UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Partial cutting of second growth western hemlock on Vancouver Island Clark, Marvin Lloyd 1999

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_2000-0042.pdf [ 11.86MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0090348.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0090348-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0090348-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0090348-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0090348-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0090348-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0090348-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0090348-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0090348.ris

Full Text

PARTIAL CUTTING OF SECOND GROWTHWESTERN HEMLOCKON VANCOUVER ISLANDbyMARVIN LLOYD CLARK, R.P.F.B.S.F., The University of British Columbia, 1971A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF FORESTRYinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIESDepartment of Forest Resources ManagementTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIASeptember 1999to the required standard© Marvin Lloyd Clark. 1999In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date 7 JZ 7 DE-6 (2/88) Abstract As the harvest of old-growth forests of coastal British Columbia declines, forest companies are considering partial cutting methods to augment fiber supplies. However, the operational and economic feasibility of many of these options has yet to be proven. This thesis investigates the harvesting and economic implications associated with the partial cutting of second growth western hemlock stands in coastal British Columbia. Specifically, it examines two partial cutting options for immature forests; commercial thinning and shelterwood havesting. The results presented are based on data acquired during an operational trial conducted between January 1997 and October 1998 by the Port McNeill Division of MacMillan Bloedel Limited, on northern Vancouver Island. The thesis is presented in two parts. Part I includes case study results while Part II investigates economic analyses using case study data. The specific objectives are: • to evaluate productivity, cost and factors influencing combinations of cable and ground-based harvesting systems, • to document the effectiveness of falling and yarding techniques for the treatments, • to document extent, severity, and causes of post-harvest site disturbance, wind damage, and residual tree wounding, • to compare the net present value of harvesting strategies that include: clearcut at 53 years, clearcut at financial rotation age, clearcut at stand culmination age, and partial cut to four residual stand densities (450, 300,200 and 100 trees/ha) at age 53, • to determine the financial consequences of residual tree wounding for partial cuts at final harvest age using net present value analysis, and • to discuss the potential to use Multiple Account Benefit-Cost Evaluation to compare the socio-economic implications of different harvesting options. The case study demonstrated that both cable and ground-based harvesting systems are operationally feasible for second growth hemlock stands. However, a number of factors in the falling and extraction phases need to be considered to ensure operational viability. ii Both manual and mechanized falling methods were monitored and manual falling proved more cost effective and provided better residual stand quality. However, it is recognized that mechanical falling is a safer method. Two types of extraction were observed at Port McNeill. A standing skyline cable system was used to harvest three treatment blocks and a ground-based hydraulic log loader was used to forward the logs from the fourth treatment block. Both systems were effective for the site, stand, and weather conditions in this trial. Stand and site impacts for the Port McNeill case study were assessed through post-harvest surveys for wind damage, site disturbance, and residual tree wounding. Unfortunately, a catastrophic windstorm caused extensive damage to the study area when harvesting was only partially completed, and the target stand densities on the treatment units had to be modified. Because both initial harvesting and windfall salvage were carried out, it is not possible to make comparisons between treatments for site disturbance and residual stand damage. The net present values (NPV) of three clearcut and four partial cut harvesting scenarios were compared using the results of the case study. Under the assumptions used in this analysis, NPVs were greatest for the clearcut scenarios and varied inversely with stand age at the time of clearcutting. For the partial cut scenarios, the treatment with the lowest residual density (SW100) provided the greatest NPV. The financial implications of residual tree wounding in partial cuts were examined using NPV analysis. The outcome identified that the final harvest NPVs were quite insensitive to wounding levels. This result is encouraging in that residual tree wounding may not be as financially significant as is currently perceived by the forestry community. This thesis presents an example of how Multiple Account Analysis can be used to compare alternative harvesting methods and made tradeoffs between competing solutions. Because there is a growing trend towards non-economic constraints influencing harvest prescriptions in coastal B.C., it will become more critical for forest managers to rank harvesting alternatives using methods that consider the criteria of all stakeholders equitably. in Table of Contents Abstract ii Table of Contents i-V List of Tables... vii List of Figures viii Acknowledgements ' 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 History of Commercial Thinning on the British Columbia Coast 3 2 OBJECTIVES 8 2.1 Parti: Partial Cutting Case Study 8 2.11 Productivity Study 8 2.12 Site and Stand Impact Assessment 8 2.2 Part II: Economic Analysis 8 3 METHODS 9 3.1 Parti: Partial Cutting Case Study 9 3.11 Site and Stand Descriptions 9 3.12 Treatment Descriptions 10 3.13 Harvesting System and Equipment Descriptions... 13 3.14 Pre-Harvest Surveys and Development 14 3.15 Harvest Monitoring 19 3.16 Post-Harvest Surveys 21 3.2 Part II: Economic Analysis 23 3.21 Financial Analysis Comparing Clear and Partial Cut Alternatives 24 3.22 Economic Significance of Tree Wounding 24 3.23 Multiple Account Analysis 24 4 RESULTS 26 4.1 Parti: Partial Cutting Case Study 26 4.11 Harvest Operations 26 4.111 Planning and Development Phases 26 iv 4.112 Harvesting Phase 27 4.12 Post-Harvest Stand and Site Damage 35 4.121 Wind Damage 35 4.122 Site Disturbance 42 4.123 Tree Wounding 44 4.2 Part II: Economic Analysis 47 4.21 Financial Comparison of Harvest Schedules and Intensities 47 4.211 Rotation Age Determination 47 4.212 Net Present Value Analysis 51 4.22 Economic Implications of Residual Tree Wounding 52 4.23 Multiple Account Analysis 55 5 DISCUSSION 60 5.1 Parti: Partial Cutting Case Study 60 5.11 Production 60 5.111 Falling and Bucking 60 5.112 Cable and Ground-based Harvesting Systems 62 5.12 Stand and Site Impacts 63 5.121 Wind Damage 63 5.122 Site Disturbance 65 5.123 Tree Wounding 66 5.2 Part II: Economic Analysis 67 5.21 Rotation Age Determination 67 5.22 Net Present Value Analysis 68 5.221 Economic Implications of Residual Tree Wounding 68 5.23 Multiple Account Analysis 69 5.3 The Future of Partial Cutting 69 6 CONCLUSION 72 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 75 8 REFERENCES 77 APPENDIX I: PERMANENT SAMPLE PLOT DATA SUMMARES 83 APPENDIX II: MACHINE COST SUMMARIES 88 APPENDIX III: WOUND CLASSIFICATION SUMMARY 94 APPENDIX TV: NET PRESENT VALUE MODEL I l l V L i s t of Tables Table 1. Pre-Harvest Stand Statistics 9 Table 2. Study Block Production Summary 26 Table 3. Planning and Layout Cost Summary 27 Table 4. Road Development Cost Summary 27 Table 5. Falling: Shift Level Productivity 28 Table 6. Excavator Forwarding: Shift Level Productivity 29 Table 7. Cable Yarding: Shift Level Time Distribution 30 Table 8. Cable Yarding: Shift Level Productivity and Cost 31 Table 9. Cable Yarding: Detailed Timing Results 32 Table 10. Production Cost Summary by Treatment 34 Table 11. Trees Damaged by Wind 38 Table 12. Wind Damage Survey Results Projected Over the Treatment Blocks 39 Table 13. Trees Damaged by Wind, by Species 39 Table 14. Wind Damage, by Direction of Wind 40 Table 15. Site Disturbance: Summary of Results 43 Table 16. Summary of Tree Wounding 45 Table 17. Comparison of Tree Wounding Between Post-Harvest and Post-Windfall Harvest on. the SW300 Area 47 Table 18. Summary of Net Present Value Illustrating Financial Rotation Age 50 Table 19. Stand Level Yield Report Generated Using STIM 50 Table 20. Commercial Thinning Economic Model Summary 53 Table 21. Sensitivity of NPV to Residual Tree Wounding Levels 55 Table 22. Multiple Account Analysis Matrix for Harvest System Ranking 57 Table 23. Cable Yarding Productivity Comparison for Partial Cutting 62 vi L i s t of Figures Figure 1. Pre-harvest second-growth stand on the SW300 treatment area 10 Figure 2. Stand table graph for study area 11 Figure 3. Stock table graph for study area 11 Figure 4. Map of study area 12 Figure 5. Diamond D210 swing yarder with Maki II motorized carriage 14 Figure 6. Hydraulic loader pre-bunching logs for yarder 15 Figure 7. Ranger 667 skidder used to forward and sort yarded logs 15 Figure 8. Timbco 415 harvester falling on the SW200 treatment unit 16 Figure 9. Original railroad grade from first harvest 17 Figure 10. Self-loading logging truck 35 Figure 11. Wind damage from December 1997 storm 38 Figure 12. Wind damage to multi-stem cluster on single root systems 41 vii Acknowledgements I acknowledge the research funding received from Forest Renewal BC; the support of my employer, the Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada (FERIC); and the cooperation of the Port McNeill Division of MacMillan Bloedel Limited and its logging contractors. I extend a special thanks to Doug and Glen Sawden of Millstone Contracting; Bill Waugh, Jack Lavis, and Jeff Ternan of MacMillan Bloedel Limited; and Ingrid Hedin, Michelle Bowden-Dunham, Ray Krag, and Mihai Pavel of FERIC for their assistance, advice and patience over the duration of this project. In addition, I gratefully recognize the guidance of my graduate studies committee, Professors John Nelson, Peter Marshall, and Steve Mitchell of the Faculty of Forestry at the University of British Columbia, and Alex Sinclair Vice President of the Western Division of FERIC. v i i i 1 INTRODUCTION As harvesting becomes more restricted in the old-growth forests of coastal British Columbia, forest companies must consider methods that are less intrusive than clearcutting in order to secure public acceptance and sustain fiber supply. An array of harvesting options with variable retention are being evaluated or promoted as alternatives to clearcutting of both old- and second-growth forests. However, the operational and economic feasibility of many of these options has yet to be proven. This study investigates the harvesting and economic implications associated with the partial cutting of immature western hemlock stands (i.e. pre-culmination age) in coastal British Columbia. Specifically, it examines two partial cutting options for immature forests; commercial thinning and shelterwood harvesting. The results presented are based on data acquired during an operational trial conducted between January 1997 and October 1998 by the Port McNeill Division of MacMillan Bloedel Limited, on northern Vancouver Island. 1.1 Background Commercial thinning involves the harvest of a portion of the trees from immature stands to both enhance the value of the residual stand and to acquire revenue from the material removed. Two removal patterns of commercial thinning are common: systematic and selective. Systematic removal is used in regularly-spaced row plantations commonly found in eastern Canada and the southeast United States, and is most appropriate for mechanized harvesting systems (Adamovich, 1968). Selective thinning, more typical to western North America, can target either the most valuable stems in the stand to maximize revenue (crown thinning), or the least valuable to maximize the residual stand value (low thinning). In the latter method, suppressed, deformed and diseased trees are removed to create a residual stand of uniformly spaced, dominant, vigorous, and windfirm trees with a preferred species distribution. All thinning activities discussed in this thesis relate to the selective removal pattern from below. The shelterwood system is a partial cutting silvicultural system that temporarily retains from 100 to 400 crop trees per hectare with desired characteristics such as species, form, or wind-firmness. Residual trees can either be located in patches or uniformly distributed over the harvest site. Traditional shelterwood harvesting has the purpose of providing a seed source for natural regeneration, or protecting regeneration by reducing vegetative competition, moderating weather l extremes (sun or snow), and reducing predation from insects such as the spruce weevil (Westerberg and Hannerz, 1994). In addition, shelterwood harvests can preserve aesthetic values on sites with,sensitive viewscapes. Shelterwood harvesting, although new to coastal second growth stands, has been used for many years in both the East Kootenay and Southern Interior regions of British Columbia to improve regeneration success for western larch and Douglas-fir stands, respectively. Shelterwood harvesting is also used in the Nordic countries to enhance natural regeneration of Norway spruce on difficult sites (i.e., moist and cold) (Westerberg and Hannerz, 1994). The shelterwood system was selected for the Port McNeill trial to assess its efficacy at spruce weevil control and wind stability. Much of the partial cutting, current and historical, practiced in coastal second growth stands is considered commercial thinning. Three advantages are commonly attributed to commercial thinning. The first assumed advantage is higher fiber yield due to the recovery of natural mortality. This assumption is strongly debated and not well supported by scientific studies. In 1994, the B.C. forest industry requested a stumpage reduction on logs from commercial thinning as this volume was considered incremental to the Annual Allowable Cut (AAC). In reply, the B.C. Ministry of Forests simulated yield response to commercial thinning using its "Tree and Stand Simulator" (TASS) (Benskin and Mitchell, 1994). The simulations were based on data collected from 12,000 permanent sample plots located throughout British Columbia, Alberta, and the US Pacific Northwest. The Ministry concluded that commercial thinning does not increase the total volume produced from a stand, however