Regulation.  British  Printer For British C o l u m b i a , Victoria, BC. BCMOF.  1997.  Innovative  Forestry  Practices  Columbia Forest Act, Reg. 1 9 7 / 9 7 . V i c t o r i a , BC. BCMOF. 1 9 9 8 a . Glossary of Forestry T e r m s . Public Affairs Branch. 52 p. BCMOF. 1 9 9 8 b . Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Operational Planning Regulation. V i c t o r i a , BC. BCMOF. 1 9 9 9 a . Managing Risk Within a S t a t u t o r y Forest  Practices  Code.  Compliance  and  Framework:  Enforcement  The  Branch.  V i c t o r i a , BC. 56 p.  122  BCMOF. 1 9 9 9 b . I n t e g r a t e d Spatial and A t t r i b u t e C o r p o r a t e (INCOSADA)  Project.  Report. Online in  Background  for  March  Database  14, 1997  Status  nttp://www.for.g ov.bc.ca/isb/incosada/project_info/background.htm  BCMOF. 1999c. Regulation changes are s t r e a m l i n i n g and  increasing  c e r t a i n t y in operational planning. Planning N e w s l e t t e r 1 0 : 2 . BCMOF. 1 9 9 9 d . Legislation allows for t e s t i n g of  performance-based  forest practices code. News Release # 1 9 9 9 : 0 7 2 . V i c t o r i a , BC. BCMOF.  2000.  Innovative  Forest  Practices  Agreement  Handbook.  V i c t o r i a , BC. 52 p. BCMOF. 2 0 0 1 a . W e s t - c e n t r a l  BC Mountain  Pine Beetle Action  Plan  2 0 0 1 . V i c t o r i a , BC. 16 p. BCMOF.  2001b.  Forest  Practices  Code  D e v e l o p m e n t Plan Guidebook. 2  n d  of  British  Columbia  Forest  Edition. V i c t o r i a , BC. 113 p.  BCMOF. 2 0 0 1 c . A r r o w T i m b e r Supply A r e a . Rationale f o r Allowable Annual Cut (AAC) D e t e r m i n a t i o n . 66 p. BCMOF. 2 0 0 2 a . New Forest Code Will Focus on Results. News Release 2 0 0 2 : 0 0 8 . Online in BCMOF. 2 0 0 2 b . (Updated  http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/pscripts/pab/newsrel/mofnewstitles.asp  BC Forest M a n a g e m e n t April  Certification  2002).  Status  Report  Online  in  http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/het/certification/CertificationStatusReport.pdf  BCMOF. 2 0 0 2 c . Result Based Discussion Paper. Consultation on a New F r a m e w o r k f o r B.C. Forest Practices. Online in BCMSRM.  2002.  Sustainable  Resource  www.resultsbasedcode.ca  management  Planning:  Landscape-level S t r a t e g y for Resource D e v e l o p m e n t .  A  Resource  Planning B r a n c h . V i c t o r i a , BC. 25 p.  123  Beishon,  J.  and  G.  Peters.  1972.  Systems  Behavior.  The  Open  University Press by Harper & Row Publishers. L o n d o n , UK. 320 p. Bellman,  R.E. and  L.A.  Zadeh.  1970.  Decision-making  in a  Fuzzy  E n v i r o n m e n t . M a n a g e m e n t Science Application Series 1 7 : B 1 4 1 B164. Binkley, C. 1 9 9 7 . A Crossroad in t h e Forest: The Path t o a Sustainable Forest Sector in BC. BC Studies 1 1 3 : 3 9 - 6 7 . Botkin, D. B. 1 9 9 0 . Discordant H a r m o n i e s : A New Ecology for the Twenty-First  Century.  American  Philological  Association,  Philadelphia, PA. 2 4 1 p. Botkin, D. B. 2 0 0 1 . The Role of T h e o r y in Forest Science and Forest M a n a g e m e n t . I n Proceedings of conference Forest Modeling for Ecosystem  Management,  Management,  Forest C e r t i f i c a t i o n , and  held in V a n c o u v e r ,  BC in A u g u s t  Sustainable 12-17,  2001  (LeMay, V. and P. Marshall Eds.). Pp: 2 5 - 4 4 . Brazee, R J . and D.H. N e w m a n . 1 9 9 9 . Observations on Recent Forest Economics Research on Risk and U n c e r t a i n t y . Journal of Forest Economics 3 : 2 - 3 . Buongiorno,  J.  and  J.K.  Gilles.  1987.  Forest  Management  and  Economics: A Primer in Q u a n t i t a t i v e Methods. Collier McMillan, London. 285 p. Buttenfield,  B.P.  2 0 0 1 . Mapping  Ecological  Uncertainty.  In  Spatial  U n c e r t a i n t y in Ecology: I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r R e m o t e Sensing and GIS Applications. S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , New York. Pp: 1 1 5 - 1 3 2 . Cantor, G. 1 8 8 3 . F o n d a m e n t s D'une Theorie Generale Des Ensembles. Acta M a t h e m a t i c a 2 : 3 8 1 - 4 0 8 .  124  Carpenter, S.R. 2 0 0 0 . A l t e r n a t e States Of Ecosystems: Evidence and Some  Implications.  In  Ecology:  Achievement  and  Challenge  (Press, M.C, N. Huntly And S. Levin Eds.). Blackwell Science, O x f o r d . Pp: 3 5 7 - 3 8 3 . Cashore, B., G. H o b e r g ,  M. H o w l e t t , J. Rayner and J. Wilson. 2 0 0 1 . I n  Search Of Sustainability. British Columbia Forest Policy I n The 1 9 9 0 s . UBC Press, V a n c o u v e r , BC. 340 P. Caswell, H. and M.C. T r e v i s a n . 1 9 9 4 . Sensivity Analysis Of Periodic Matrix Models. Ecology 7 5 : 1 2 9 9 - 1 3 0 3 . Chambers,  L.D.  and  M.A.P.  Taylor.  1999.  Strategic  Planning:  Processes, Tools and O u t c o m e s . Ashgate Publishers, Aldershot, England. 2 0 8 p. Charles, A. 2 0 0 1 . Sustainable Fisheries S y s t e m s . Blackwell Science, O x f o r d . 3 8 4 p. Christensen, N.L. 1 9 9 7 . Managing H e t e r o g e n e i t y a n d C o m p l e x i t y on Dynamic  Landscapes.  In  Ecological  Basis  for  Conservation  (Pickett, S.T.A., R.S. Ostfeld, M. Schachak and G.E. Likens Eds.). C h a p m a n and Hall, New York. Pp: 1 3 6 - 1 4 5 . Clayoquot  Sound  Management  Scientific in  Panel.  Clayoquot  1995.  Sound:  Sustainable  Planning  and  Ecosystem Practices  -  Report 5. C l a y o q u o t Sound Scientific Panel, V i c t o r i a , BC. 297 p. C l a y t o n , A . M . H . a n d N. J. Radcliffe. 1 9 9 6 . S u s t a i n a b i l i t y : A S y s t e m s a p p r o a c h . Earthscan, London. 258 p. CLMA/NFPA Mountain Pine Beetle Emergency Task Force. 2 0 0 0 . State of E m e r g e n c y Declared in t h e W o r k i n g Forests in West Central BC: I n d u s t r y Plan To Battle The Mountain Pine Beetle Epidemic. Fall 2 0 0 0 U p d a t e . Prince G e o r g e , BC. 27 p.  125  Cobb, R. W . , J. K. Ross and M. H. Ross. 1 9 7 6 . A g e n d a building as a c o m p a r a t i v e political process. A m e r i c a n Political Science Review 70: 126-138. COFI. 1 9 9 9 . A Blueprint f o r C o m p e t i t i v e n e s s : Five I d e a s f o r I m p r o v i n g Public Policy Affecting t h e BC Forest I n d u s t r y and t h e People, Businesses and C o m m u n i t i e s t h a t Depend on it. V a n c o u v e r , BC. 20 p. Commission on Sustainable D e v e l o p m e n t .  1 9 9 2 . A g e n d a 2 1 . United  Nations Publications, New York. 82 p. Commission on Sustainable Forest-Related  Development.  1996. Implementation  of  Decisions of t h e United Nations Conference on  E n v i r o n m e n t and D e v e l o p m e n t at t h e National and I n t e r n a t i o n a l Levels, I n c l u d i n g an Examination of Sectoral and Cross-Sectoral Linkages. Report of t h e Secretary General t o t h e Second Session Ad  Hoc  Intergovernmental  Panel  on  Forests.  E / C N . 1 7 / I P F / 1 9 9 6 / 4 . New York, U.S. 33 p. Cool, T. 1 9 9 9 . Proper Definition for Risk and U n c e r t a i n t y . Department  of  Washington  University.  Economics  Economics  Working  Papers in Risk and I n s u r a n c e 9 9 0 2 0 0 2 . W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 14 p. Cornwall, A. 1 9 9 6 . T o w a r d s Participatory Practice: Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and t h e Participatory Process. I n  Participatory  Research in H e a l t h : Issues and Experience (Koning and Martin Eds.) Zed Books, L o n d o n . Pp: 9 4 - 1 0 7 . Coulson  Group  of C o m p a n i e s .  2001a.  