it does allow volume to be borrowed from future harvests to offset fiber shortages in the short-term. Because the TASS simulation found no incremental fiber available through commercial thinning, stumpage relief was not recommended. Similarly, MacMillan Bloedel Limited analyzed yield results from 2300 second-growth plots and found no increase in yield with thinning (Loftus, 1997). On experimental plots, yield was maintained (thinned plus standing volume was equal to the volume on the unthinned controls), while on operational trials, thinned plus standing volume was less than that on the controls. Others studies have, however, demonstrated incremental yield from thinning activity. Griffith (1959) reported on a trial comparing growth rates between a thinned and natural stand of second-growth western hemlock at the University of British Columbia Research Forest near Haney 2 British Columbia. In 1950, a portion of the stand was thinned to a six foot by six foot spacing (1.83 X 1.83 m) of dominant and codominant trees. Sample plots were established prior to thinning (five in the treated area and one in the control) and tree dimensions were remeasured three and eight years after thinning. Griffith found that thinning had a marked effect on the growth of the dominant and codominant trees in the hemlock stand. Eight years after thinning, average annual diameter was increasing by 5.35% in the thinned plots and 3.76% in the control plot, however, thinning had no noticeable effect on height growth. The B.C. Ministry of Forests (1999) reports that, unlike B.C., thinnings in Europe commonly recover incremental volume over untreated stands because of two operational differences: 1) frequent multiple-entry light-removal treatments, and 2) higher commercial fiber utilization levels. The second advantage of thinning is improved final stand quality or value achieved by removing the suppressed, intermediate, deformed, and diseased trees. Post-thinning stand increment is fixed on trees of superior form and value. The final harvest of thinned stands and the subsequent lumber conversion of the logs are more efficient because unit production costs are inversely proportional to log size for both activities. Lumber value is also improved because of the reduction of defect and the increased supply of valuable, wide lumber (Jozsa, 1994). The third advantage, which applies to both commercial thinning and shelterwood harvesting, is improved industrial access to stands that may not otherwise be available for harvest due to regulatory constraints such as adjacency, visual quality, watershed rate-of-cut control, or slope stability. Today the fiber access advantage of both types of partial cutting interests many coastal forest companies. Although the three advantages are often specific to the local circumstances and not endorsed by all foresters, two significant disadvantages to partial cutting are universally accepted. The first is higher harvesting costs compared with clearcutting alternatives, and the second is the high risk of damaging the residual stand and consequently reducing its productivity and potential value at final harvest. Both of these concerns will be explored in this thesis. 1.2 History of Commercial Thinning on the British Columbia Coast Although shelterwood harvesting of second-growth is relatively new in British Columbia, commercial thinning has been done intermittently for 70 years. Early experimental thinning was 3 conducted on the B.C. Forest Service Research Forest at Cowichan Lake in 1929 (Adamovich, 1962). In the late 1940s, research on commercial thinning gained popularity. The Powell River Co. Ltd. thinned 80 acres of 55-year-old Douglas-fir in 1948 near Powell River and in 1949 the company conducted a series of small (1-5 acre) commercial thinning trials in western hemlock stands on Tumour Island (Maxwell and Mcintosh, 1974). Joergensen (1957) reported 35 thinning experiments in British Columbia, primarily involving Douglas-fir under silvicultural or pathological experiments. However, three trials involved pure western hemlock stands and two involved mixed stands containing hemlock. The most researched of the hemlock trials was conducted by the B.C. Forest Service on East Thurlow Island in 1953. The study, called Experiment 388, was intended as both a stand productivity and a silvicultural evaluation. Twenty permanent sample plots were established involving 5 treatments replicated 4 times. Treatments included: • control (no harvesting) • very light thinning (225 ft2 residual basal area per acre (60 m2/ha)) • light thinning (200 ft2/ac (53 m2/ha)) • medium thinning (175 ft2/ac (46 m2/ha)) • heavy thinning (150 ft2/ac (40 m2/ha)) The study blocks were logged using D4 and D6 Caterpillar tractors. Borzuchowski (1955) reported that logging costs were twice the market value of the logs produced and 10 to 58% of the residual trees were damaged. Borzuchowski attributed the failure of the operation to the poor attitude of the crew, unusually wet weather, poor planning and development of the blocks, and poor falling techniques. The logging company abandoned the operation before completing the harvest but felled all remaining marked trees so the silvicultural studies could proceed. Approximately 1500 m 3 of logs were left on the ground. In 1987 the twenty permanent sample plots established for Experiment 388 were remeasured for growth and yield analysis (Omule, 1988). Omule concluded the following: 4 • Thinning had no important effect on top height, total gross volume growth, and gross production. • Varying with thinning intensity, the thinned stands produced up to 8% more cumulative total volume (including thinnings) to age 88 than did the unthinned stands. However, there was no clear relationship between cumulative yield and thinning intensity. • At a rotation age of 88 years, the unthinned stands had up 26% more total volume available for final harvest than did the thinned stands. • The entire-stand quadratic mean dbh was up to 14% larger in the thinned than in the unthinned stands, however crop-tree (247 largest-diameter trees per hectare) quadratic mean dbh was similar for both thinned and unthinned stands at age 88. In 1959, a second thinning experiment was initiated adjacent to the first one on East Thurlow Island (Adamovich, 1962). A Garrett Tree Farmer skidder was used for log extraction. This operation was also abandoned due to financial challenges faced by the contractor. One of the factors contributing to this failure was the lack of a road system for moving the wood to the shoreline. Skidding distances averaged 610 m and turn times averaged one hour. During the 1970s many B.C. coastal forest companies embarked on commercial thinning programs. British Columbia Forest Products Ltd., Canadian Forest Products Limited, MacMillan Bloedel Limited, Crown Zellerbach Inc., and Rayonier Canada Ltd. all conducted trials. Intensive forest management was promoted for its perceived ability to increase the yield of second growth forests and forest companies were provided with stumpage incentives (Section 88 of the Forest Act) to embark on programs that included spacing of juvenile stands, planting to higher densities that would allow future commercial thinning entries, and commercial thinning programs. MacMillan Bloedel's intensive forest management program, called "The Designed Forest", was projected to increase the yield of second-growth forests by up to 40% through aggressive stand density management. The management regime included accelerated planting schedules, spacing of naturally established juvenile stands, double entry commercial thinning programs, and fertilization of high site managed forests (Ainscough, 1981). MacMillan Bloedel initiated commercial thinning activities at five logging divisions on the east side of Vancouver 5 Island and in the Powell River area to refine techniques to be applied under the Designed Forest program. Scandinavian equipment and expertise were imported to accelerate the progress and eventually local contractors modified their equipment and the concepts to become very effective at commercial thinning. In 1974, Crown Zellerbach conducted thinning trials on a 43-year-old Douglas-fir/western hemlock stand on Quadra Island using both ground-based and cable systems (Leslie, 1974). Operational productivity, site and stand impacts, and lumber recovery factors for a sample of the logs harvested were monitored during the trial. Logging costs for the ground-based trial were $95/cunit ($34/m3); however, production costs for operational thinning were expected to drop to $50/cunit ($18/m3). Residual tree wounding levels of 50% were observed and a lumber recovery factor of 5 bf/cf (177bf/m3) was achieved on the sawmill run. Forest industry support of commercial thinning lasted from 1975 to 1981 when a severe forest industry recession caused most companies to abandon their intensive forest management programs (especially on public tenures). One of the factors limiting economic viability of commercial thinning on the B.C. coast is the lack of appropriate conversion facilities to manufacture the logs into products that capture the potential value. Few small log sawmills or veneer plants existed on the coast in the 1970s so most of the thinning logs were pulped. Many of the coastal pulp mills even lacked the appropriate equipment to competitively debark and process small logs. Surprisingly, this situation has changed little in the past 25 years. During the 1980s commercial thinning in coastal B.C. forests seldom exceeded 50 hectares per year (except for 1986 and 1988 when it approached 200 ha/year) (Simons Reid Collins, 1996). However in the early 1990s interest was renewed due to a combination of strong product demand and eroding access to traditional fiber sources. One significant commercial thinning program launched in the early 1990s was initiated by the Campbell River Forest District of the B. C. Ministry of Forests with an annual harvest of 40 000 m3. This program was carried out through Small Business Forest Enterprise Program with sales granted to operators on the Sayward Forest. In 1938, 35 000 hectares of this 150 000 hectare forest burned and regenerated, both hrough planting and natural seed-in, to predominantly Douglas-fir. One objective of this thinning 6 program was to extend the rotation of a portion of this forest in order to even out the fiber flow to maintain the economy of the region. Unfortunately most of these commercial thinning activities on the coast stopped with the onset of the latest forest industry recession in 1997. Recently the concept of partial cutting has gained the interest of three British Columbia forest companies for reasons that are not entirely economic. Since 1998 MacMillan Bloedel Limited, TimberWest Forest Limited, and Canadian Forest Products Ltd. have announced new forest management policies that will reduce, or eliminate, their use of clearcut harvesting practices. These new partial cutting initiatives are being adopted to reduce marketplace criticisms even though many questions concerning the operational, economic, ecological, biological, and social aspects of partial cutting have yet to be answered. The intention of this thesis is to examine and discuss some of the operational and economic factors. 7 2 OBJECTIVES This thesis examines the partial cutting of British Columbia coastal second-growth forests in two parts. Part I involves a case study of four treatments with differing residual stand densities and harvesting systems and Part II contains an economic analysis with models using case study data. The specific objectives of the thesis are: 2.1 Parti: Partial Cutting Case Study 2.11 Productivity Study • To evaluate productivity, cost and factors influencing combinations of cable and ground-based harvesting systems. • To document the effectiveness of falling, and yarding techniques for the treatments. 2.12 Site and Stand Impact Assessment • To document extent, severity, and causes of post-harvest site disturbance, wind damage, and residual tree wounding. 2.2 Part II: Economic Analysis • To compare the net present value of seven harvesting strategies. These harvesting strategies include: three ages for clearcuts and four residual stand densities for partial cuts (450, 300, 200 and 100 trees/ha). • To determine the financial consequences of residual tree wounding for partial cuts at final harvest age using net present value analysis, and • To discuss the potential to use Multiple Account Benefit-Cost Evaluation to compare the socio-economic implications of different harvesting options. 8 3 M E T H O D S 3.1 Parti: Partial Cutting Case Study 3.11 Site and Stand Descriptions The 48-hectare study block, located on private land owned by MacMillan Bloedel Limited, is situated near the community of Port McNeill on Vancouver Island. The biogeoclimatic subzone for this area is Coastal Western Hemlock sub-montane very wet maritime (CWH vml) (Green and Klinka 1994). Using the Canadian Pulp and Paper Association's terrain classification system (Mellgren, 1980), the study block is characterized with a ground strength of Class 3, a ground roughness of Class 2, and a slope of Class 1. The flat terrain on the study block made the cable harvesting less than optimum, and rigged back spar trees were necessary on all yarding corridors. Corridors longer than 200 m (5 of 28) required intermediate support trees. Although a number of large, sound, red cedar stumps from the previous harvest were dispersed throughout study block they did not present any significant obstacles to yarding, in fact they were preferred as rigging anchor stumps whenever possible. The stand regenerated naturally following cable logging in 1941 and 1944, and evolved to a pre-harvest stand composition of approximately 80% western hemlock {Tsuga heterophylla), 15% amabilis fir {Abies amabilis), 4% Sitka spruce {Pica sitchensis) and 1% western red cedar {Thuja plicata) by basal area. Table 1 illustrates pre-harvest stand conditions for the entire study block and by the individual treatment areas. The summary statistics for the treatment areas were obtained Table 1. Pre-harvest Stand Statistics Treatment area Density (trees/ha) Basal area (m2/ha) Volume (m3/ha) Average live crown ratio Average height to diameter ratio Site Index for western hemlock (m @ 50 yr) Control area 1678 79.0 1022 29.0 91.6 32 Cable thinning 1656 69.3 872 21.1 96.7 31 Ground-based SW100 1433 66.7 860 19.7 96.2 31 Cable SW200 1111 69.5 926 27.1 82.2 32 Cable SW300 956 84.1 1150 30.2 75.3 33 Entire study block 1650 70.0 950 n.a. n.a. 33 9 from detailed cruising of permanent sample plots established in each area, while the data for the entire study site were provided from an operational cruise representing the entire block (live crown and height-diameter ratios were available only for the PSPs). For the overall study site, pre-harvest density was 1650 trees/ha, basal area was 70 m2/ha, and volume was 950 m3/ha. The average site index for the block is 33 m based on western hemlock at 50 years breast height age (BHA). Figure 1 illustrates pre-harvest stand conditions on one of the treatment units. The graphs presented in Figures 2 and 3 illustrate stock and stand table data compiled from the operational cruise. 3.12 Treatment Descriptions The block was subdivided into five compartments (Figure 4). A control area was to remain untreated, two compartments were to be thinned to a residual stocking of 450 trees/ha using two different harvesting methods, and two other units were to be thinned as uniform shelterwood Figure 1. Pre-harvest second-growth stand on the SW300 treatment area. 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 DBH Class (cm) • S. Spruce • A. Fir • Hemlock • Cedar Figure 2. Stand table graph for study area (min dbh recorded - 12.5 cm). re E 3 O > 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 DBH Class (cm) • S. Spruce • A. Fir • Hemlock • Cedar Figure 3. Stock table graph for study area (min dbh recorded - 12.5 cm). 11 Bear Creek • Road Cable yarding corridor | Control | Commerical thinning cleanup (ground-base) | Cable commercial thinning | Ground-based SW-100 Cable SW-300 1 Cable SW-200 | Feathered edge Reserve area Landing 12 treatments of 200 and 300 trees/ha residual density. Final harvest for all four partial cuts was proposed at a breast height age of 73 years (20 years following treatment). A major wind event occurred part way through the experiment and the density prescriptions for all the treatment units were subsequently modified. The ground-based commercial thinning unit, which was only partially felled prior to the wind storm, was changed from 450 trees/ha commercial thinning to a 100 trees/ha uniform "shelterwood (now SW100). The cable thinning area, prescribed at 450 trees/ha, was partially harvested before the storm. It was partitioned into 2 two sub-units following the storm, one requiring windfall recovery and the other requiring both log and windfall recovery. Ground-based harvesting equipment was used on both sub-units for the final harvesting and cleanup activities. Post-harvest densities on all treatment units were lower than those initially prescribed due to the windfall. 3.13 Harvest ing System and Equipment Descriptions The primary harvesting system selected for the cable treatments was a standing skyline cable system using a Diamond D210 swing yarder and a Maki II motorized slack pulling carriage (Figure 5). Narrow skyline corridors (3-4 m wide) were located between 30 and 40 m apart, depending on the location of back spar trees. A small Linkbelt hydraulic log loader (Figure 6) was used to align and bunch logs prior to cable yarding. The loader initially traveled along the skyline corridors pulling individual logs into piles behind it as the machine advanced. Later the loader moved through the inter-corridor areas building small bunches aligned to the adjacent corridors in herringbone patterns. The intention of pre-bunching was to reduce residual tree damage from lateral yarding and to improve yarder productivity by increasing turn payload and reducing cycle time. Logs yarded to the roadside were moved by a Ranger 667 rubber-tired grapple skidder (Figure 7) to roadside decks. These decks were sorted according to five grades. A self-loading highway-sized log truck then transported the logs as pure grade-classified bundles to either the sortyard or booming ground. Although the cable system was considered to be the most appropriate method for harvesting because of site disturbance concerns (high rainfall and deep organic soil layers), MacMillan Bloedel wanted to test the feasibility of a ground-based thinning system. Therefore, one area 13 Figure 5. Diamond D210 swing yarder with M a k i II motorized carriage. was assigned a combined excavator-forwarding/grapple-skidding treatment for comparison with the cable system. The intention was to test a small area of the treatment with the ground-based system, and if successful, complete the remaining treatment area with this system. If unsuccessful, the remainder of the area would be cable harvested. Two falling methods were used on the study block. Manual falling was used for the two treatment areas with the highest residual densities and a Timbco 415 feller-processor equipped with a Pierce 220 head (Figure 8) was used on the two uniform shelterwood areas. The manual fallers, employees of the cable thinning contractor, had extensive experience with all aspects of commercial thinning. The feller-processor was contracted directly by MacMillan Bloedel to test its application for second growth partial cutting. The operator of the Timbco, although experienced with hydraulic excavator-based machinery, was new to mechanical falling in a partial cut. 14 Figure 6. Hydrau l i c loader pre-bunching logs for yarder . 3.14 Pre-Harvest Surveys and Development The following pre-harvest surveys and development activities were undertaken to collect baseline data and to prepare for harvesting activities: 1. Initial block reconnaissance: In July 1996 a reconnaissance survey and a pilot cruise of the proposed block were undertaken to characterize the stand and identify boundary locations for the treatment compartments. The pilot cruise involved the establishment of 14 prism plots (BAF 7) and provided an overview of stand composition and a sampling error that was used to determine the sample size for a subsequent operational cruise. 2. Windthrow hazard assessment: In August 1996 a contractor was hired to appraise the study block for windthrow potential and to suggest management strategies for the treatment units. Four site attributes were considered: topographic exposure, soil characteristics, stand characteristics, and existing windthrow patterns. A summary report detailed the findings and recommendations of the windthrow hazard assessment (Mitchell, 1996). 3. Block layout and boundary location: MacMillan Bloedel engineering crews located, traversed, and mapped the block boundaries, treatment unit split lines, riparian buffers, wind protection buffers, and haul road locations. Figure 8. T imbco 415 harvester falling on the SW200 treatment unit. 16 4. Operational cruise: During July and August of 1996 an operational cruise was conducted with 30 fixed-radius plots (5.64 m in radius or 0.01 ha in area) systematically located on a grid pattern over the study block. The plot data were given to a consultant1 for compilation and the resulting cruise summary was used to designate thinning treatment units and to prepare the cutting permit application. 5. Permanent sample plot establishment: During August 1996 five permanent sample plots (PSPs) were established and surveyed, one in each treatment unit. The plots were located by randomly selecting a distance between 50 and 150 m along the longest diagonal vector between block corners and referenced to the block boundaries. The plots were 30 m square with the sides aligned in north, east, south and west directions. Plastic pins mark each corner and each corner pin was witnessed by two blazed trees located outside the plot. Every tree within the plot with a dbh greater than 10 cm was numbered and tallied by species, crown class, and defect condition. The four PSPs in the blocks that were harvested (not the control) were re-surveyed after harvesting and will be re-measured again in 5 years to collect growth and yield response data. Appendix I includes an example of the pre- and post-harvest data for Plot 4 (SW300 Block) and an enclosed CD rom disk contains spreadsheet files of all the pre-an post-harvest data collected. Although the topic of growth and yield is not developed further in this thesis the PSP data is included in the event that other researchers may wish to reference the plots for future study. 6. Road reactivation and construction: Because the railroad grades used for the first harvest were still evident in the study block (Figure 9), and appropriately located for the thinning entry, they were rebuilt for truck access. The road rebuilding was monitored to determine costs. Fallers cleared right-of-way trees, and an excavator removed any stumps from the running surface and spread gravel delivered from a nearby pit. MacMillan Bloedel also used its vibratory compactor on the roads to set them up for immediate use. Later in the Spring of 1997 a section of new road was built to access the SW100 and SW300 blocks instead of rebuilding another section of railroad grade. Again the equipment use and gravel delivery required to construct this section of road were monitored for development costs. Simons Reid Collins (a Division of H.A. Simons Ltd.) were contracted to compile the cruise plot data to ensure it was summarized in a format compatible for B.C. Ministry of Forests Cutting Permit Application. 17 Figure 9. Or ig ina l rai lroad grade from first harvest. 7. Tree marking: Initially there was no intention to mark residual trees on the treatment areas as the hand fallers were experienced with tree selection criteria. However, when the decision was made to test the feller-processor, two small sample areas in the uniform shelterwood treatments were marked as a reference for the operator to gauge inter-tree spacing and leave tree characteristics. The areas marked were 1 and 0.5 ha in the shelterwood 200 and 300 units respectively. This small marking trial also provided an estimate of tree marking costs. 8. Skyline corridor location: The corridors were established by the harvesting contractor using the following steps: • Walked the boundary location selecting large diameter trees (> 45 cm dbh) that were approximately 40 m apart to use as back spars. Hemlock backspars were preferred, however some amabilis firs were used if no suitable hemlock could be found. 18 • Ran a compass bearing from the back spar to intersect the haul road at 90 degrees. The surveyor walked the bearing painting red dots on both the front and the back of the trees along the proposed corridor until he reached the road. • Felled all trees 1.5 m on either side of the proposed corridor. Usually 2 fallers worked on each corridor, one starting at the tail tree and the other starting in the middle. Both fallers progressed towards the road, dropping the trees with butts aligned towards the road. 3.15 Harvest Moni to r ing 1. Production data collection: The Port McNeill accounting office assigned unique block numbers to each of the four treatment units. Logs from each treatment unit were sorted, decked and hauled in homogeneous loads. The truck driver recorded the block designation number for the origin of each load allowing the scaling process to track production volumes by specific treatment unit. In 1997, five log sorts were generated from the test block (small pulp, chip-n-saw, gang, small sawlog, and balsam peeler). However, when logging resumed in 1998 the small pulp and chip-n-saw sorts were combined. The contractor was asked to sort the logs at the harvest site to avoid the $9/m3 expense of processing the thinning production through the dryland sortyard. The production was weighed and sample loads were scaled to provide a volume to weight conversion factor. The weighed loads were delivered directly to the booming ground. The balsam peeler sort, however, was delivered to the sortyard. Although balsam peelers were a small component of the overall production, the sort had relatively high value, and it could be packaged with the Divisional balsam peeler production. The scaled production volumes for each treatment unit were later used to determine harvest phase productivity. Machine rates for the equipment monitored were determined using a machine costing spreadsheet (Appendix II). Input data for the spreadsheet were acquired from multiple sources including equipment dealers, equipment contractors, and personal knowledge. These calculated rates reflect general owning and operating cost for equipment, however they do not include supervision, equipment mobilization, or profit allowances and therefore may differ from actual rates paid to the contractors working on the study. Production costs were then determined by multiplying machine productivity by the appropriate machine rates. 19 2. Hand falling productivity: Shift level data were collected for the fallers working on the cable commercial thinning block. Scheduled hours of work were subdivided into productive and delay categories. Delays included weather, mechanical, personal, and meeting times. Some hand falling activity occurred on the ground-based area during the spring of 1997 and was monitored at the shift level. However, the majority of the ground-based block was felled during the summer of 1998 with no on-site shift level monitoring, so falling times were acquired from contractor time records. Scaled volumes were used to determine falling productivity rates. 3. Mechanical falling productivity: The Timbco 415 feller-processor used for both shelterwood areas had its own onboard computer that tracked machine usage and volumes processed. The operator provided printouts from the onboard computer on a daily basis and explained the reasons for any machine delays that were recorded. Although the computer also provided production volumes, accuracy was questionable so again log scale data were used to calculate the mechanical falling productivity rates. 4. Loader forwarding productivity: Shift level timing was done for the hydraulic log loader while bunching logs in the cable thinning, SW200, and SW300 blocks. Scheduled machine hours and delay times for each shift were recorded by the researcher on site. When operations resumed in 1998, shift level data provided by the contractor were used to determine productivities for the SW100 block and the windfall cleanup work. 5. Cable yarding productivity: Both detailed and shift-level timing techniques were used to monitor cable yarding activities on three study blocks (cable thinning, SW200, and SW300). A hand-held datalogger was used for detailed timing of individual yarding cycle elements over different yarding distances and rigging configurations (with and without intermediate skyline supports). Shift-level data were collected using a Servis recorder mounted on the cable yarder. In-shift delays and daily log counts were noted on the Servis recorder charts by the machine operator. The crew's work cycle included 10 consecutive 8-hour shifts followed by 4 days off. Production volume was acquired from the scale records for each block. 6. Skidding and sorting productivity: A rubber-tired grapple skidder was used to forward logs from the yarder and sort them along the haul road. Although the skidder was needed to 20 manage the landing pile, it was underutilized while servicing only one yarder. No timing data were recorded for the skidder and shift lengths recorded for the yarder were applied to the skidder. 