Log  N Talk  Monthly  Report  Log  N Talk  Monthly  Report  V o l . 0 1 - 6 7 . P o r t A l b e r n i , BC. 2 1 p. Coulson  Group  of C o m p a n i e s .  2001b.  V o l . 0 1 - 6 8 . P o r t A l b e r n i , BC. 24 p.  126  Courtney,  H., J.  Kirkland  Uncertainty.  In  and  P. Viguerie. . 1 9 9 9 .  Harvard  Bussiness  Strategy  Review  on  Under  Managing  U n c e r t a i n t y . The Harvard Bussiness Review Paperback Series. Boston, MA. Pp 1-32. Cubbage,  F.W.,  J. 0 .  O'Laughlin  and C. S.  Bullock.  1993.  Forest  Resource Policy. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 5 6 2 p. Daniels, S. and G. Walker.  1 9 9 7 . Rethinking Public Participation  In  Natural Resource M a n a g e m e n t : Concepts From Pluralisms And Five  Emerging  Approaches.  In  Pluralisms  and  Sustainable  Forestry and Rural D e v e l o p m e n t . FAO, Rome. Pp: 2 9 - 4 7 . De Geus, A.P. 1 9 9 7 . The Living C o m p a n y : Habits For Survival in a Turbulent  Business  Environment.  Harvard  Business  School  Publishing. B o s t o n , MA. 240 p. DeAngelis,  D.L.  and  Nonequilibrium  J.  C.  Waterhouse.  Concepts  in  1987.  Ecological  Equilibrium  Models.  and  Ecological  Monographs 5 7 : 1 - 2 1 . DeAngelis, D.L. Spatially  and and  Processes,  P.S. W h i t e . Temporally  and  1 9 9 4 . Ecosystems as Products Varying  Landscapes  -  Driving  Forces,  A Theoretical  of  Ecological  Perspective.  In  Everglades: The Ecosystem and I t s Restoration ( D a v i s , S.M. and J.C. Ogden Eds.). St. Lucia Press, Florida. Pp: 9 - 2 8 . Denny,  M.W.  and  S.  Gaines.  2000.  Chance  in  Biology.  Princeton  University Press, New Jersey. 4 2 4 p. Dorner, B. 2 0 0 1 . Natural  Landscape Pattern and Range of  Natural  Variability of t h e A r r o w TSA. Final Project Report to t h e A r r o w IFPA. C o n t r a c t # 7 1 8 9 3 4 . Slocan. BC. 9 4 p.  127  Dovers, S.H and J.H. H a n d m e r . 1 9 9 3 . Contradictions in Sustainability. E n v i r o n m e n t a l Conservation 2 0 : 2 1 7 - 2 2 2 . D r e n g s o n , A.R. and D. Taylor. 1 9 9 8 . Ecoforestry: The A r t and Science of Sustainable Forest Use ( D r e n g s o n , A.R. and D. T a y l o r Eds.). New Society, Gabriola I s l a n d , BC. 3 1 2 p. Dubois, O.  1998.  Capacity  to  Manage  Role Changes  in  Forestry:  I n t r o d u c i n g t h e " 4 R s " F r a m e w o r k . I I E D , L o n d o n . 22 p. Duerr,  W.A.  1982a.  Forestry  as  a  System.  In  Forest  Resource  M a n a g e m e n t : D e c i s i o n - m a k i n g Principles and Cases ( D u e r , W.A Ed.). O.S.U. B o o k s t o r e , Corvallis. Pp: 3 - 8 . Duerr, W.A. 1 9 8 2 b . Choices and t h e i r Prediction. I n Forest Resource M a n a g e m e n t : D e c i s i o n - m a k i n g Principles and Cases ( D u e r , W.A Ed.). O.S.U. B o o k s t o r e , Corvallis. Pp: 3 5 - 4 4 . Duerr, W.A. 1982c. Decision Process in S u m m a r y . I n Forest Resource M a n a g e m e n t : D e c i s i o n - m a k i n g Principles and Cases ( D u e r , W.A Ed.). O.S.U. B o o k s t o r e , Corvallis. Pp: 2 3 - 3 4 . Duerr,  W.A.  and  H.J. V a u x .  1953.  Research  in t h e  Economics  of  Forestry. Charles L. Pack Foundation, W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 4 7 5 p. Duinker,  P.N.  and  M.R.S.  Hay.  1994.  Environmental  Assessment,  Forests, and C o n t e x t u a l C h a n g e : I n Search o f Bigger Pictures. I n Keeping A h e a d : The Inclusion of L o n g - T e r m " G l o b a l " Futures in Cumulative Institute  Environmental  for  Environmental  Assessments Studies,  (Munn,  University  R.E. of  Ed.).  Toronto.  E n v i r o n m e n t a l M o n o g r a p h 1 1 . T o r o n t o , O N . Pp: 1 2 9 - 1 4 0 . Dunster, J. and  K.  Dunster.  1 9 9 6 . Dictionary  of Natural  Resource  M a n a g e m e n t . UBC Press, Vancouver. 363 p.  128  Dunster,  J.A.  and  R.B.  Gibson.  1989.  Forestry  and  Assessment:  D e v e l o p m e n t of t h e Class E n v i r o n m e n t a l A s s e s s m e n t for T i m b e r Management  in O n t a r i o . Canadian I n s t i t u t e f o r  Environmental  Law and Policy, T o r o n t o . 177 p. D u n t o n , J. T. 1 9 9 8 . Risk M a n a g e m e n t and S t a t u t o r y  Decision-Making  Under British Columbia's Forestry Legislation. Thesis s u b m i t t e d in partial f u l f i l l m e n t of t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e degree of Master of  Public  Administration.  School  of  Public  Administration.  University of V i c t o r i a . Victoria, BC. 62 p. Edwards,  G.  and  M.S.  Fortin.  2001.  Cognitive  View  of  Spatial  U n c e r t a i n t y . I n Spatial Uncertainty in Ecology: I m p l i c a t i o n s for Remote Sensing and GIS Applications. S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , New York. Pp: 1 3 3 - 1 5 6 . Erdle, T.  and  M.  Sullivan.  1998.  Forest  Management  Design  for  C o n t e m p o r a r y Forestry. The Forestry Chronicle 7 4 : 8 3 - 9 0 . ESRI. 1 9 9 8 . G e t t i n g t o Know ArcView® G I S . ESRI Press. Redlands, California. 6 5 4 p. Fahey, L. and R.M. Radall. 1 9 9 8 . I n t e g r a t i n g S t r a t e g y and Scenarios. I n Learning f r o m t h e Future: C o m p e t i t i v e  Foresight  Scenarios  (Fahey, L. and R.M. Radall Eds). John Wiley & Sons, New York. Pp: 2 2 - 3 8 . FAO (Food and A g r i c u l t u r e Organization of t h e United N a t i o n s ) . 1 9 9 8 . Guidelines f o r t h e M a n a g e m e n t of Tropical Forests. Part 1 : The Production of W o o d . FAO Forestry Paper 1 3 5 , Rome. 307 p. Fedkiw, J. 1 9 9 8 . Managing Multiple Uses on National Forests, 1 9 0 5 1 9 9 5 : a 9 0 - y e a r Experience and it isn't Finished Yet. Pub. FS6 2 8 , USDA Forest Service, W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 2 8 4 p.  129  Fernow,  B.E.  1902.  Economics of Forestry:  a Reference  Book  for  S t u d e n t s of Political Economy and Professional and Lay Students of Forestry. T.Y. Crowell & Co, New York. 5 2 0 p. Ford, E.D. 2 0 0 0 . Scientific Method for Ecological Research. Cambridge University Press, C a m b r i d g e , UK. 5 6 4 p. F o r m a n , R.T.  1 9 9 5 . Land Mosaics: t h e Ecology of Landscapes  and  Regions. C a m b r i d g e University Press, C a m b r i d g e , UK. Foteau, K.R., S. Essam, P. Mieugen, P. Nzokov, J.B. T a n d j e u and U. Zang-Zang. Revenus  1998.  de  Les  Droits,  Differents  Relations,  Intervenants  Responsabilities  dans  L'utilisation  et des  Ressources Forestieres a O m a n , C a m e r o u n . Etude preparee pour 1'IIED. I I E D , London. Franklin, J.F. 1 9 9 0 . T h o u g h t s or Applications of Silvicultural Systems Under New Forestry. Forest Watch 1 0 : 8 - 1 1 . Franklin, J. F., and R. T. T. F o r m a n . 1 9 8 7 . Creating Landscape Pattern by  Forest  Landscape  Cutting:  Ecology  Ecological  Consequences  and  Principles.  1:5-18.  FSC. 1 9 9 9 . FSC Principles and Criteria. Pamphlet, O a x a c a , Mexico. 9 p. Garling, T. and G. Evans (Eds.). 1 9 9 1 . E n v i r o n m e n t , C o g n i t i o n , and A c t i o n : An I n t e g r a t e d A p p r o a c h . Oxford University Press. 368 pp. G h e b r e m i c h a e l , A., J. Williams and J.M. Vasievich. 1 9 9 6 . A Manager's Guide  to  Forestry  Investment  Analysis.  Northern  Ontario  D e v e l o p m e n t A g r e e m e n t ' s N o r t h e r n Forestry p r o g r a m and USDA Forest Service. 68 p.  130  Georgantzas, Learning  N.C. to  and  W.  Manage  Acar.  1995.  Strategic  Scenario-Driven  Uncertainty.  Planning:  Quorum  Books,  W e s t p o r t , Connecticut. 396 p. Gillman, M. And R. Hails. 1 9 9 7 . Ecological M o d e l i n g : Putting Theory into Practice. Blackwell Science, O x f o r d . 2 2 4 p. Golledge, R.G. 1 9 9 1 . Cognition of Physical and Built E n v i r o n m e n t s . I n Environment,  C o g n i t i o n , and A c t i o n : An  Integrated  Approach  ( G a r l i n g , T.R. and W. Evans Eds.). O x f o r d University Press, New York. Pp: 3 5 - 6 2 . Grant,  W.E.  1998.  Reflections  Ecology  From  and  a Systems  Natural  Resource  Perspective.  Management:  Ecological  Modeling  108: 67-76. Green, D.G. 1 9 9 7 . C o m p l e x i t y in Ecological S y s t e m s . I n Frontiers in Ecology: Building t h e Links ( K l o m p , N and I. Lunt e d s . ) . Elsevier Science, New York. Pp: 2 2 1 - 2 3 1 . G r e g e r s e n , H., S. D r a p e r and D. Elz (Eds.). 1 9 8 9 . People and Trees. The Role of Social Forestry in Sustainable  Development.  EDI  S e m i n a r Series, The World Bank, W a s h i n g t o n D.C. G u n t e r , E. and H. L. Haney. 1 9 8 4 . Essentials of Forestry I n v e s t m e n t Analysis. O r e g o n State Bookstore. Corvallis, OR. 3 3 7 p. Haag, D. and M. K a u p e n j o h a n n . 2 0 0 1 . P a r a m e t e r s , Predictions, Postn o r m a l Science and t h e Precautionary Principle - A Road Map for Modelling f o r Decision-Making. Ecological Modeling 1 4 4 : 4 5 - 6 0 . Haddock,  M.  and  L.  Brewster.  1998.  Guide  to  Forest  Land  Use  Planning. W e a s t Coast E n v i r o n m e n t a l Law Research Foundation, V i c t o r i a , BC. 107 p.  131  H a m m o n d , H. 1 9 9 1 . Seeing t h e Forest A m o n g t h e T r e e s : The Case for Wholistic Forest Use. Polestar Press, W i n L a w , BC. 309 p. Haworth,  L,  C.  Brunk,  D.  Jennex  and  S.  Arai.  1998.  A  Dual-  perspective Model of A g r o s y s t e m H e a l t h : S y s t e m Functions and S y s t e m Goals. Journal of Agricultural and E n v i r o n m e n t a l Ethics 10: 127-152. Hayter,  R.  2000.  Flexible  Crossroads:  Restructuring  of  British  Columbia's Forest Economy. UBC Press, V a n c o u v e r , BC. 4 4 8 p. H e l l s t r o m , E. 1 9 9 7 . E n v i r o n m e n t a l Forestry Conflicts, Forest Policies and t h e Use of Forest Resources - Recent D e v e l o p m e n t s in USA, G e r m a n y , France, S w e d e n , Finland and N o r w a y . European Forest I n s t i t u t e , W o r k i n g paper 7. Joensuu, Finland. 72 p. Henriksson,  K.  Learning:  1999. on  The  Collective  Plurality  and  Dynamics  Multi-Social  of  Organizational  Structuring.  Lund  University Press, L u n d , S w e d e n . 252 p. H i g m a n , S, S. Bass, N. J u d d , J. Mayeus and R. N u s s b a u m . 1 9 9 9 . The Sustainable Forestry Handbook. Earthscan, L o n d o n . 3 0 4 p. Hoberg, G. 2 0 0 1 . Policy Cycles and Policy Regimes: A F r a m e w o r k for Studying  Policy  Change.  In  Search  of  Sustainability:  British  Columbia Forest Policy in t h e 1990s ( C a s h o r e , B., G. H o b e r g , M. H o w l e t t , J. Rayner a n d J. Wilson Eds.). UBC Press, V a n c o u v e r , BC. Pp: 1-29. Hodgetts, R. M. 1 9 8 2 . M a n a g e m e n t : T h e o r y , Process, and Practice. D r y d e n Press, Chicago. 542 p. Holling, C.S., A. B a z y k i n , P. Bunnell, W.C. Clark, G.C. Gallopin: R. Hilborn, D.D. Jones, R. M. P e t e r m a n , J.E. Rabinovich, J.H. Steele and C.J. W a l t e r s . 1 9 8 7 . Adaptive E n v i r o n m e n t a l A s s e s s m e n t and  132  M a n a g e m e n t ( H o l l i n g , C S . Ed.) John Wiley & Sons, New York. 377 pp. Holloway, C A . 1 9 7 9 . D e c i s i o n - m a k i n g Under U n c e r t a i n t y : Models and Choices. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 522 p. Holzheu, F. and P. W i e d e m a n n . 1 9 9 3 . I n t r o d u c t i o n : Perspectives on Risk Perception. I n : Risk is a Construct ( R u c k v e r s i c h e r u n g , B Ed.) K n e s e b e c k - V e r l a g , Munich. Pp: 9 - 1 9 . Howlett, M. P. and M. R a m e s h . 1 9 9 5 . S t u d y i n g Public Policy: Policy Cycles and  Policy S u b s y s t e m s .  Oxford  University  Press,  New  York. 2 3 9 p. I . L u m b e r . 1 9 9 9 a . IKEA Greener. News A r c h i v e s : 1 1 / 1 9 9 9 . Online in http://www.ilumber.com/  vtLbin/JavalinIIS.dll/PagePO.po/portal/news/nov99.  xhtml  I . L u m b e r . 1 9 9 9 b . Home Base Phases Out Endangered W o o d . News archives:  11/99.  Online  in  http://www.ilumber.com/_vtLbin/JavalinIIS.dll/PagePO.po/portal/news/nov99.xhtml  Isukapalli,  S.S.  1999.  Transportation  Uncertainty  Models.  Analysis  Dissertation  Of  Submitted  Transport In  -  Partial  Fulfillment Of The Requirements For The Degree Of Doctor Of Philosophy.  Graduate  Program  in  Chemical  and  Biochemical  Engineering. The State University of New Jersey. 198 p. I v e r s o n , D. 1 9 9 8 . My T w o Cents W o r t h . Eco-Watch Dialogues. USDA Forest Service. Online in  http://www.fs.fed.us/eco/eco-watch/ewmytwocents.html  Jensen, M.E., N. Christensen and P.S. B o u r g e m o n . 2 0 0 1 . An Overview of  Ecological  Assessment  Principles  and  Applications.  In  A  Guidebook f o r I n t e g r a l Ecological Assessments (Jensen, M.E. and P.S. B o u r g e m o n e d s . ) . Springer, New York. Pp: 1 3 - 2 8 . J o h n s t o n , D.R, A.J. G r a y s o n , R.T.  Bradley.  1967.  Forest  Planning.  Faber, L o n d o n . 5 4 1 p. 133  Jorgensen, S.E. and F. Muller. 2 0 0 0 . Handbook of Ecosystem Theories and M a n a g e m e n t . Lewis Publishers. Boca R a t o n , Florida. 584 p. Kay, J.  1 9 9 7 . The  Ecosystem  Approach:  Ecosystems  as  Complex  S y s t e m s . I n Proceedings of t h e First I n t e r n a t i o n a l w o r k s h o p of t h e CIAT-Guelph Project " I n t e g r a t e d Conceptual F r a m e w o r k for Tropical A g r o e c o s y s t e m  Research Based on Complex  Systems  Theories ( M u r r a y , T. and G. Gallopinn Eds.) held 2 6 - 2 8  May,  1997  Cali,  in  Centro  Internacional  de  Agricultura  Tropical,  C o l o m b i a . Pp: 6 9 - 9 8 . Kengen, S. 1 9 9 7 . Forest Valuation for Decision-Making. Lessons of Experience and Proposals f o r I m p r o v e m e n t . FAO. Rome. 133 p. Kiang, W. 1 9 9 8 . Farming S y s t e m s as an A p p r o a c h to Agro-Ecological Engineering. Ecological Engineering 1 1 : 2 7 - 3 5 . K i m m i n s , J.P. 1 9 9 7 . Balancing Act: E n v i r o n m e n t a l Issues in Forestry. 2  n d  Ed. V a n c o u v e r : UBC Press, V a n c o u v e r . 2 4 5 p.  K i m m i n s , J.P., K.A. Scoullar, B. Seely, D.W A n d i s o n , R. Bradley, D. Mailly, and K.M. Tsze. 1 9 9 9 . FORCEEing and FORECASTing t h e HORIZON:  Hybrid  Simulation  Modeling  of  Forest  Ecosystem  Sustainability. I n Empirical and Process Based Models f o r Forest Tree a n d S t a n d G r o w t h Simulation ( A m a r o , A. and M. T o m e Eds.). Edicoes S a l a m a n d r a , Lisboa. Pp. 4 3 1 - 4 4 1 . Kleine, M. 1 9 9 7 . The T h e o r y and Application of a S y s t e m s Approach to Silvicultural  Decision-making.  Forest  Research Center,  Sabah.  The B o r n e o C o m p a n y , Cincinnati, OH. 1 5 7 p. Klemperer,  W.  D.  1996.  Forest  Resource  Economics  and  Finance.  McGraw Hill, New York. 5 5 1 p.  134  Klir,  G.J.  1994.  The  Many  Faces  of  Uncertainty.  In  Uncertainty  Modeling and Analysis: T h e o r y and Applications ( A y y u b , B.M and M.M. G u p t a Eds.). Elsevier Science. Pp: 3 - 1 9 . Kolb, D. 1 9 8 4 . Experiential  Learning: Experience as The Source of  Learning and D e v e l o p m e n t . Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs. 288 PKropff, M.J, J. B o u m a and J.W. Jones. 