7. Hauling productivity: Because the log truck could also out-produce the yarding equipment, it was only required to service the block intermittently. Costing assumptions for the hauling were based on truck productivity when it worked for complete shifts in the thinning and those productivities were extrapolated over the total production. 3.16 Post-Harvest Surveys 1. A network of fixed radius plots (5.64 m, or 0.01 ha) was systematically established on each of the treatment units. A plot location grid was initialized using a random compass bearing and a random distance from the block boundary to the first plot center in each treatment. Subsequent plot centers were located at 50 m intervals along the randomly selected bearing and subsequent grid lines were parallel to, and offset 75 m from, the original bearing. The same plots were used to survey for post-harvest wind damage, residual volume, site disturbance and tree wounding. Immediately following the completion of all harvesting and windfall recovery on the treatment units in October 1998, a combined survey was initiated to measure residual tree volumes, site disturbance, and tree wounding. 2. Wind Damage: As already mentioned, the risk of post-harvest windthrow was a concern and a hazard assessment was conducted prior to allocating treatment blocks. The target residual densities of harvesting treatments were assigned to reflect the risk associated with stand characteristics and wind exposure within the study block. Despite the precautions taken, a severe storm occurred in December 1997 that caused extensive wind and snow damage to the entire study block. In March 1998, four of the five treatment areas were surveyed for wind damage using the fixed-radius plot grid established for the post-harvest surveys. The area that was initially assigned as a ground-based commercial thinning with 450 residual trees/ha was not surveyed: it was only partially felled at the time of the storm and any relationship between windfall severity and residual density would be difficult to determine. In addition, data collected from both the commercial thinning cable block (450 trees/ha) and the control block (1650 trees/ha — untreated) would reflect the residual densities of the partially-felled 21 ground-based treatment. Al l trees located in, or originating from, each plot were measured for volume and categorized as undamaged, overturned, leaning, or broken topped. A compass bearing indicating the direction of each overturned or leaning tree was also recorded. 3. Residual Volume: Residual volumes were determined from the measurement of the diameter at breast height (DBH) and tree height for all standing trees within the plot with DBH greater than 12.5 cm. Diameters were measured using a diameter tape and heights were measured using a hypsometer (an electronic range finder with trigonometric logic). Any defect that would reduce tree volume was noted on the cruise card and entered into the cruise compilation spreadsheet for subsequent volume deduction. 4. Site Disturbance: The center of each post-harvest survey plot was used to initiate the transect lines for a site disturbance survey. The line-intercept site disturbance survey involved selecting a random compass bearing, chaining along the bearing for 15 m from the plot center, and noting the surface soil condition at each one-meter interval along the chain. The random bearing was then incremented by 90 degrees in a clockwise direction and the procedure was repeated. Thirty observations were recorded at each plot. The surface soil condition at each observation was classified as one of three categories: 1) undisturbed, 2) disturbed (if evidence indicates a machine or log has traveled over the point), or 3) other (if the point is covered by a log, stump, rock, or root wad). Disturbed points are further described by three criteria: l)evidence of machine traffic, 2) presence or absence of mineral soil, and 3) depth of impression. For this report, the data were summarized by the following three disturbance classifications: • undisturbed (includes points classified as "other" when no evidence of machine travel is present), • lightly disturbed (organic soil scuffing but no soil impression depth), and • disturbed (mineral soil exposure and/or measurable soil impression depth). 22 Each disturbance classification was reported as a percentage of total points observed by treatment and an "area disturbed" (hectares) was determined by multiplying the proportion of "disturbed" observations by the treatment area. In addition to the in-block disturbance, the area disturbed for harvesting access was also measured. All of the roads and landings on the study block were measured for length and width. Measurements were taken at 10 m intervals along the roads to record both running surface and cleared right-of-way width. The cross-sectional measurements were averaged for each road section and multiplied by the lengths to determine overall area cleared for road access and area removed from growing site as surfaced road. 5. Tree Wounding: Residual stand damage was sampled on all harvested treatment areas using the post-harvest survey grid described earlier. Al l trees in each plot were inspected for damage; species, DBH, and wound descriptors were recorded. Wound descriptors included: • area of scar (cm ) determined from average length and width measurement, • location of scar (i.e., root or height on the tree bole above germination point), and • type of scar characterized by depth of injury (i.e., bark removed or sapwood gouged). A wound classification spreadsheet was developed by the author to summarize tree damage data. Wounding data for individual trees were entered into the spreadsheet for classification into one of five categories (none, light, moderate, severe, and mortal wounding) based on cumulative scores resulting from the severity of the three scar descriptors. Appendix II contains an example of the wound severity classification spreadsheet. 3.2 Part II: Economic Analysis Conventional economic comparisons between partial and clearcut alternatives consistently favor the latter due the focus on financial factors. This thesis investigates the economics of partial cutting from three aspects to broaden the scope of factors considered when comparing benefits between the two methods. The first compares net present value (NPV) between 3 clearcut and 4 partial cutting scenarios. The second analyses the financial consequence of residual tree 23 wounding resulting from partial cutting operations, and finally the third discusses Multiple Account Analysis (MAA) and its application to partial cutting benefit/cost analysis. 3.21 Financial Analysis Comparing Clear and Partial Cut Alternatives Two computer-based models were used to explore the economic issues of commercial thinning and their sensitivity to residual stand density and harvest timing. A stand growth model know as "The Stand and Tree Integrated Model" (STIM) (Bonnor et al., 1995) was used to generate stand tables for the treatment options. The stand tables were then used as inputs to an Excel spreadsheet model developed by the author to determine the net present value (NPV) of the seven harvesting scenarios. Seven scenarios are analyzed, three clearcut and four partial cut harvests. The four partial cut scenarios illustrate the effect of residual density on NPV while the three clearcut scenarios illustrate the effect of rotation age on NPV. Both financial and yield culmination ages are calculated for the Port McNeill case study stand and are used in the NPV analysis. 3.22 Economic Significance of Tree Wounding The risk of residual tree wounding during commercial thinning is of grave concern to foresters for two reasons: diminished residual stand health, and reduced product value at final harvest. This thesis explores both of these concerns pertaining to wounding. The stand health issue is explored through a review of published literature and the economic significance of wounding is projected using the NPV spreadsheet developed for harvest scenario evaluation. A provision was incorporated into the spreadsheet logic to degrade logs based on their diameter class grade classification and the level of wounding reported from the harvest scenario. The volume of the prime log grade from each diameter class was degraded to pulp at the same proportion as wound occurrence. Diameter classes that could only provide either pulp, or chip-and-saw and pulp, were not degraded. Wounding levels were varied to test the sensitivity of final harvest value to thinning damage. 3.23 Multiple Account Analysis When conventional benefit-cost analysis techniques are used to justify decisions for commercial thinning, results are seldom favorable (Stone, 1996). Benefit-cost analysis is a structured procedure based on economic principles used to compare a series of economic events or projects. 24 Unfortunately benefit-cost analysis is not well suited to resource-based project ranking because inputs must be provided in monetary units and many of the issues influencing resource-based decisions are more qualitative than quantitative. A second limitation of benefit-cost analysis is that it has difficulty distributing benefits and costs over all the constituents impacted by the project ranking process. This is illustrated by the social and economic conflicts that surround land-use issues in B.C. An alternative to benefit-cost analysis is Multiple Account Analysis (MAA)which was developed in the early 1970s by the U.S. Water Resources Council to consider environmental quality and social effects in combination with financial benefits. In the mid 1980s the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans adopted a M A A framework for the evaluation of its salmonid enhancement program (Shaffer, 1991). Although this thesis will not conduct a multiple account analysis of commercial thinning activity, it will compare this technique to the traditional benefit-cost analysis procedure and present a hypothetical example illustrating how it could be applied to better compare "non-market" values associated with the project. 25 4 RESULTS 4.1 Part I: Partial Cutting Case Study 4.11 Harvest Operations Over the two years in which harvesting occurred, 18 525 m 3 of logs were recovered from the study block (Table 2). The logs recovered from widening of the original railway grades and construction of the new road (845 m3) were tallied separately because they were not harvested with any of the systems prescribed for the treatment units. 4.111 Planning and Development Phases The planning and development phases are typically more expensive for partial cuts than clearcuts because costs are accrued only against the volume harvested, not against the entire block volume that was developed. However, in this case the costs were relatively low at $1.47 and $1.16/m3 for the planning and layout, and road construction phases respectively (Tables 3 and 4). Boundary and buffer layout followed natural block features such as an adjacent creek, a highway, and the perimeter of the dryland sortyard. A riparian reserve area was established along Bear Creek on the east side of the block and feathered boundaries were located on the south and southeast sides of the SW200 and SW300 units for wind protection (Figure 4). The feathered edges were manually felled to a residual density double that of the adjacent treatment block. Table 2. Study Block Production Summary Treatment unit 1997 volume (m3) 1998 volume (m3) Total volume (m3) Right-of-way 845 0 845 Cable thinning 1 890 4 755 6 645 SW100 0 4 025 4 025 SW200 3 103 1 017 4 120 SW300 2 212 678 2 890 Total 8 050 10 475 18 525 26 Table 3. Planning and Layout Cost Summary Participants Tasks Labour Expenses Total cost Production cost ($) ($) ($) ($/m3) FERIC reconnaissance 1 150 450 1 570 0.08 operational cruise 9 100 2 100 11 200 0.60 Consultant windthrow hazard assessment 1 000 1 000 0.05 Port McNeill boundary and road location 5 700 280 5 980 0.32 Division mapping 1 600 300 1 900 0.10 cutting permit preparation 2 200 2 200 0.12 cruise compilation 2 500 2 500 0.13 Millstone yarding corridor layout 940 940 0.05 Total cost 20 690 6 600 27 290 1.47 Road development benefited from the legacy of old railroad grades that were located appropriately for the second harvest. About 1 km of the 1.27 km of road constructed on the block was rebuilt railroad grade which simply involved clearing stumps and placing about 20 cm of gravel surfacing on the old grade. A vibratory compactor was used to set up the new surface for immediate use, however, if there had been time to season the road, vibrating would have probably been unnecessary. Two soft spots developed in the old road during a period of heavy rain and frequent skidder traffic and six truck loads of rock were needed to repair the damage. Otherwise both the new and old road sections stood up well to the demands of the skidder sorting and piling along the right-or-ways. 4.112 Harvesting Phase Falling and Bucking: Both manual and mechanical falling and bucking methods were observed during the study and are summarized in Table 5. Mechanical felling was applied on the SW200 Table 4. Road Development Cost Summary Participants Tasks Time Rates Cost Production cost (h) ($/h) ($) ($/m3) Millstone excavator 72 88 6 336 0.34 skidder 22 63 1 386 0.07 Port McNeill gravel trucks 180 65 11 700 0.63 Division compactor 24 85 2 040 0.11 Total cost 21 462 1.16 27 Table 5. Fa l l i ng : Shift Leve l Product ivi ty Treatment Productive time Felled volume Productivity Hourly cost Production cost (h) (m3) (m3/h) (nvVshift) (stems/h) (stems/shift) ($) (S/m3) Manual falling Commercial thinning 734.5 5 451 7.4 48.2 18 117 64.62 8.71 Manual falling SW100 418.0 3 882 9.3 60.4 na. na. 64.62 6.96 Mechanical falling SW200 204.0 3 102 15.2 98.8 16 108 180.00 11.84 Mechanical falling SW300 210.8 2 212 10.5 68.2 16 106 180.00 17.15 and SW300 blocks (Figure 8) where the machine had wider inter-tree spacing to maneuver, and manual fallers worked the cable commercial thinning and ground-based blocks. Mechanical falling was more costly for 2 reasons: 1) the feller-processor cost $180 per scheduled hour (Table 5) compared to the manual faller at $65/h/faller, and 2) the productivity rates of the feller-processor (15.2 and 10.5 m3/h for the SW200 and SW300 units respectively) were not very different from those for the manual fallers (7.4 and 9.3 m3/h for the commercial thin and SW100 units respectively). In addition to the higher costs for mechanical falling in a partial cutting treatment, other shortcomings were observed with the feller-processor: • Initially there was a significant level of site disturbance and root damage caused by the machine's single grouser track shoes. This problem was noted early in the study and rectified by installing new