2 0 0 1 . S y s t e m s approaches for t h e design of sustainable a g r o - e c o s y s t e m s . Agricultural S y s t e m s 70: 369-393. K u h n , T. 1 9 7 0 . The S t r u c t u r e of Scientific Revolutions. 2  n d  Edition.  University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 215 p. La  place,  P.S.  1820.  Probabilites. 3  r d  Oeuvres, Tome  VII:  Theorie  Analytique  de  Edition reprint 1 9 9 5 . Editions Jacques Gabay,  Paris. 3 8 4 p. Landsberg, J. 2 0 0 1 . Modeling Forest Ecosystems: State of t h e A r t , Challenges and Future Directions. I n Proceedings of Conference Forest Modeling f o r Ecosystem M a n a g e m e n t , Forest Certification, and Sustainable M a n a g e m e n t , held in V a n c o u v e r , BC in August 1 2 - 1 7 , 2 0 0 1 (LeMay, V. and P. Marshall Eds.). V a n c o u v e r , BC. Pp: 3 - 2 1 . Lang, L. 1 9 9 8 . Managing Natural Resources With G I S . ESRI Press, Redlands, California. 132 p. Leiss, W. and C. Chociolko.  1 9 9 4 . Risk and  Responsibility.  McGill-  Q u e e n ' s University Press. Kingston, ON. 4 0 5 p. LeMay, V. and P. Marshall (Eds.). 2 0 0 1 . Proceedings of Conference Forest Modeling f o r Ecosystem M a n a g e m e n t , Forest Certification,  135  and Sustainable M a n a g e m e n t , held in V a n c o u v e r , BC in August 1 2 - 1 7 , 2 0 0 1 . V a n c o u v e r , BC. Levin, S. 1 9 9 8 . Ecosystems and t h e Biosphere as C o m p l e x Adaptive S y s t e m s . Ecosystems 1 : 4 3 1 - 4 3 6 . Marsh, B. 1 9 9 8 . Using Scenarios to I d e n t i f y , A n a l y z e , and  Manage  U n c e r t a i n t y . I n Learning From t h e F u t u r e : C o m p e t i t i v e Foresight Scenarios (Fahey, L. and R.M. Radall Eds). John Wiley & Sons, New York. Pp: 3 9 - 5 3 . Marshall, P. 1 9 8 4 . Formulation and Selection of T i m b e r  Management  S t r a t e g i e s : Description of t h e Problem C o n t e x t and D e v e l o p m e n t of a M e t h o d o l o g y . Thesis S u b m i t t e d in Partial Fulfillment of t h e R e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e Degree of D o c t o r o f Philosophy. Faculty of G r a d u a t e Studies ( F o r e s t r y ) . The University of British C o l u m b i a . V a n c o u v e r , BC. 2 4 5 p. M a t u r a n a , H.R and F.J Varela. 1 9 8 0 . Autopoiesis and C o g n i t i o n : t h e Realization of t h e Living. D. Reidel Pub. Co, B o s t o n . 1 4 1 p. Mauersberger,  P.  1995.  Entropy  Control  of  Complex  Ecological  Processes. I n P a t t e r n , B.C and S.E. Jorgensen (Eds.) Complex Ecology: The Part-Whole Relation in Ecosystems. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Pp: 1 3 0 - 1 6 5 . McClain, K. 2 0 0 2 . SFM Reporting and Direction f o r Action -  Practical  Considerations W i t h i n t h e C o n t e x t of t h e " M c G r e g o r Approach to SFM". Prince G e o r g e , BC. 4 2 p. McCoy, J. and K. J o h n s t o n . 2 0 0 1 . Using ArcGIS Spatial Analysit. ESRI Press. Redlands, California. 240 p.  136  McDonald, P. 1 9 9 9 . Prized f o r e s t s . A look at Slocan's A w a r d - w i n n i n g Forest  Management  System.  Logging  and  Sawmilling  Journal  August 1999. McGregor  Model  Pioneering  Forest Association. Approaches  to  2 0 0 1 . The  Sustainable  McGregor Forest  Story  -  Management  (Scott, A. Ed.). Prince George, BC. 162 p. McVay, K.R. 1 9 9 8 . Raster to Vector Conversion Script. ESRI scripts WEB  site  downloads.  Online  in  http://arcscripts.esri.com/scripts.asp?eQuery=asPointFtab&eLang = & e P r o d = & e R e c s = 1 0 & e D e s c = o n  Meitner,  M.S.,  S. Sheppard  and  H. Harshaw.  2 0 0 1 . Arrow  Forest  District Public Values S u r v e y : Putting Your Finger on The Pulse of t h e District. Project Final Report. A r r o w IFPA, Slocan, BC. Mercier, J. 1 9 9 7 . D o w n s t r e a m And U p s t r e a m Ecologists: The People, Organizations  And  Ideas  Behind  The  Movement.  Praeger  Publishers, W e s t p o r t , Connecticut. 2 2 7 p. Meridian  Institute.  Stewardship  2001. Council  Comparative and  Analysis  Sustainable  of  the  Forestry  Forest Initiative  Certification P r o g r a m s . W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 15 p. Meridith,  F.  1993.  Approaches  to  Ecologically  Based  Forest  I n t e r v e n t i o n s . U.S.D.A. Forest Service. N R - 6 0 7 . 15 p. Meyer, J.L. 1 9 9 7 . Conserving Ecosystem Functions. I n Ecological Basis for C o n s e r v a t i o n (Pickett, S T . A . , R.S. O s t f e l d , M. Schachak and G.E. Likens Eds.). C h a p m a n and Hall, New York. Pp: 1 3 6 - 1 4 5 . M i n t z b e r g , H. 2 0 0 0 . The Rise And Fall Of Strategic Planning. Financial Times Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 4 7 8 p.  137  Mintzberg, H., B. A h l s t r a n d and J. C a m p e l . 2 0 0 1 . S t r a t e g y S a f a r y : The C o m p l e t e Guide T h r o u g h The Wilds Of S t r a t e g i c  Management.  Financial T i m e s Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 4 1 6 p. Mitchell, S.J., T. Hailemarian and Y. Kulis. 2 0 0 1 . Empirical Modeling of Cutblock  Edge W i n d t h r o w  Risk on V a n c o u v e r  Island,  Canada  Using Stand Level I n f o r m a t i o n . Forest Ecology and M a n a g e m e n t 154: 117-130. M u m p o w e r , J. L. and T. R. S t e w a r t . 1 9 9 6 . Expert J u d g m e n t And Expert D i s a g r e e m e n t . T h i n k i n g and Reasoning 2 : 1 9 1 - 2 1 1 . N a v e h , Z. and A. L i e b e r m a n . 1 9 9 4 . Landscape Ecology: T h e o r y And Application. 2  n d  Edition. S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , New York. 3 5 9 p.  Nelson, J. 2 0 0 1 . Forest And Landscape Dangerous  Weapons?  In  Models:  Proceedings  Of  Powerful Tools Or Conference  Forest  Modeling f o r Ecosystem M a n a g e m e n t , Forest Certification, and Sustainable M a n a g e m e n t , held in V a n c o u v e r , BC in A u g u s t 1 2 17, 2 0 0 1 (Le May, V. and P. Marshall Eds.). V a n c o u v e r , BC. Pp: 45-55. N e w m a n , D.H. 1 9 8 8 . A Discussion Of The C o n c e p t Of The O p t i m a l Forest Rotation And A Review Of The Recent L i t e r a t u r e . USDA Forest  Service,  Southeastern  Forest  Experimental  Station.  General Technical Report SE-48. Research Triangle Park, NC. 38 PN y b e r g , B. 1 9 9 9 . An I n t r o d u c t o r y Guide To A d a p t i v e M a n a g e m e n t For Project  Leaders And  Participants.  B.C.  Forest Service,  Forest  Practices B r a n c h , V i c t o r i a , BC. 24 p. O'Connor, R. 1 9 8 3 . T r a c k i n g t h e Strategic Plan. Research Project N° 8 3 0 . The Conference B o a r d , New York. 16 p.  138  O'Looney, J. 2 0 0 0 . Beyond m a p s : GIS and Decision-Making in Local G o v e r n m e n t . ESRI Press, Redlands, California. 2 4 0 p. O'Neill, R.V, D.L. De Laurentis, J.B. Waide and T.F.H A l l e n . 1 9 8 6 . A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. 2 5 4 p. O d u m , H.T. 1 9 9 4 . Ecological And General S y s t e m s : A n I n t r o d u c t i o n To Systems  Ecology.  2  n d  Edition.  University  Press  of  Colorado,  Niwot, Colorado. 6 4 4 p. Oliver,  CD,  J.P  Kimmins,  H.  Harshaw  and  S.J  Shepard.  2001.  Definitions of Sustainable Forestry: Sustainability I n d i c a t o r s . I n Forests  and  Landscapes:  Linking  Ecology,  Sustainability,  and  Aesthetics ( S h e p p a r d , S.J and H. Harshaw e d s ) . IUFRO Research Series. C A B I : W a l l i n g f o r d , UK. 304 p. Ormsby,  T.  J. Alvi.  1999.  Extending  ArcView®  GIS.  ESRI  Press.  Redlands, California. 