tracks with less aggressive triple grouser shoes. The operator also modified his technique to place limbs and debris over sensitive areas before walking the machine onto them. • Most of the trees harvested on the two shelterwood areas were selected by the operator. However, restricted visibility of the tree canopies from the machine cab compromised his ability and as a consequence many trees with poor crowns were retained. • The Pierce felling head used on the Timbco harvester was not well-suited for falling clusters of stems on single root systems so most clusters were left standing. When the wind storm 28 occurred in December 1997 almost all of the residual multi-stem clusters blew over due to their large canopy sail area on the single root system. • The technique used to work the falling face was problematic. The operator normally severed trees with the rotating deck positioned at 90 degrees to the travel direction and then swung the house to the right for processing. This allowed the stem to be delimbed and topped in front of the tracks creating a flotation mat. Tipping the felled stems through the canopy of the untreated stand allowed the stem to fall slowly, however when processing started, the felled stem brushed against the standing trees along its path wounding many of the residual trees. This problem was most severe in the SW300 area, which was felled during the peak sap flow season. • The boom of the machine, located on the operator's left side, restricted his vision. Consequently the operator always swung the cut trees to the right for processing and piling. However, this meant that only half of the resulting log bundles were aligned suitably for corridor yarding. If logs on one side of the corridor were aligned with the yarding direction, the ones on the other side would be aligned in the reverse direction. A small hydraulic log loader was needed to realign the processed logs before yarding. This problem could be overcome by modifying the mechanical felling work practices on future cable harvesting treatments. Excavator Forwarding: Over the course of the study, two methods of excavator forwarding were used. On the blocks that were cable harvested, the excavator aligned and piled logs for yarding, while on the SW100 block the excavator moved the logs to roadside or, in some cases, to skid trails. Productivities varied by both residual density and falling practice used (Table 6). Table 6. Excavator Forwarding: Shift Level Productivity Treatment Scheduled time (h) Productive time (h) Volume harvested (m3) Productivity (m3/smh) Productivity (m3/pmh) Production cost ($/m3) Commercial thinning 130.75 108.75 2 141 16.4 19.7 5.05 SW100 153.00 149.00 4 025 26.3 27.0. 3.15 SW200 167.50 156.00 3 102 18.5 19.9 4.47 SW300 204.00 195.00 2 212 10.8 11.3 7.63 29 Of the two manually felled blocks (Commercial thinning and SW100), forwarding was most productive on the SW100 block with fewer residual trees. Similarly on the mechanically felled blocks, the excavator did better with fewer residual trees. This result is logical because the operator must take more care in denser residual stands to avoid wounding trees. As the SW200 and SW300 blocks were forwarded during sap flow season, the need for caution was amplified. The forwarding productivity on the SW300 block was the lowest of the four treatments and this can be attributed to a change in harvesting strategy employed by the contractor as the block was nearing completion. A decision was made to forward all the logs from the last three skyline corridors either to the landing or to the last active yarding corridor to allow both machines to finish at the same time. Although this strategy saved three road changes for the yarder and reduced the cable harvesting costs for the block, the excavator handled more of the volume more often. This resulted in the low productivity for the machine. Cable Harvesting: Harvesting on three of the four treatment units involved cable yarding. The Diamond D210 swing yarder previously described (Figure 5) employed a three person crew including a hooktender/chokersetter, a chaser, and a machine operator. On occasion a second chokersetter would assist the crew. Cable yarding was monitored on the three treatment units using both detailed and shift level timing techniques. Table 7 summarizes the results of shift level monitoring. Overall, the cable yarder spent 89% of the time engaged in productive activities (the combination of times for yarding (71%), and move and rig (18%)). The move and rig element included all the tasks Table 7. Cable Yarding: Shift Level Time Distribution Time Commercial thinning SW200 SW300 Weighted overall average (%) (h) (%) (h) (%) •(h) (%) Scheduled time (h) 251.25 100 279.8 100 197.5 100 100 Mechanical delays (h) 6 2.4 0.25 0.1 4 2.0 1.4 Weather delays (h) 0 0.0 12 4.3 10.75 5.4 3.1 Rigging delays (h) 9 3.6 8.3 3.0 11.75 5.9 4.0 Operating delays (h) 6 2.4 11.95 4.3 2 1.0 2.7 Moving and rigging (h) 50 19.9 44.8 16.0 35.5 18.0 17.9 Yarding (h) 180.25 71.7 202.50 72.4 133.50 67.6 70.9 30 associated with moving from one yarding corridor to the next, including: moving and anchoring the yarder, rigging the lift trees (back and intermediate spars), and stringing the working lines on the new corridor (skyline, haulback and mainline). This time element averaged 4.7 hours per move over the 28 corridor changes observed on the three treatment units. The largest non-productive shift element was rigging delays (4%) which included the time required to splice broken or worn running lines and eyes, replace chokers, or reposition haulback or lift tree blocks (not corridor changes). The weather delays that occurred in the two shelterwood blocks (3% of scheduled hours) were either whole or part days when winds were too high for the crew to work safely under the residual trees. The yarder had good mechanical availability (98.6%) reflecting the fact that it was new when it arrived at the study block. Most of the mechanical delay time was contributed by small breakdowns to the Maki motorized carriage. Cable harvesting productivity ranged widely between the commercial thinning and shelterwood blocks (7.52 and 11.2 m 3 per scheduled hour, respectively) (Table 8). Three reasons explain this variation: 1) the average piece size on the commercial thinning block was the smallest at 0.25 m 3 compared with 0.34 and 0.27 m 3 on the SW200 and SW300 blocks, respectively, 2) less volume per hectare was removed from the commercial thinning block requiring more frequent corridor changes for the yarder, and 3) in the SW300 unit the log loader bunched more logs along fewer corridors allowing the crew to avoid three corridor changes. Some of the yarding cost reduction achieved in the SW300 area was offset by a higher excavator forwarding cost (Table 6). Table 9 summarizes the results of 553 cycles that were timed in detail using a hand held data logger. The results are presented by treatment and by the number of chokersetters working during the observation period. The number of chokersetters was one or two as other employees Table 8. Cable Y a r d i n g : Shift Leve l Product ivi ty and Cost Scheduled time Productive time Volume harvested Pieces harvested Productivity Production cost Treatment (h) (h) (m3) (no.) (m3/smh) (m3/pmh) (pieces/pmh) ($/m3) Commercial thinning 251.25 180.25 1 890 7 597 7.52 10.49 42.15 33.10 SW200 279.8 202.5 3 103 9 130 11.09 15.32 45.09 22.45 SW300 197.5 133.5 2 212 8 189 11.20 16.57 61.34 22.23 31 would assist when time was available. Average cycle times varied between 5 and 7 minutes and were most dependent on yarding distance. Yarding turns averaged 6 pieces. Using the detailed timing data for the SW300 area (Table 9), the following shift level productivity is estimated: • Turns per Productive Shift: (8h * 60 min) / 5.16 min = 93 • Pieces per Productive Shift: 93 turns * 6 pieces per turn = 558 • Volume per Productive Shift: 558 pieces * 0.27 m 3 per piece = 151 m 3 • Volume per Scheduled Shift: 151m 3* 67.6% = 102 m 3 The actual productivity for the SW300 area (Table 7) was 11.2 m 3 per scheduled hour (90 m 3 per scheduled shift). Projecting the detailed timing data results in overestimating actual production by 13%. Even though detailed timing results often overestimate when used to extrapolate production outcomes, they do indicate the relative proportion of individual elements to overall cycle times and this can be useful for analysis of alternative scenarios. One question that arose during this study was whether or not a second chokersetter was of economic benefit. "Lateral Out" and "Hook" are the cycle elements affected directly by adding a second chokersetter. Using the Table 9. Cable Y a r d i n g : Detailed T i m i n g Results Commercial thinning SW200 SW300 Chokersetters (no.) 1 2 1 2 1 2 Cycles (no.) 151 54 120 84 65 79 Ave. pieces (no./turn) . 6 6 6 6 6 6 Ave. yarding distance (m) 91 265 93 91 131 156 Ave. time/cycle Unhook(min) 0.69 1.38 0.71 0.55 0.63 0.65 Outhaul (min) 0.79 0.94 0.86 0.84 0.78 0.70 Lateral out (min) 0.60 0.69 0.53 0.49 0.27 0.34 Hook (min) 1.10 0.76 1.66 1.20 1.71 1.70 Lateral in (min) 0.69 0.81 0.74 0.61 0.40 0.57 Inhaul (min) 1.28 2.27 1.30 1.23 1.37 1.36 Total cycle (min) 5.15 6.85 5.80 4.92 5.16 5.32 32 detailed timing results for the SW200 block in Table 9, the combined cycle element decrease was 0.5 minutes (or 23%). This added efficiency should reduce the overall cycle time from 5.8 minutes to 5.3 minutes, which in turn should provide 7 additional cycles per shift (or 42 logs and 14.3m more per shift). The incremental labor cost for this added volume is approximately $240, or $16.78/m3. When compared with the average yarding cost of $22.45/m3 (Table 8) the incremental production provided by a second chokersetter is of economic benefit. The cycle time improvements provided by a second chokersetter on the commercial thinning and SW300 blocks appear less beneficial and this may be explained in part by the longer "Lateral Out" cycle elements in both blocks. These in turn resulted because a second chokersetter was not usually added until yarding activities approached the back end of the yarding corridors, and if the corridors radiated from a landing (as in the SW300 block) lateral yarding distances increased towards the back end. Skidding and Sort ing: The skidding and sorting phases of this study were not observed in detail other than to tally the operating shifts for the machine. The machine cleared logs from the landing area and sorted them into 5 grades for decking along the haul roads. The operator had time available to trim broken logs in the decks, relieve the yarder engineer, and assist the rigging crew with corridor changes. Although the Ranger 667 grapple skidder was larger than necessary, it was probably more cost effective than using a small log loader to perform a similar function. Using a log loader would have enabled the use of a less expensive conventional truck (rather than a self-loading truck), however both the sorting and trucking would become less effective as continuous hauling would be necessary to keep the landing area clear for the other equipment. The tallied hours for the skidder at a rate of $62.59 per scheduled hour (Appendix II) were applied against delivered log volumes to determine skidding and sorting phase costs for each treatment area (Table 10). The wide range of skidding and sorting costs ($3.44 to $8.25/m3) reflect the productivity of the harvest system feeding the skidder, not the productive capability of the skidder. 33 Loading and Hauling: A self-loading highway-sized log truck (Figure 10) was used to deliver logs from the study block to either the sortyard or the booming ground. As the truck was capable of delivering over 200 m per shift while the yarder usually produced less than 100 m per shift, hauling occurred on an intermittent schedule. Because the truck loaded from pre-sorted decks, it had no direct connection with the yarding phase and frequently hauling shifts were scheduled during the off days for the rigging crew to minimize traffic congestion on the block. The truck driver recorded the sort description and treatment block origin of each load hauled and these data were combined with the scale summaries to provide the treatment production volumes presented in Table 4. Hauling productivity was not monitored directly due to the intermittent and independent truck schedule used for this phase. Instead, an average hauling productivity of 20.6 m 3 per scheduled hour was calculated by dividing the total volume hauled (18 525 m3) by 112 hauling shifts (896 hours) and applied against an hourly cost of $91.07 (Appendix II) to yield an average hauling cost of $4.40/m3. The same average hauling cost was applied to each treatment unit (Table 10). Overall Harvest Costing: Table 10 illustrates the overall harvesting costs for the four treatment units as determined using the production data and machine costs derived from a costing template (Appendix II). The costs presented are not the actual costs incurred by the harvesting contractors or MacMillan Bloedel, and they pertain only to initial harvesting activities, not windthrow recovery. Some of the phase costs (i.e., falling and cable yarding) presented in Table 10 vary Table 10. Production Cost Summary by Treatment Harvesting phase Commercial thinning ($/m3) SW100 ($/m3) SW200 ($/m3) SW300 ($/m3) Planning 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 Road development 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 Falling & bucking 8.71 6.96 ' 11.84 17.15 Excavator forwarding 5.05 3.15 4.47 7.63 Yarding 33.10 n.a. 22.45 22.23 Skidding/sorting 8.25 3.44 5.64 5.59 Loading/hauling 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 Ground man 0.00 1.69 0.00 0.00 Total 62.09 22.22 51.38 59.58 34 Figure 10. Self-loading logging truck. widely between blocks. As previously discussed, the largest variation appears in the falling and yarding phases and this reflects the use of two different falling methods (manual and mechanical). Although the category of "Ground Man" appearing at the bottom of Table 10 is not a harvest phase, it identifies an additional employee working on the SW100 treatment to assist with operations. The cost is identified separately rather than added to skidding or excavator forwarding so that these 2 phases will remain comparable across all treatments. 