527 p. Pahl-Wostl, C. 1 9 9 5 . The Dynamic Nature of E c o s y s t e m s : Chaos and Order E n t w i n e d . John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, England. 267 PParminter,  J.  Biology  1998.  Natural  Disturbance  Principles f o r Forested  Ecology.  Landscapes  In  Conservation  (Voller,  Ed.). UBC  Press, V a n c o u v e r . Pp: 3 - 4 1 . Parminter, J. and P. Daigle. 1 9 9 7 . Landscape Ecology and Disturbances Ministry  Relatioships  of Forests.  to  Research  Biodiversity. Program.  British  Extension  Natural  Columbia Note  #10.  V i c t o r i a , BC. 9 p. Pawlak, Z. and A. S k o w r o n . 1 9 9 9 . Rough Set R u d i m e n t s . Bulletin  of  I n t e r n a t i o n a l Rough Set Society 3: 6 7 - 7 2 .  139  Pearse, P. H. 1 9 9 0 . I n t r o d u c t i o n t o Forestry Economics. UBC Press, V a n c o u v e r , BC. 2 2 6 p. Pearse, P.H. 2 0 0 0 . Economic I n s t r u m e n t s For P r o m o t i n g Sustainable Forestry:  Opportunities  Forests.  Markets,  and  Constraints.  Regulation,  and  In  The  Wealth  Sustainable  of  Forestry  (Tollefson, C. Ed.). UBC Press, V a n c o u v e r , BC. Pp: 1 9 - 4 0 . Perry, D.A. 1 9 9 4 . Forest Ecosystems. Johns Hopkins University Press, B a l t i m o r e . 6 4 9 p. Perry, D.A., J.G. Borchers, M.P. A m a r a n t h u s . 1 9 9 0 . Species Migration and  Ecosystem  Stability  During  Climate  Change:  The  B e l o w g r o u n d C o n n e c t i o n . Conservation Biology 4 : 2 6 6 - 2 7 4 . Pickett,  ST.A.,  J.  Kolasa  and  C.G.  Jones.  1994.  Ecological  U n d e r s t a n d i n g : t h e Nature of T h e o r y and t h e T h e o r y of Nature. Academic Press, San Diego. 2 0 6 p. Pielke, R.A. 1 9 9 9 . Who Decides? Forecasts and Responsibilities in t h e 1997 Red River f l o o d . A m e r i c a n Behavioral Science Review 7 2 : 83-101. Pielke, R.A, D. Sarewitz and R. Byerly. 2 0 0 0 . Decision-Making and The Future  of  Nature:  Understanding  and  Using  Predictions.  In  Prediction: Science, Decision-Making, and The Future of Nature (Sarewitz,  D.,  R.A.  Pielke and  R. Byerly  Eds.) Island  Press,  W a s h i n g t o n , DC. Pp: 3 6 1 - 3 8 7 . Pinchot, G. 1 9 0 3 . A Primer in Forestry. Division  of  Forestry  Bulletin  Part I :  the  24. Government  Forest. Printing  USDA Office,  W a s h i n g t o n . 89 p. Poore, D., J. Blaster, E. B r u e n i g , P. Burgess, B. Cabarle, D. Cassells, J. Douglas, D. G i l m o u r , P. Hardcastle, G. H a r t s h o r n , D. K a i m o w i t z ,  140  N. Kishor, A. Leslie, J. Palmer, F. Putz, M.N. Salleh, N. Sizer, T. S y n o t t , F. W a d s w o r t h and T. W h i t m o r e . 1 9 9 8 . No Forest W i t h o u t M a n a g e m e n t : Sustaining Forest Ecosystems Under Conditions of Uncertainty.  ITTO  Newsletter.  Online  in  http://www.itto.or.jp/newsletter/v8n4/10.html  Prabhu,  R.,  H.J  Ruitenbeek,  T.J.B  Boyle  and  C.J.P  Colfer.  2001.  Between Voodoo Science and Adaptive M a n a g e m e n t : The Role and  Research  Needs  For  Indicators  of  Sustainable  Forest  M a n a g e m e n t . I n Criteria And I n d i c a t o r s f o r Sustainable  Forest  M a n a g e m e n t (Raison, R.J and A. B r o w m Eds). IUFRO Series N7. CABI Publishing, W a l l i n g f o r d , UK. 4 6 2 p. President's Council on Sustainable  Development.  1996.  Sustainable  A m e r i c a : A New Consensus for t h e Prosperity, O p p o r t u n i t y and a Healthy E n v i r o n m e n t f o r t h e Future. W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 122 p. PriceWaterhouseCoopers  LLP. 2 0 0 0 . The Greening  of Globalization.  Risky Business W i n t e r 2 0 0 0 : 2 - 5 . Propper de C a l l e j o n , D., T. Lent, M. Skelly and C. A. Webster. 1 9 9 8 . Sustainable  Forestry  Within  an  Industry  Context.  In  The  Business of Sustainable Forestry: Case Studies. A Project of The Sustainable Forestry W o r k i n g Group. The John D. and Catherine T. M a c A r t h u r F o u n d a t i o n . Chicago, Illinois. Pp: 2 . 1 - 2 . 3 9 . Rattray,  G.  1999.  Professional  Are  We  Moving  Accountability.  Forward? Association  A Status of  BC  Report  on  Registered  Professional Foresters. FORUM 6 ( 4 ) . Rayner, S. 2 0 0 0 . Prediction And O t h e r Approaches t o Climate Change Policy. I n Prediction: Science, Decision-Making, and The Future of Nature ( S a r e w i t z , D., R.A. Pielke and R. Byerly Eds.) Island Press, W a s h i n g t o n , DC. Pp: 2 6 9 - 2 9 8 . 141  Rescher, N. 1 9 8 3 . Risk: A Philosophical I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e T h e o r y of Risk Evaluation and M a n a g e m e n t . University Press of A m e r i c a , W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 2 0 8 p. Ricotti, M. and E. Z i o . 1 9 9 9 . A Neural N e t w o r k A p p r o a c h t o Sensitivity and U n c e r t a i n t y Analysis. Reliability Engineering and  Systems  Safety 6 4 : 5 9 - 7 1 . Ringland, G. 1 9 9 8 . Scenario Planning: Managing f o r t h e Future. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 4 2 2 p. Ritchie,  B.  and  D.  Marshall.  1993.  Business  Risk  Management.  C h a p m a n & Hall, L o n d o n . 3 6 5 p. Riverside Forest Products Ltd. 2 0 0 0 . 2 0 0 0 Annual Review: I n Touch With a C h a n g i n g W o r l d . K e l o w n a , BC. 24 p. Robinson.  A.R,  J.  M.  Interdisciplinary  Mc  Ocean  Carthy  and  B.J.  Rothschild.  Science  is  Evolving  and  a  1999. Systems  Approach is Essential. Journal of Marine S y s t e m s 2 2 : 2 3 1 - 2 3 9 . Rollins, K. 2 0 0 1 . Measuring Ecosystems Values. I n A Guidebook For Integrated  Ecological  Assessments  (Jensen,  M.E.  and  P.S.  B o u r g e m o n e d s . ) . Springer, New York. Pp: 2 2 1 - 2 4 4 . Romm,  F.  1998,  The  Pursuit  Of  Innovation.  In  The  Business  of  Sustainable F o r e s t r y : Case Studies. A Project o f The Sustainable Forestry  Working  Group.  The  John  D.  and  Catherine  T.  MacArthur F o u n d a t i o n . Chicago, Illinois. Pp: 1 . 1 - 1 . 9 . Rowe,  C.  1992.  Interaction.  The Alfred  Management Waller  Matrix: Publisher,  The  Psychology  of  Henley-on-Thames,  O x f o r d s h i r e . 128 p. Sarewitz, D. a n d R. Byerly. 1 9 9 9 . Prediction I n Policy: A Process, Not A Product. Natural Hazards Observer 2 3 : 2 - 3 .  142  Sarewitz, D., R.A. Pielke, and R. Byerly Eds. 2 0 0 0 . Science, DecisionMaking, and t h e Future of Nature. Island Press, W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 4 0 0 p. Schanz,  H.  1994.  Forstleuten.  Forstliche Der  Nachhaltigkeit'  Bundesrepublik  Aus  Der  Deutschland.  Sicht  Von  Institut  fur  F o r s t o k o n o m i e Paper 1 9 - 9 4 . Universitat Freiburg. 1 3 1 p. Schanz, H. 1 9 9 8 . Sustainable Forest M a n a g e m e n t : On t h e Meanings and Functions o f a Central T e r m in Forestry. V o l u n t a r y Paper f o r t h e X I W o r l d Forest Congress, held in A n t a l y a , T u r k e y in October 1 9 9 7 . Online in  http://www.ulb.ac.be/assoc/iff/sectionl/otherlinks/sfm.PDF)  S c h w a r t z , P. 1 9 9 6 . The A r t Of The Long View: Planning For The Future in an Uncertain W o r l d . Doubleday, New York. 2 6 2 p. Seastedt, T. 1 9 9 6 . Ecosystem M a n a g e m e n t : T h e New Tool of Land Managers? Online in Sedjo,  R.A.,  A.  Goetzl  http://culter.Colorado,edu:1030/~tims/ecomanage.html  and  S.O.  Moffat.  1 9 9 8 . Sustainability  of  T e m p e r a t e Forests. Resources For t h e F u t u r e , W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 102 p. Scheffer,  M., S., J. A. C a r p e n t e r , C. Foley, a n d B. Walker. 2 0 0 1 .  