4.12 Post-Harvest Stand and Site Damage 4.121 W i n d Damage Some wind damage subsequent to partial cutting is common. The probability of wind damage occurrence is greatest during the first 5 years following harvest (Navratil, 1997). Partially cut stands are more susceptible to wind damage for two reasons. The first reason is the reduction, or elimination, of canopy wind dampening. Wind dampening is very evident in dense second growth western hemlock stands. Dominant trees catch the winds traveling across the top of closed canopies and bend into the crowns of co-dominant and intermediate trees to dissipate the wind energy through the bending of multiple stems and the resisting moment of multiple root systems. Recently thinned stands have substantially reduced crown interaction so residual trees must have adequate mechanical strength in their boles and root systems to resist the wind generated bending moments. The second reason for increased susceptibility to wind damage is 35 the change of the stand canopy from a closed shear plane to a series of wind-trapping sails. These sails include the entire crown of all residual trees instead of only the proportion of dominant crowns extending above the co-dominant trees. From the initiation of this project the wind stability of residual trees was identified as a concern. The windthrow hazard assessment conducted in August 1996 (Mitchell, 1996) identified two endemic windfall patterns on the study block from the orientation of old windfall mounds and root cavities. Storms from both southeasterly and northeasterly directions had overturned trees in the previous forest on this site. Based on the findings of the windthrow hazard assessment the following operational strategies were recommended to reduce wind damage to residual trees: • An unthinned buffer 30 m wide should be left between the log sort yard and the partial cut treatments to reduce wind penetration into the residual stand, • In uniform thinning, removal from below will leave the most windfirm trees on the site. Priority for removal should be given to intermediate and smaller codominant trees rooted on unstable microsites, • Where trees are growing very close together with interlocked or damping crowns, they should be left together or removed together, • Care should be taken during felling to avoid impacts with residual trees, • During mechanical skidding, damage to roots of residual trees is likely because of the surficial rooting on the site. If delimbing is conducted at the stump skidding on a mat of tree limbs could reduce damage to roots. Skidding machinery should be restricted to trails. Rubber tires would likely cause less damage than steel tracks, and cable yarding should cause the least damage, and • Given the predominance of damage from southerly winds, in a stand with uniform soil and stand characteristics, it would be preferable to have the highest removal treatments at the 2 The Windthrow Handbook for British Columbia Forests (Stathers et.al, 1994) defines two types of windthrow: endemic and catastrophic. Endemic windthrow occurs regularly on a small scale in areas of inherently higher risk. Windthrow management is intended to mitigate endemic windthrow risk. Catastrophic windthrow results from infrequent and exceptionally strong winds that cause extensive damage over large areas. 36 north end of the block and the lowest removal treatments at the south end. (While this is the reverse of the current plan, the current plan reflects the lower stand density at the southern end of the unit and the higher windfirmness of individual trees at the south end.) The first four of these recommendations were incorporated in the harvest plans and operations were modified to partially accommodate the last two recommendations. For example, the ground-based treatment was originally intended to be skidder harvested, but was changed to excavator forwarding to reduce site impacts. Although the final recommendation regarding the relocation of treatment units was not implemented, there were modifications made to the wind protection buffers along the southeast and southwest block boundaries. The buffer widths were expanded from 30 m to 60 m with the inside 20 m of the buffer being feathered to a residual tree density of double that of the adjacent treatment block. Throughout the winter and spring of 1997, as harvesting activity progressed on the commercial thinning cable, SW200 and SW300 blocks, the study area was frequently buffeted by strong winds. On five occassions cable yarding operations were curtailed due to the violent tree crown movement in the vicinity of the rigging crew. Athough a few trees did blow over while the study area was active, the frequency of windfall was not alarming and no surveys were initiated to tally windfall occurrences. Most of the initial windfall occurred adjacent to the roads and was quickly recovered in order to maintain access. Any windfall occurring on the treatment blocks prior to yarding was simply recovered by the rigging crew as they came to it and any occurring after harvesting that was within reach of the skidder's mainline was recovered with no documented frequency. Harvesting was halted at the end of June 1997 due to poor market conditions. At this time both shelterwood blocks were completed, the cable commercial thinning block was felled but only 60% yarded, and the ground-based commercial thinning block was partially felled (35%). Subsequent windthrow occurrence was not recovered or monitored until the study area was hit by a severe storm in December 1997. The storm began with a heavy fall of wet snow that stuck in the tree crowns and was followed by high velocity out-flow winds from a northeasterly direction. Following the storm, extensive wind damage was observed on all treatment areas of the study block and in neighboring stands of second growth. The damaged, which included stem breaks, and leaning and overturned trees (Figure 11), was consistent with descriptions of catastrophic windthrow (Stathers et al., 1994). 37 Figure 11. Wind damage from December 1997 storm. Although this windfall event was discouraging for those involved with the study, it did provide an opportunity to study the implications of thinning treatments on wind stability for these types of stands. A survey was conducted on four of the five treatment areas to quantify the wind damage. The ground-based commercial thin area was not included in the survey as falling was incomplete and residual tree density varied from untreated to 450 trees/ha. In addition, the two residual stocking levels present on this block (untreated and 450 trees/ha) were already being sampled on the control and cable thinning treatments, respectively. Table 11 illustrates the number of trees that were tallied as wind damaged by treatment area. Although all treatments were dramatically affected by the wind, the block least affected was the untreated control with 37% of the surveyed trees being either snapped off or blown over. The wind damage on the Table 11. Trees Damaged by Wind Treatment Plots (no.) Trees measured (no.) Trees blown down (no.) Trees with broken tops (no.) Trees leaning (no.) Undamaged trees (no.) Proportion of trees damaged (%) Control 12 174 8 22 35 109 37.4 Commercial thinning 26 120 34 25 3 58 51.7 SW200 20 46 10 8 0 28 39.1 SW300 18 88 29 16 1 42 52.3 Total 76 428 81 71 39 237 44.6 38 control block reduced the residual volume per hectare by 31% (Table 12). The higher proportion of damage by number of trees rather than by volume suggests that the smaller trees were more susceptible to the wind than the large ones. This result was evident on all four of the treatments surveyed. Field observations also noted that the heaviest damage occurred to intermediate crown class trees with the greatest slenderaess ratio. This result is of value when setting tree selection criteria for thinning second growth hemlock stands. Intermediate crown class stems, whether well rooted or not, present the greatest risk for post-harvest wind damage from both overturning and snapping and should be a primary target for removal. As crown, root, and bole characteristics for trees differ between species, there is a question of whether one species becomes more vulnerable to wind damage than the other species after stand density is reduced. Table 13, which presents data on wind damage by species, illustrates that except for one of the four treatments surveyed, the proportion of hemlock trees damaged exceeded its pre-storm proportion in the stand while the proportions of cedar, amabilis fir and spruce damage was less than pre-storm proportions. Initially it would appear that hemlock may Table 12. Wind Damage Survey Results Projected Over the Treatment Blocks Pre- Pre- Total Post- Proportion Proportion storm storm volume Post-storm storm of trees of volume Treatment density volume damaged density volume damaged damaged (trees/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (trees/ha) (m3/ha) (%) (%) Control 1450 894 274 908 620 37.4 30.6 Commercial thinning 462 415 171 223 244 51.7 41.2 SW200 230 378 117 140 261 39.1 31.0 SW300 489 473 197 233 176 52.4 41.6 Table 13. Trees Damaged by Wind, by Species Pre-storm stand, proportion by species Wind-damaged trees, proportion by species Western Amabilis Sitka Western Western Amabilis Sitka Western Treatment red cedar fir spruce hemlock red cedar fir spruce hemlock (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Control 0.6 5.2 0.0 94.3 1.5 0.0 0.0 98.5 Commercial thin 0.0 15.0 3.3 81.7 0.0 9.7 0.0 90.3 SW200 0.0 23.9 2.2 73.9 0.0 14.3 0.0 85.7 SW300 1.1 17.0 1.1 80.7 0.0 21.7 0.0 78.3 39 have a higher susceptibility to wind damage, however when crown class distribution is also considered hemlock had the highest proportion of intermediate class stems and this probably contributed more to the disproportional wind damage than any physiological difference between species. Although the windthrow hazard assessment had identified two storm directions as potentially damaging to the treatment units, operational precautions were more focused on southeasterly storms because the most susceptible treatments (SW200 and SW300) were exposed from this direction. It was assumed that because storms from the northeasterly direction would have to travel across areas of progressively diminishing tree density, the two shelterwood treatments would also be buffered in this direction. Unfortunately, the northeasterly storm event in December 1997 apparently caused the most damage to all the treatment units. Because no windfall monitoring occurred prior to the December 1997 storm, it was unclear how much wind damage resulted from earlier storms. In an attempt to clarify this, compass bearings were recorded for each blown down and leaning tree surveyed. Table 14 provides a summary of the directional data collected on the wind damage. Tree damage directions within +/- 30 degrees of 200 degrees were tallied as resulting from northeasterly storms and trees with damage directions within +/- 30 degrees of 300 degrees were tallied as resulting from southeasterly storms. Broken topped trees were assumed to have resulted from the northeasterly storm that occurred in December 1997 due to the snow loaded canopies that were unique to this storm. The following observations can be made from the data presented in Table 14: Table 14. Wind Damage, by Direction of Wind Trees blown down Trees leaning Total Total damage Broken wind Treatment NE SE Other NE SE Other tops damage NE SE other (no.) (no.) (no.) (no.) (no.) (no.) (no.) (no.) (no.) (no.) (no.) Control 7 0 1 27 1 7 22 65 56 1 8 Commercial thinning 10 9 15 1 2 0 25 62 36 11 15 SW200 5 1 4 0 0 0 8 18 13 1 4 SW300 3 5 21 0 1 0 16 46 19 6 21 Total 71 191 124 19 48 Proportion 64.9% 9.9% 25.1% 40 • 10% of the damage surveyed on the four treatment units was oriented from a southeasterly direction, and the highest proportion of this damage (18%) occurred in the commercial thinning treatment. • 65% of the damage was oriented from a northeasterly direction, and the highest proportion (45%) occurred in the control area (area most exposed to the storm). The highest proportion of damage in the control area was in the form of leaning trees (42%). This illustrates how crown dampening with a closed canopy dissipates wind forces over multiple stems and reduces wind throw occurrence. • 25% of observed damage was oriented in other miscellaneous directions. Finding miscellaneous windfall direction is not surprising because trees can be pushed sideways by other falling trees. • 37% of all the damaged trees surveyed had broken tops, and if they all resulted from the December 1997 storm, they account for 57% of the total damage observed from this storm. Another observation made during the wind damage survey was the vulnerability of multiple stems growing from a single root system (Figure 12). Falling instructions required that either all stems on a single root system be left standing or be felled, rather than retaining a single stem on Figure 12. W i n d damage to multi-stem cluster on single root systems. 41 the common root system and risking both wind damage and fungal entry through the cut stumps. While this selection requirement was effective for hand falling, it presented a problem for mechanical falling. The feller-processor had difficulty positioning the felling head on stems in close proximity and therefore elected to leave all the multiple stem clumps standing. The increased wind exposure following thinning acted on the combined crowns of the multiple stems to develop more overturning moment than the root systems could resist and most of the multi-stem clumps blew over. Tree selection criteria should target multi-stem cluster for removal in hemlock thinning. I f mechanical feller-processors are employed that cannot deal with clumps safely or productively the areas around the clumps should be left for subsequent falling by hand fallers. I f the treatment objective is for uniform residual stem distribution, it is important that the feller-processor leave a large enough patch surrounding the multi-stem clump for the manual faller to adjust for the appropriate inter-tree spacing once the clump is removed. 4.122 Site Disturbance Site disturbance was measured in two ways. The area in roads and landings was determined from measurements of lengths and widths while the disturbance on the treatment units was sampled using a line-intercept method. Table 15 presents the results of the site disturbance surveys. A l l treatment areas that were harvested were sampled for disturbance while the control and buffer areas were assumed to have no harvest related disturbance. The proportion of samples with light disturbance indicates minor impacts to the organic layer from harvesting activity, but light disturbance is not defined as area disturbed. The SW300 and Commercial Thin treatments have the highest proportion of disturbed area resulting primarily from rehabilitated skid trails. The skid trails were established during the windfall recovery process and deactivated by the hydraulic log loader after the windfall was removed. Although the loader operator did a good job of de-compacting the tire ruts and distributing slash over the trails, the areas affected still met the disturbance criteria of the B . C . Soil Conservation Surveys Guidebook (1997) due to the mixing of organic and mineral soil horizons. These rehabilitated trails appear to be excellent seedbeds for regeneration as they were already covered with hemlock germinants three months following rehabilitation. 