Catastrophic Shifts in Ecosystems. Nature 4 1 3 : 5 9 1 - 5 9 6 . Shenk, T . M . and A . B . Franklin. 2 0 0 1 . Models I n Natural  Resources  M a n a g e m e n t : An I n t r o d u c t i o n . I n Modeling in Natural Resource Management:  Development,  Interpretation  and  Application  ( S h e n k , T . M . a n d A . B . Franklin Eds.). Island Press, W a s h i n g t o n , DC. Pp: 1-15. S h e p p a r d , S. 2 0 0 1 . Would You Know A Socially Sustainable Forest I f You Saw One?: W h y A Results-Based A p p r o a c h  May Not Be  143  Enough. Second lecture I n 5 0  t h  A n n i v e r s a r y of t h e UBC Faculty of  Forestry Jubilee Lecture Series. V a n c o u v e r , BC. 26 p. Shindler, B.A. and L.A C r a m e r . 1 9 9 9 . Shifting Public Values I n Forest Management:  Making  Sense  Of  Wicked  Problems.  Western  Journal of Applied Forestry 1 4 : 1 1 - 1 7 . S h o r e , T.L. and L. S a f r a n y i k .  1 9 9 2 . Susceptibility A n d Risk  Rating  S y s t e m s For The Mountain Pine Beetle I n The Lodgepole Pine Stands. Pacific Forestry Centre, Victoria. BC. 12 p. Sierra S y s t e m s . 2 0 0 1 . Report to Geographic Data BC. Digital I m a g e M a n a g e m e n t C u r r e n t Assessment -  Future D i r e c t i o n . Victoria,  BC. 59 p. Sinnott, J.D. 1 9 9 8 . The D e v e l o p m e n t Of Logic I n A d u l t h o o d :  Post-  f o r m a l T h o u g h t A n d its Applications. Plenum Press, New York. 372 p. Site  Productivity  Working  Group.  1997.  Site  Index  (Productivity)  Estimation P r o g r a m . Progress Report and Five-Years Plan 1 9 9 8 99 t o 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 . BCMOF Research B r a n c h , V i c t o r i a , BC. 22 p. Slocan Forest Products  Ltd. 1 9 9 9 . Forest D e v e l o p m e n t  Plan  1999-  2 0 0 3 . Slocan, BC. Slocan  Forest  Products  Ltd.  2001.  Management's  Discussion  and  Analysis Of Financial Results. I n 2 0 0 1 Report t o S t a k e h o l d e r s , E m p l o y e e s , a n d C o m m u n i t i e s . Pp: 4 3 - 5 2 . S m i t h , D. M., B.C. Larson, M. J Kelty and P. M. S. A s h t o n . 1 9 9 7 . The Practice of Silviculture: Applied Forest Ecology. 9  t h  Edition. John  Wiley & Sons, New York. 537 p. S m i t h s o n , M. 1 9 8 9 . I g n o r a n c e and U n c e r t a i n t y : Emerging Paradigms. S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , New York. 392 p.  144  Society of A m e r i c a n Foresters. 1 9 9 3 . Task Force On Sustaining Long Term  Forest  Health  and  Productivity.  Publication  93-02.  B e t h e s d a , M a r y l a n d . 83 p. Solberg,  B.  and  S.  Participation Eds.).  Miina.  In  Land  Proceedings  1996.  Conflict  Management  of  The  Management  and  Public  ( S o l b e r g , B. and S.  International  Conference  Miina  Conflict  M a n a g e m e n t and Public Participation I n Land M a n a g e m e n t Held I n J o e n s u u , Finland 1 7 - 1 9 June 1 9 9 6 . European Forest I n s t i t u t e , J o e n s u u , Finland. 3 3 9 p. S t a n b u r y , W.T. 2 0 0 0 .  Environmental  Groups and The  International  Conflict O v e r The Forests Of British C o l u m b i a , 1990 t o 2 0 0 0 . SFU-UBC Centre f o r t h e Study of G o v e r n m e n t and  Business.  V a n c o u v e r , BC. 4 1 2 p. S t a n b u r y , W.T. and L B . Verstinsky. 2 0 0 0 . G o v e r n i n g I n s t r u m e n t s For Forest  Policy  In  British  Columbia:  A Positive  and  Normative  Analysis. I n The Wealth Of Forests: M a r k e t s , Regulation, and Sustainable Forestry (Tollefson, C. Ed.). UBC Press, Vancouver, BC. Pp: 4 2 - 7 6 . Starr, C. 1 9 8 0 . I n t r o d u c t o r y Remarks. I n Societal Risk Assessment: How Safe is Safe Enough? ( S c h w i n g , R.C. and A. Albers Eds.). Plenum Press, New York. S t e w a r t , T.R. 2 0 0 0 . U n c e r t a i n t y , J u d g m e n t , and Error I n Prediction. I n Prediction: Science, Decision-Making, and The Future Of Nature (Sarewitz,  D.,  R.A.  Pielke and  R. Byerly  Eds.)  Island  Press,  W a s h i n g t o n , DC. Pp: 4 1 - 5 7 . Stine,  P.A.  and  C.  Hunsaker.  2001  Generic  Issues  Regarding  Uncertainty I n Spatial Data Used I n Ecological Applications. I n  145  Perspectives  on  Uncertainty  in  Spatial  Data  for  Ecological  Analyses. S p r i n g e r V e r l a g . Suzuki, D. and A. McConnell. 1 9 9 7 . Sacred Balance: Rediscovering Our Place in N a t u r e .  David Suzuki  Foundation. G r e y s t o n e  Books,  V a n c o u v e r . 259 p. Taylor, B, L. K r e m s a t t e r and R. Ellis. 1 9 9 7 . A d a p t i v e M a n a g e m e n t of Forests in British C o l u m b i a . B.C. Ministry of Forests, Victoria BC. 103 p. The Home Depot. 1 9 9 9 . Wood  The Home Depot Launches  Purchasing  Policy.  Press  Environmental  Release.  Online  in  http ://www.homedepot.com/prel80/HDUS/EN_US/diy_main/pg_diy Jsp?BV_SessionID = 326684406.0954790995@@@@&BV_EngineID=calhgjglkgmbemfcfkmcficghj.O  The  Montreal  Process.  1995.  Criteria  C o n s e r v a t i o n and Sustainable  and  Indicators  for  the  M a n a g e m e n t of T e m p e r a t e  and  Boreal Forests. 4 8 p. The  Santiago Criteria  Declaration. and  Indicators  1995.  Sustaining  the  World's  for t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n  and  Forests:  Sustainable  M a n a g e m e n t of T e m p e r a t e and Boreal Forests. 22 p. T h o m p s o n , J.D. 1 9 6 7 . Organizations in A c t i o n : Social Science Bases of A d m i n i s t r a t i v e T h e o r y . McGraw-Hill, New York. 192 p. T h o m p s o n , W.A., I. V e r t i n s k y , H. Schreier and B.A. Blackwell. 2 0 0 0 . Using  Forest  Management  Fire  Hazard  Modeling  in  Multiple  Planning. Forest Ecology and  Use  Forest  Management  134:  163-176. T h r o w e r & Associates. 1 9 9 9 . I n t e r i m Report: M o n i t o r i n g Early Stand Development.  Project  MFI-40-050.  Prepared  for  the  BCMOF  Resources I n v e n t o r y Branch. Victoria, BC. 15 p.  146  T i m m e r m a n s , H. 1 9 9 1 . Decision-Making Processes, Choice Behaviors, and E n v i r o n m e n t a l Design: Conceptual Issues and Problems of Application. I n E n v i r o n m e n t , Cognition, and Action ( G a r l i n g , T. and G. W. Evans Eds.). Oxford University Press, New York. Pp: 63-76. Tollefson, C. 2 0 0 0 . The Wealth of Forests. M a r k e t s , Regulation, and Sustainable Forestry ( e d . Tollefson, C ) . UBC Press, V a n c o u v e r , BC. 3 9 6 p. T r e w e e k , J. 1 9 9 9 . Ecological I m p a c t A s s e s s m e n t . Blackwell Science, O x f o r d . 3 7 2 p. T u r n e r , S J . and A.R. Johnson. 2 0 0 1 . A Theoretical F r a m e w o r k  For  Ecological A s s e s s m e n t . I n A Guidebook For I n t e g r a t e d Ecological Assessments (Jensen, M.E. and P.S. B o u r g e m o n e d s . ) . Springer, New York. Pp: 2 9 - 3 8 . UNEP  (United  Nations  Environmental  Environment  Impact  Program).  Assessment Training  1996.  Resource  UNEP Manual.  Economics, Trade and E n v i r o n m e n t Unit. W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 220 p. UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA.  1 9 9 7 . Forests and Biological Diversity.  Working  d o c u m e n t p r e p a r e d f o r t h e t h i r d m e e t i n g of t h e liaison g r o u p on forest  biological  diversity.  Montreal,  Canada.  U N E P / C B D / S B S T T A / 3 / I n f . 22 p. UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA.  1 9 9 7 . Biological Diversity in Forests.  Subsidiary  Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice. Second Meeting  Montreal,  2  to  6  September  1996.  U N E P / C B D / S B S T T A / 2 / 1 1 . 100 p. UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA. Elaboration.  1 9 9 9 . Ecosystem A p p r o a c h : Further Subsidiary  Body  on  Scientific,  Conceptual  Technical  and  Technological Advice. 22 p. 147  U.S.  EPA ( E n v i r o n m e n t a l Quality  Planning  Document.  Protection  Agency).  a n d Standards  Innovative  1 9 9 9 . Office  Economic  Strategies  and  Analysis  of Air  Resource  Economics  Group.  W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 2 2 3 p. U.S. EPA-California. 1 9 9 8 . W o w ! A Whole New W a y o f Looking a t Your Data. ArcView®  -  Session  1 . Preparatory  i n f o r m a t i o n t o CAL  C o m p u t e r Users Conference Materials 1 9 9 8 , held O c t o b e r 2 1 , 1998 in Reddling, California. EPA M a n a g e m e n t  a n d Licensing  Branch. 6 p. U.S  National  Science  a n d Technology  Council.  1 9 9 6 . Building  a  Scientific Basis t o Ensure t h e Vitality a n d Productivity o f U.S. Ecosystems. C o m m i t t e e on E n v i r o n m e n t a n d Natural Resources, Ecosystem  Working  Group.  Online  in  http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/ewgfn2.txt  Van d y n e , G . M . 1 9 6 6 . Ecosystems, S y s t e m s Ecology, a n d Systems Ecologists. Reprinted Complex  Oak Ridge  National  1 9 9 5 in Pattern, Ecology:  Laboratory,  Oak Ridge, TN  B.C a n d S.E. Jorgensen  T h e Part-Whole  Relation  in  (Eds.)  Ecosystems.  Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Pp: 1-27. Van K o o t e n , C. a n d E. K r e m a r . 2 0 0 0 . Fuzzy Logic a n d Non Market V a l u a t i o n : A C o m p a r i s o n o f Methods. I n Conference IIFET 2 0 0 0 : Microbehavior  a n d Macroresults  held  July  10-14,  2000  in  Corvallis, O r e g o n . I n t e r n a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e o f Fisheries Economics a n d T r a d e , Corvallis, O r e g o n . Vercelli, A. 1 9 9 8 . Sustainable D e v e l o p m e n t , Rationality a n d T i m e . I n Sustainable D e v e l o p m e n t : Concepts, Rationalities a n d Strategies (Faucheux, S, M. O'Connor and J. Van d e r S t r a a t e n Eds.). Kluwer Academic Publishers. Pp: 2 5 9 - 2 7 6 .  148  Viegas,  J.M.  1982.  Processes.  Uncertainty,  Center  of  Complexity  Urban  and  and  Regional  Decision-Making  Systems  (CESUR),  D e p a r t a m e n t o de Engenharia Civil, I n s t i t u t o S u p e r i o r Tecnico, Lisboa, Portugal. Publication N° 2 4 3 . 20 p. Walters, C.  1986. Adaptive  M a n a g e m e n t o f Renewable  Resources.  McMillan Publishing, New York. 374 p. W a r i n g , R. and W. H. Schlesinger. 1 9 8 5 . Forest Ecosystems Concepts and M a n a g e m e n t . Academic Press, I n c . , O r l a n d o . 3 4 0 p. Weetman,  G.F.  2000.  Worrying  Management  Plans  Management  of  in  Issues  British  Forested  About  Forest  Columbia.  Landscapes:  In  Landscape Ecosystem  Directions  and  I m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( D ' E o n , J. F. Jackson and E.A. Ferguson Eds.). UBC Press, V a n c o u v e r . Pp: 3 1 9 - 3 2 4 . West Coast E n v i r o n m e n t a l Law. 2 0 0 1 . BCEN Forest Caucus Comments  on  Result  Based  Pilot  projects.  Further  Online  in  http://www.for.gov.bcca/hfp/rbpilot/stillwater%20pilot/ag8restillwater.doc  Weyerhaeuser.  2001a. Stillwater Timberlands  Pilot Project  Detailed  proposal. Powell River, BC. 75 p. Weyerhaeuser.  2001b.  Stillwater  Pilot  Project.  Weyerhaeuser's  response to Review by BCEN. Powell River, BC. 16 p. White,  P.S.  1979.  Pattern,  Process,  and  Natural  Disturbance  in  V e g e t a t i o n . Botanical Review 4 5 : 2 2 9 - 2 9 9 . W h i t e , P.S and S T . A . Pickett. 1 9 8 5 . Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics:  An  Introduction.  In  The  Ecology  of  Natural  Disturbance and Patch Dynamics (Pickett, S T . A . and P.S. White Eds.). Academic Press, Orlando, Florida. Pp: 3 - 1 3 .  149  Wilds, S.P.  and  P.S.  White.  2 0 0 1 . Dynamic Terrestrial  Ecosystem  Patterns and Processes. I n A Guidebook f o r I n t e g r a l Ecological Assessments (Jensen, M.E. and P.S. B o u r g e m o n Eds.). Springer, New York. Pp: 3 3 8 - 3 5 1 . Wilkin,  L.  and  A.  Uncertainty:  Sutton  (Eds.).  Approaches,  1982.  Methods  The  and  Management  Applications.  Of  Martinus  Nijhoff Publisher, D o d r e c h t . 2 8 5 p. Wilson, I .  1998.  Approach  Mental To  Maps o f The  Scenarios.  In  Future: An Intuitive  Learning  From  The  Logics Future:  C o m p e t i t i v e Foresight Scenarios (Fahey, L. and R.M. Radall Eds). John Wiley & S o n s , New York. Pp: 8 1 - 1 0 8 . Wilson, J. 1 9 9 8 . Talk a n d L o g : Wilderness Politics in British C o l u m b i a , 1 9 6 5 - 1 9 9 6 . UBC Press, Vancouver, BC. 4 2 9 p. Wodley, S., G. A l w a r d , L. Iglesias, T.W. H o e k s t r a , B. Holt, L. Livinston, J.  Loo, A.  S k i b i k i , A.  Williams  and  P. W r i g h t .  2000.  North  A m e r i c a n Test o f Criteria and I n d i c a t o r s o f Sustainable Forestry. Center  for  International  Forestry  Research  (CIFOR)  Forest Service. USDA Forest Service I n v e n t o r y and  -  USDA  Monitoring  I n s t i t u t e Report. W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 175 p. W o l l e n b e r g , E., D. Edmunds and L. B. Buck. 2 0 0 0 . Using Scenarios t o Make Decisions A b o u t The Future: A n t i c i p a t o r y Learning For The A d a p t i v e C o - M a n a g e m e n t of C o m m u n i t y Forests. Landscape and Urban Planning 4 7 : 6 5 - 7 7 . World  Bank.  1996.  The  World  Bank  Participation  Sourcebook.  E n v i r o n m e n t a l M a n a g e m e n t Series, W a s h i n g t o n , DC. 2 5 9 p. World T r a d e O r g a n i z a t i o n . 2 0 0 1 . Market Access: Unfinished Business Post U r u g u a y Round I n v e n t o r y (Special s t u d y No. 6 ) . Economic Research and Analysis Division. G e n e v a , S w i t z e r l a n d . 139 p. 150  Z u c c h e t t o , J. a n d A. Systems  Ecology  M. Janson. Study  of  1985. the  Resources a n d Society:  Island  of  Gotland,  a  Sweden.  S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , New York. 2 4 6 p.  DICTIONARIES AND ENCYCLOPEDIAS Academic Press D i c t i o n a r y o f Science and T e c h n o l o g y . 1 9 9 2 . Academic Press, New York. The Oxford English Dictionary, 1 9 8 9 . Second Edition. O x f o r d University Press, New York. The McGraw-Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Science & T e c h n o l o g y ,  8  t h  Edition. 1 9 9 8 . McGraw-Hill, New York. The New  Encyclopedia  Britannica, 1 5  t h  Edition.  1974.  Encyclopedia  Britannica I n c , Chicago. The  McGraw-Hill  Dictionary  o f Scientific  and Technical  Terms,  5  t h  Edition. 1 9 9 4 . McGraw-Hill, New York.  151  APPENDIX 1. GLOSSARY Chaotic process: process t h a t is unpredictable due t o n o n - m e a s u r a b l e shifts in initial conditions ( D e n n y and Gaines, 2 0 0 0 ) . C o m p l e x i t y : condition of consisting of parts or e l e m e n t s not simply coordinated,  but  some  of  them  involved  in  various  degrees  of  s u b o r d i n a t i o n ; c o m p l i c a t e d , i n v o l v e d , i n t r i c a t e ; not easily analyzed or disentangled ( O x f o r d English D i c t i o n a r y ) . C o n t i n g e n c y : an e v e n t t h e occurrence of which could not have b e e n , or was not, f o r e s e e n ( O x f o r d English D i c t i o n a r y ) . Criteria ( C r i t e r i o n ) : A c a t e g o r y of conditions or processes by which sustainable  forest  characterized  by  management a set  of  may  related  be  assessed.  