42 Table 15. Site Disturbance: Summary of Results Treatment Area (ha) Plots (no.) Undisturbed (%) Light disturbance (%) Disturbed (%) Total (%) Area disturbed (ha) Commercial thinning -cleanup 3.6 7 80.0 8.6 11.4 100.0 0.41 Commercial thinning 8.1 13 81.0 2.6 16.4 100.0 1.33 SW100 9.6 12 81.4 15.6 3.0 100.0 0.29 SW200 7.5 18 65.4 30.0 4.6 100.0 0.35 SW300 7.1 18 65.7 17.4 16.9 100.0 1.20 Control 6.2 0 100.0 0 0 100.0 0 Buffer zones 4.5 0 100.0 0 0 100.0 0 Roads and landings 1.3 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 1.30 Total area 47.9 4.87 Overall disturbance 10.2 When in-block disturbance proportions are extrapolated to estimate area disturbed and then combined with area occupied by roads and lands, the total disturbed area is 4.9 ha, or 10.2% of the block. This level of disturbance seems excessive for treatments that were predominantly cable harvested. What contributed to this level of disturbance? Road occupancy accounts for 2.7%, which is typical and appropriate for the harvest system used. Another 1.5% occurred on the two areas that were harvested with ground-based systems (Commercial Thin Cleanup and SW100), again an acceptable level of disturbance. The remaining 6.0% occurred on treatment units that were initially cable harvested and then re-entered with ground-based equipment to recover windfall. It was during the blowdown cleanup that most of the site disturbance occurred, and more specifically, it resulted from the network of trails used by the rubber-tired skidder to forward loader-bunched windthrow logs to the roadside. It is interesting to note from Table 15 that the SW100 block, the only block completely harvested with ground-based equipment, has the lowest proportion of site disturbance. This occurred for three reasons: 1) the block was manually felled, 2) most of the logs were forwarded to roadside with a hydraulic log loader, which did create light disturbance to the organic layer (15.6% — Table 15), but almost no mineral soil exposure, gouging or rutting, and 3) harvesting occurred at the end of the driest summer Port McNeill has experienced in many years. There was no rainfall recorded seven weeks prior to, or during harvesting. 43 4.123 Tree Wounding Tree wounding occurs whenever bark is displaced exposing the xylem layer and providing an entry court for decay fungi. The risk of fungal infection is influenced by the area and depth of the wound, the height of the wound on the tree bole, and the species of trees retained. Trees compartmentalize wounds by forming barriers that limit the decay column to the tree's diameter at the time of injury. New sapwood formed after the injury is usually not affected by the decay. The vascular cambium of the tree will expand to close the wound through callus formations. After closure, the advance of discoloration and decay ceases (Nevill, 1997). Some tree species have physiological advantages that either reduce the risk, or consequence of wounding. For example lodge pole pine and Douglas-fir trees have the ability to exude pitchy resins over the surface of wounds, sealing the exposed cambium from fungus spore entry. They also have thicker bark that will withstand more mechanical impact than thin-barked species such as western hemlock, amabilis fir, or Sitka spruce (Worthington, 1961). The risk of wounding increases during the spring sap flow season regardless of bark thickness characteristics (Wright and Isaac, 1956). The health and economic viability of a partially cut stands can be compromised by the wounding of residual trees during harvesting. Falling and yarding activities expose residual trees to mechanical impacts from moving trees, logs, or machinery (Aho et al., 1983; Bettinger and Kellogg, 1993; Cline, 1991; Fairweather, 1991; Froding, 1982; Howard, 1995; Kellogg et al., 1986; McNeel et al., 1996; Miles and Burk, 1984; Nichols et al., 1994; Ostrofsky et al., 1986; Sidle and Laurent, 1986; Wright and Isaac, 1956; Worthington, 1961). An objective of this study was to compare residual tree wounding levels between different treatment prescriptions and operational techniques. Unfortunately three unexpected occurrences modified the wound severity on the treatment units and confounded the data to a point that the intended comparisons may be inappropriate. The three confounding events are: 1) working through sap flow, 2) misaligning log bunches during mechanical falling, and 3) recovering 3 Most decay fungi that affect conifer trees are members of the Basidiomycetes and can be categorized as either brown or white rots. Brown rots attack cellulose and hemicellulose, but not lignin, while white rots will attack all three. Both heart- and saprot fungi may cause either white or brown rot. The terms rot and decay refer to wood that has lost mechanical strength due to fungal infection. 44 windthrow damage. However, I believe there is value in discussing the final wounding levels and describing how the unexpected events impacted wound severity so that anyone considering similar partial cutting activities can benefit this knowledge. Harvest operations on the Port McNeill project commenced in January and continued into June of 1997. The onset of sap flow became evident in the last week of March at which time cable yarding operations were active on the commercial thinning block. A decision was made to complete the yarding corridor that was active and then move the operation on to the SW200 block in hopes that the wider inter-tree spacing would reduce the risk of damaging residual trees. When the yarder setup on the first corridor of the SW200 block, which had been mechanically felled and processed, we discovered a substantial planning oversight in the way the log bunches were oriented to the yarding corridors. The harvester had worked a falling face parallel to the yarding corridors and piled logs in a herringbone pattern to the corridor, however only logs on one side of the corridor were aligned correctly for extraction, while logs on the other side of the corridor were facing in the opposite direction for yarding. The rigging crew completed the first corridor incurring severe wounding levels on the residual trees while attempting to turn the misaligned logs with the carriage. Operations were halted while a strategy was developed to deal with the problem. The solution was to realign all the logs on the block using the excavator, and unfortunately this solution had to be applied to the SW300 block as well. Sixty-nine plots were used to quantify wounding levels on 121 residual trees over all the harvested treatment areas (Table 16). Trees were categorized into five levels of wound severity Table 16. Summary of Tree Wound ing Treatment Plots (no.) Trees sampled (no.) No wounding (no.) Light wounding (no.) Moderate wounding (no.) Severe wounding (no.) Mortal wounding (no.) Commercial thinning -cleanup 7 12 1 6 3 0 2 Commercial thinning 13 36 14 8 8 2 4 SW100 12 9 4 4 0 1 0 SW200 19 26 8 8 5 4 1 SW300 18 38 8 9 9 6 6 Total 69 121 35 35 25 13 13 Percentages 100% 28.9% 28.9% 20.7% 10.7% 10.7% 45 based on a classification system that considered wound area, height, and depth (described in Appendix III). Seventy-one percent of the trees surveyed were damaged, and 30% of these damaged trees were wounded severely enough that imminent or eventual mortality is expected. The SW100 and Commercial Thin Cleanup areas were the treatments with the lowest and highest damage levels respectively. Both of these blocks were harvested entirely with ground-based equipment. As the wounding levels observed are higher than expected for the type of operations conducted, what could have contributed to these levels of severity? Although this study cannot quantify how different factors combine to influence wound severity, it can identify three causes. First, both the SW200 and SW300 areas were harvested during the peak sap flow period (April to June) and activities such as mechanical falling, loader forwarding, and cable yarding all had high potential for residual tree contact. The cable yarding phase was the only operation of the three to use tree guards to minimize contact damage. Second, windfall recovery was undertaken on all but the SW100 area (the area with the least wounding) and this re-entry increased the exposure of residual trees to harvesting operations. Third, mechanical processing has a higher potential to • wound residual trees because unprocessed tops are pulled through the standing timber. Although this study set out to quantify wound occurrence following the falling, excavator bunching, and yarding phases for each harvest treatment, the unexpected combination of market and weather related events complicated the wound surveying schedules and confounded the survey results. Table 16 presents a summary of the final wound occurrences by treatment, however there is a question of how much damage resulted from the initial harvest and how much resulted from the combination of the initial harvest and the windthrow cleanup. Unfortunately only one of the 2 completed treatments was surveyed post-harvest and pre-windstorm to allow this comparison. This treatment was the SW300 block (Table 17). Following harvest in 1997, 18 plots were established and 89 trees were measured for wound occurrence. Fifty-two of the 89 trees had some level of wounding (58%). The same plots were re-surveyed in 1998 following wind throw cleanup and only 39 trees remained on the plots and 32 of the remaining trees were wounded (82%). The escalation in the proportion of residual trees wounded occurred because nine previously uninjured trees were injured by either the wind storm or the cleanup harvest. 46 Table 17. Comparison of Tree Wounding Between Post-harvest and Post-windfall Harvest on the SW300 Area 1997 1998 Plot Sample trees Trees with wounds Sample trees Trees with wounds (no./plot) (no./plot) (no./plot) (no./plot) 1-1 7 3 5 2 1-2 1 0 0 0 1-3 5 3 1 1 1-4 9 6 2 2 1-5 4 2 0 0 1-6 2 2 2 2 2-1 5 3 1 1 2-2 7 4 5 4 2-3 1 1 0 0 2-4 3 1 1 1 2-5 1 1 0 0 2-6 4 1 2 1 3-1 8 8 6 6 3-2 10 5 0 0 3-3 6 3 6 4 3-4 4 0 2 2 3-5 6 4 3 3 3-6 6 5 3 3 Total 89 52 39 32 Proportion of trees damaged 58.4% 82.1% 4.2 PartH: Economic Analysis 4.21 Financial Comparison of Harvest Schedules and Intensities Forest harvesting schedules and intensities are influenced by both economic and regulatory factors. Economic factors include product market values and harvest rotation age, while regulatory factors can include rates-of-cut, visual quality, habitat, slope stability, and terms of tenure. Two trends are emerging in coastal B.C. forestry that will influence the economics of forest management substantially: the transition from old- to second-growth harvesting, and the adoption of variable retention harvesting techniques. Although rotational management was of little concern for the scheduling of old-growth harvests, it will become an important factor in the planning of second-growth harvesting. An objective of this thesis is to compare the economic impacts of varying rotation age and harvest intensity in second growth stands using net present value calculations. Seven scenarios, including the four partial cutting treatments prescribed at 47 Port McNeill and three hypothetical clearcuts of varying rotation age, are compared using a stand growth model (STTM)4 and an Excel spreadsheet model for NPV analysis. The spreadsheet model was created to take the stand table data (volume per hectare by diameter class) generated by STTM and distribute it into five log grades based on diameter class. Log market values were then assigned to each of the log grades (pulp, chip and saw, gang, sawlog, and small peeler). The total log value ($/ha) from the harvest was divided by the total volume (m3/ha) to provide an average log value ($/m3) for the harvest scenario. Profit margins (log value minus logging cost) for current harvesting activities are considered at full value while the margins projected for future harvests are discounted by a social discount rate5 to develop NPVs for each future activity. Three decision parameters (discount rate, thin/harvest interval, and thinning method (low/crown)) can be varied to test NPV sensitivity. Spreadsheet reports presented in Appendix IV illustrate this valuation process. 4.211 Rotation Age Determination The optimal rotation age for a forest occurs when stand productivity is maximized. However, maximum stand productivity can be viewed from two perspectives: maximum fiber yield, or maximum financial yield. Culmination age, also referred to as physical rotation age, is the year in which the stand reaches its maximum mean annual increment (MAI). This is determined by dividing the stand's total yield per hectare by its age. Culmination age for any one species is most dependent on site index. Financial rotation age occurs when the net present value of a stand is maximized. Three factors are most influential on financial rotation age: net revenue (product value minus harvest cost), accrued silvicultural investment, and social discount rate. The logic to harvest at culmination age is based on an objective of maximizing the productivity of the growing site while the objective of financial rotation age management is to maximize the productivity of the capital invested in the forest. This thesis illustrates both methods of rotation age 4 "Stand and Tree Integrated Model" (STTM), developed by the Canadian Forest Service, was designed specifically to predict growth for both natural and thinned stands of western hemlock. The model can forecast the growth of a stand of trees from thee different initial conditions: 1) from regeneration, 2) from an existing stand based on a number of stand parameters, and 3) from a tree list. 5 Social Discount Rate is the discount rate measured either by the social opportunity cost or social time preference that is used to calculate the value of the social investment criterion for projects. Social discount rates for forestry projects typically vary between 2 and 6% (Stone, 1993). 