indicators  which  Criteria are  are  monitored  periodically t o assess change (The Montreal Process, 1 9 9 5 ) . Deterministic process: process in which exact laws are f o l l o w e d , so t h a t w h a t will h a p p e n in t h e f u t u r e is necessary consequence of states at any given m o m e n t in t h e past (McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical T e r m s ) . Eco-forestry: a p p r o a c h to m a i n t a i n and restore full f u n c t i o n i n g , natural forest e c o s y s t e m s in p e r p e t u i t y , while h a r v e s t i n g f o r e s t goods on a sustainable basis. The essence of ecoforestry is t o learn t o perceive what  the  forest  can  supply  without  altering  its  basic  ecological  functions and intrinsic values ( D r e n g s o n and T a y l o r , 1 9 9 8 ) . Ecosystem m a n a g e m e n t :  approach by w h i c h , in a g g r e g a t e , t h e full  a r r a y of f o r e s t values and functions is m a i n t a i n e d at t h e level.  Coordinated  management  at  the  landscape  level,  landscape including  152  across o w n e r s h i p s , is an essential c o m p o n e n t . (Society of A m e r i c a n Foresters, 1 9 9 3 ) Effectiveness:  contribution  towards  a  certain  outcome  (Hodgetts,  1982). Efficiency: inputs required for reaching a certain o u t c o m e ( H o d g e t t s , 1982). Efficacy:  power  Dictionary).  or  The  capacity  to  produce  Merriam-Webster  an effect  Dictionary  (Oxford  relates  English  efficacy  with  capableness, p r o d u c t i v e n e s s , adequacy, capacity, and sufficiency. Equilibrium: s t a y i n g in t h e vicinity of a given state o v e r a relevant t e m p o r a l scale (DeAngelis and W a t e r h o u s e , 1 9 8 7 ) Extent: size of an area m a p p e d or analyzed (Stine and  Hunsaker,  2001). Feedback:  a modification, adjustment,  or control  of a process  or  s y s t e m by a result o r effect o f t h e process ( O x f o r d English D i c t i o n a r y ) G r a i n : resolution of any given landscape f e a t u r e , as it is perceived t h r o u g h t h e source of data used (Stine and H u n s a k e r , 2 0 0 1 ) . Holistic  forestry:  interconnected forms),  not  approach  that  defines  the  forest  as  a  diverse,  w e b w h i c h focuses on sustaining t h e whole (all life on  the  production  of  any  one  part  (e.g.  timber)  (Hammond, 1991). Homeostasis: certain stability in a s y s t e m (Beishon and Peters, 1 9 7 2 ) I g n o r a n c e : lack of k n o w l e d g e (Oxford English D i c t i o n a r y ) .  153  I n d i c a t o r : a m e a s u r e o f an aspect o f criteria ( c r i t e r i o n ) . A q u a n t i t a t i v e or qualitative variable w h i c h can be m e a s u r e d or described and which when  observed  periodically  demonstrates  trends  (The  Montreal  Process, 1 9 9 5 ) . Instinct:  act t h a t a p p e a r to be rational, but is p e r f o r m e d  without  conscious design ( O x f o r d English D i c t i o n a r y ) . K n o w l e d g e : t h e s u m o f w h a t is k n o w n ; fact, s t a t e , or condition of u n d e r s t a n d i n g ( O x f o r d English D i c t i o n a r y ) . Modification: change in respect t o s o m e qualities in a s y s t e m (Oxford English D i c t i o n a r y ) . New f o r e s t r y : a p p r o a c h t h a t defines f o r e s t m a n a g e m e n t w i t h t i m b e r production biological  as  a  diversity  by-product and  of  its  maintaining  primary  function:  long-term  sustaining  ecosystem  health  (Franklin, 1 9 9 0 ) . Non-linear i n t e r a c t i o n s : t h e rules of interaction change as t h e s y s t e m changes and develops ( L e v i n , 1 9 9 8 ) . Optimal  operating  point:  state  of  development  that  takes  full  a d v a n t a g e o f t h e available e n e r g y and resources ( K a y , 1 9 9 7 ) . Precautionary principle: in t h e face of u n c e r t a i n t y , society should t a k e reasonable actions t o a v e r t risks w h e r e t h e potential h a r m t o h u m a n health or t h e e n v i r o n m e n t  is t h o u g h t t o be serious or  irreparable  (President's Council on Sustainable D e v e l o p m e n t , 1 9 9 6 ) . Social f o r e s t r y : a b r o a d range o f t r e e and f o r e s t related u n d e r t a k e n by r u r a l l a n d o w n e r s and c o m m u n i t y g r o u p s t o  activities provide  154  products f o r t h e i r o w n use and for g e n e r a t i n g local income (Gregersen et a l . , 1 9 8 9 ) . S t a t e : q u a n t i t y stored i n , or condition of, a s y s t e m ( O d u m , 1 9 9 4 ) . Stochastic p r o c e s s : process g o v e r n e d by probabilistic laws (McGrawHill Dictionary o f Scientific and Technical T e r m s ) . Type one e r r o r : rejecting a null hypothesis w h e n it is t r u e (Ritchie and Marshall, 1 9 9 3 ) . Type t w o e r r o r : failing t o reject a null h y p o t h e s i s w h e n it is false (Ritchie and Marshall, 1 9 9 3 ) . U n c e r t a i n t y : i n c o m p l e t e n e s s of knowledge ( S m i t h s o n , 1 9 8 9 ) . Understanding:  the  degree  of  match  between  reality  and  theory  (Pickett et a l . , 1 9 9 4 ) .  155  APPENDIX 2. PROVINCE-WIDE QUANTIFICATION OF HOW UNCERTAINTY IS AFFECTING FOREST PLANNING I N BC  1. Revision of Forest Development Plans in BC FDP REVIEWED/YEAR  FDP AMENDMENTS/YEAR  CARIBOO  38  523  NELSON  38  200  PRINCE GEORGE  53  281  KAMLOOPS  60  444  PRINCE RUPERT  24  285  VANCOUVER  88  1005  301  2738  BCMOF FOREST REGION  TOTAL PROVINCE  2. Estimated Costs of Revision of Forest Development Plans in  Staff t i m e (Office r e v i e w , field  $ 11,000 / FDP  3 0 1 FDP/year  $ 3,311,000  $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 / FDP  100 FDP/year  $ 2,500,000  $ 3 0 , 0 0 0 / FDP  26 FDP/year  $ 780,000  review, m e e t i n g s w i t h stakeholders)  24  Vehicles, a c c o m m o d a t i o n in c a m p s , helicopter t i m e , etc. Appeals, r e v i e w s , and board audits  TOTAL PROVINCE  2 3  2 4  $ 6,591,000  Based on a n s w e r s of 25 o u t of t h e 4 0 BCMOF Forest D i s t r i c t s Based on an a v e r a g e of 4 0 full m a n - d a y s per FDP at $ 2 7 5 / d a y . T h e s e a v e r a g e s w e r e g i v e n  by District officials.  156  3.  Causes  of  Major  and  Development Plans in B C  BCMOF FOREST REGION  CARIBOO  Minor  Amendments  to  Forest  25  Main Causes for Minor Amendments to FDPs 1) Beetle  Main Causes for Major Amendments to FDPs 1) Beetle  2) Block Layout 3) Windthrow NELSON  1) Block Layout  1) Changes in Policy  2) Beetle  2) Beetle  3) Windthrow  3) Social conflicts  4) Fire PRINCE GEORGE  1) Block layout 2) Beetle 3) Fire  1) Timber market changes 2) Fire 3) Beetle  KAMLOOPS  1) Block layout  1) Block layout  2) Beetle and  2) Timber market  defoliators  changes 3) Changes in policy 4) Beetle and defoliators  PRINCE RUPERT  VANCOUVER  1) Block layout  1) Block layout  2) Windthrow  2) Windthrow  1) Block Layout  1) Timber market  2) Timber market ~v> 0  v  changes  changes 2) First Nations consultation 3) Block Layout  2 5  Based on answers of 34 out 40 BCMOF Forest Districts and 4 out of 5 licensees.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0075307/manifest

Comment

Related Items

Admin Tools

To re-ingest this item use button below, on average re-ingesting will take 5 minutes per item.

Reingest

To clear this item from the cache, please use the button below;

Clear Item cache