48 determination using the Port M c N e i l l stand as an example, and the outcomes of both are used to determine clearcut harvest ages for two of the seven scenarios illustrated with the N P V analysis. Forest economists have used different approaches to calculate the financial rotation age of a stand. Dobie (1966) compares two formulas for determining financial rotation: Faustmann's and Duerr's. Faustmann proposed that financial rotation age occurred when the capital plus interest of the stand, plus the soil rent equaled the net revenue of the stand (Gaffney, 1957). Duerr proposed that financial rotation age occurred when the average marginal value growth per acre of the growing stock, expressed as a percentage, equaled the specified interest rate desired (Duerr, 1960). Dobie used two Douglas-fir stands of similar site index (S.I. 160 and 165 feet at 100 years) and different ages (63 and 86 years) for his comparison. For both stands Duerr's method estimated financial rotation ages about three to four years less than Faustmann's under similar interest rate assumptions (67 and 63 years respectively for an interest rate of 3%). When the interest rate was increased to 5% financial rotation ages dropped to 58 and 52 years respectively. For this thesis, financial rotation age is determined by comparing the N P V of projected clearcut harvest yields over a series of stand ages. The age at which the N P V for the harvest yield is maximized is deemed to be the financial rotation age. S T I M yield projections over a series of age classes were entered into the spreadsheet model to determine average stand values based on the log grade distribution (Appendix IV). Table 18 illustrates the N P V calculation based on the stand valuations by age class. Harvest costs are projected in an inverse relation to average tree size. Five model criteria are user definable: base year, social discount rate, stand establishment cost, road development cost, and log value by grade. Varying each parameter independently illustrates the effect on financial rotation age. Financial rotation age is unaffected by changing the base year, reduced by increasing social discount rate, stand establishment and road development costs, and increased by widening the value spread between low and high grade logs. The projected financial rotation for the Port M c N e i l l study site is 53 years using a 3% social discount rate (Table 18). Coincidentally, this was the stand age when the case study trials were done. S T I M was used to generate a stand level yield report for a stand with similar site index to that of the Port M c N e i l l study site (S.I. 33 for western hemlock at 50 years B H A ) (Table 19). Y ie ld 49 Table 18. Summary of Net Present Value Illustrating Financial Rotation Age Input \ariahles iiiiiifif Log value (S/mJ) ISllfllll^  Base \ear c y, *" J ™ Small peelers s> $8S Social discount late 3 0% Sau logs $80 Stand establishment U M ($'ha) Gam. $64 Road development cost (Vlia) 447 ( hip & saw $58 Pulp •j-54 Total Harvest Merchant- merchant-age able able Average Average Loggin g Net Site Total (BH density volume tree size value cost revenue value NPV years) (trees/ha) (m3/ha) (mVtree) ($/m3) ($/m3) ($/ha) ($/ha) ($/ha) 43 2100 536 0.26 55.75 24.00 17,026 6,465 8,189 48 2000 647 0.32 56.28 23.00 21.551 6,738 8,535 53* 1850 751 0.41 56.76 22.00 26,112 6,771 8,577 58 1710 846 0.49 57.15 21.50 30,146 6,522 8,262 63 1555 931 0.60 57.52 21.00 34,014 6,173 7,819 68 1424 1009 0.71 58.46 20.50 38,303 5,857 7,420 73 1310 1081 0.83 58.72 20.00 41,854 5,411 6,855 * Financial Rotation Age Table 19. Stand Level Yield Report Generated Using STTM (Site Index 33) Breast height Stand Basal Total Merchantable age DBHQ density area HTOP volume volume MAI (years) (cm) (trees/ha) (m2/ha) (m) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha/year) 8 6.3 1068 3.3 6.2 7.4 0.0 0.58 13 7.5 3451 15.4 10.5 53.9 2.0 3.03 18 8.9 4491 27.7 14.4 133.8 21.3 5.87 23 10.2 4698 38.2 18.0 235.2 84.6 8.47 28 11.7 4324 46.3 21.4 345.6 194.0 10.55 33 i3.3 3735 52.2 24.4 456.7 294.4 12.09 38 15.1 3160 56.6 27.2 563.0 399.1 13.16 43 16.9 2677 60.0 29.8 663.4 536.2 13.89 48 18.6 2294 62.6 32.2 757.4 647.5 14.35 53 20.3 1996 64.8 34.3 845.2 751.2 14.63 58 21.9 1763 66.7 36.3 927.4 845.7 14.77 63 23.5 1577 68.3 38.2 1004.4 931.3 14.82 68 24.9 1429 69.7 39.9 1076.5 1009.1 14.79 73 26.3 1310 70.9 41.5 1144.2 1080.6 14.71 78 27.6 1208 72.0 43.0 1207.9 1147.3 14.59 83 28.9 1117 73.1 44.4 1268.4 1210.2 14.45 88 30.2 1036 74.0 45.7 1325.9 1269.7 14.29 50 culmination occurred at a breast height age of 63 years with an MAI of 14.82 m3/ha/yr. If yield culmination were the determinant of rotation age it would occur about ten years later than the financial rotation age for the same stand. Yield culmination age is inversely influenced by site index. 4.212 Net Present Va lue Analysis The STIM growth model was used to create yield volumes by DBH Class for seven harvesting scenarios. The input criteria used to generate the STIM yield values closely approximated the stand conditions for the Port McNeill study site. The STIM input criteria were as follows: • Site Index: 33 m for western hemlock at 50 years, • d/D Ratio6: 0.9 for Commercial Thinning of the 450 and 300 trees/ha residual stands, 0.93 for 200 trees/ha and 0.95 for 100 trees/ha, • Thinning Age: 53 years at breast height, and • Final Harvest Age: 73 years at breast height The diameter class volumes by treatment (generated with STIM) are entered into the spreadsheet model for distribution into 5 log grade categories for valuation (Appendix IV). A total product value ($/ha) for each treatment is determined and then averaged over the associated volume to provide an average value for the treatment ($/m3). The final process in the analysis is to discount all future values and costs to NPV for treatment comparisons. The NPVs reported in Table 20 include a "Site value"7 which reflects the capitalized value of the periodic net income from perpetual forest rotations (Stone 1993). The untreated stand would have merchantable volumes of 751, 931 and 1081 m3/ha at breast height ages 53 (thinning age and financial rotation age), 63 (physical rotation age), and 73 (final harvest age of partially cut treatments) years respectively. The table also displays the residual volumes following thinning treatments at age 53 and the final harvest volumes at age 73 by treatment density. Required input criteria for this model include: 6 d/D Ratio is term used to indicate the diameter class bias used during tree selection for a commercial thinning prescription, "d" represents the quadratic mean DBH of all trees harvested and "D" is the pre4iarvest quadratic mean DBH for the stand. A d/D ratio greater than one indicates a harvest selection bias for the larger diameter trees in the stand (crown thinning), and a ratio of less than one indicates a thinning from below. 7 Site value is also known as bare land value, soil rent, and soil expectation value. 51 • Log values by grade, • Logging costs by treatment, • Social discount rate, • Base year definition, • Thinning age, and • Final harvest age. Optional input criteria can include: • Wounding level, and • Stand establishment cost The log value criteria used were current in June 1999 and the partial cutting harvest costs were those determined in the case study (Table 10). The clearcut and final harvest costs were estimated by the author based on volume to be recovered, anticipated piece size, and the use of an excavator forwarding harvest system. Table 20 presents a summary for one model run. The three clearcuts had the highest NPVs with the scenario of harvesting at the youngest age (53 BH years) providing the best results. The NPVs for the partial cutting scenarios diminished with residual density, except for the SW100 treatment, which had the highest NPV and the lowest residual density. This anomaly resulted because the net revenue from the SW100 treatment in the first entry was much greater than from the other partial cuts reflecting the lower cost of loader forwarding instead of cable yarding ($22.22 instead of $47.00/m3). When the model was run using cable yarding costs for all four partial cuts, all NPVs declined directly with residual density. Sensitivity analysis identified that extending return harvest periods on partial cuts reduced the influence of residual density on NPVs. 4.22 Economic Implications of Residual Tree Wound ing Wounding levels may be critical to the economic viability of partial cutting because unlike clearcutting, partial cutting usually retains the most valuable trees for subsequent entries. As 52 3 o H z 1^ z 5 -no -H o\ m a vo -H p- oo m M» 0\ O 0\ OO » CN Os CN m ^H- Os -i \o M cn o —^ in^ OS. OS. OS. 00 so" ©" ~H ©" p-" CM" CN os o os —i oo r-~ ~H SO O SO 1/1 < —< ro^ C5 Os^ ^ ©^ oo_ so" so" so" o" o" —T t-~" CN CN CN —< •—i —< CN - 2 « z s^ 00 ^ O O O SO «~> CM O0 CM r» r-cn rn CN" V"T I-H* CN CM —i —i o o o o o o o o o o o m o © o o o od K so so' T3 > StS. O O O OS O O © -H O CM TJ- © —i U JH © © © -H CM ro so so so so so o o o ro oo r- m r- Os CM CM "n H; tn fS © © © ro ro ro ro r-- r- r- tn. .Ja HH Z St5= 'a « s c?8^ > 8e CM Os CM — —> r- oo —, so — T CM in^ Os^ C^. Os. in. so. so" ©" •«*" CM" —<" CM" -H" CM ro ro 1 ' CM o © © OS oo oo CN © © O © in ro CM CM ©' CM Os CM CM CM CM SO VI v-> CM SO VI CM m ro r-i-i m 00 so Os CM sd t--' vo' vo vi so in <Ti in v-. >n >n "8. J >5 "S J g 0H ^ A Is —1 so — 00 —< OO SD wo -^r ro ro o© vo ro i-s oo os Tt <n so o © o o o o o >n o © o f ro CM — ro oo ro ro ro ro ro >n wo so v> >n m >n o s C3 ^ U HkJ H|_» H—> ja ja «a I S 1 S O O O OH PH OH OH 53 accrued stand management expenses are carried to the final harvest of the residual stand, any wounding and ensuing decay will diminish the net present value of the final harvest. Goheen et al. (1980) found that merchantable volume loss due to decay in 40- to 120-year old western hemlock stands was very small when compared to old-growth hemlock stands (2.8% compared to 52%). This was true even when young hemlock stands, especially those that had been thinned, exhibited high levels of infection by decay fungi. Goheen et al. suggested that volume loss was low for young stands because the development of advanced decay in western hemlock is a slow process requiring many years. This study identified that decay volumes were quite similar between thinned and unthinned young hemlock stands (2.2 and 3.2% respectively), however decay in thinned stands occurs more frequently in the butts, while in unthinned stands decay is more commonly found higher up the stem. Because butt logs are the most valuable, this finding suggests thinned stands could have lower residual stand values than unthinned stands if operational wounding is not managed effectively. For this reason Goheen et al.'s primary recommendation for managing western hemlock second growth was to adopt short rotation schedules, preferably less than 120 years. Han et al. (in press) retrospectively studied bark growth and decay development associated with tree wounding on four commercially thinned stands in western Oregon. They projected future value loss for 10-, 20-, and 50-year intervals after tWnning, using a growth and yield model (ORGANON). Al l scars that remained open in western hemlock and Sitka spruce had advanced decay 13 years after wounding. In Douglas-fir, no rot was observed in scars less than 21 years old, however, in 29-year-old scars, advanced decay and pitch rings were observed in both open and closed scars. Projected value loss increased with both time after wounding and higher stand damage levels. In thinned Douglas-fir stands with 20% stand damage, value loss 50 years after thinning was 2% of the total future log value, and at 40% stand damage it was 3.9% of the total future value (Han et al, in press). This thesis examines the financial implications of residual tree wounding using the spreadsheet model developed for NPV determination. An equation in the spreadsheet degrades the volume of the butt logs available at final harvest in each diameter class to pulp grade in proportion to the 54 wounding level reported from the harvest scenario. Diameter classes that are only large enough to provide pulp or chip-and-saw grade logs are not degraded. This is a logical approach because most wound-induced decay is located within 2 m of the ground. The spreadsheet then summarizes the resulting volumes by log grade for valuation, converts the aggregate value into an average value for the harvest ($/m3), and determines the NPV based on the financial evaluation criteria specified. Table 21 presents the NPVs for only the partial cut treatments generated for Table 20 (wounding has no influence on clearcut NPVs) and compares them with model runs with varying wounding levels. The outcome identified that the final harvest NPVs for partial cuts were surprisingly insensitive to wounding level. The results are also consistent with the value losses projected by Han et al. (in press) and are encouraging in that residual tree wounding may not be as financially significant as previously suggested. 4.23 Multiple Account Analysis Benefit-cost analysis was developed in the 1930s as a technique for comparing and ranking alternative projects in terms of their financial outcomes. Benefits typically include outputs, or positive effects, that people are willing to pay for, and costs include inputs, or negative effects, that people must be compensated for in order to be no worse off as a result of project implementation. Unfortunately not all project effects can be described in terms of net financial benefits. Impacts on ecological, cultural and aesthetic attributes are difficult to express in monetary terms. A number of procedures are used to project non-market, non-use, or intrinsic values for benefit-cost analysis, however they are based on simplistic assumptions and inferences. The procedures are categorized as either revealed preference or expressed preference valuation. Table 21. Sensitivity of NPV to Residual Tree Wounding Levels No wounding 22% wounding 42% wounding 71% wounding Treatment NPV Change NPV Change NPV Change NPV Change ($/ha) (%) ($/ha) (%) ($/ha) (%) ($/ha) (%) Commercial thin 13,298 n.a. 13,034 2.0 12,795 3.8 12,447 6.4 SW300 12,375 n.a. 12,120 2.1 11,888 3.9 11,551 6.7 SW200 11,060 n.a. 10,900 1.4 10,755 2.8 10,544 4.7 SW100 21,493 n.a. 21,398 0.4 21,311 0.8 21,186 1.4 55 The hedonic pricing method (HPM) is an example of revealed preference valuation and it is the method most frequently used to infer environmental values from the market value of housing or labour. The logic is that prices for comparable housing and labour would be greater and lesser respectively, in locations with preferred environments. The contingent valuation method (CVM) is an example of expressed preference valuation. This method solicits individual preferences for some change in resource status using a survey procedure. Respondents to C V M surveys are asked how much they would: 1) be willing to pay (WTP) to protect and environmental commodity from change, or 2) be willing to accept (WTA) in compensation for some level of change to occur. Both valuation methods are controversial and introduce a high degree of uncertainty. An alternative method, multiple account analysis (MAA) was developed in the 1970s to overcome the short falls of benefit-cost analysis by considering a wider range of criteria and indicators for project ranking. Criteria that can be valued are considered in financial terms while criteria with intrinsic, or non-market value,are considered in relative terms. Multiple account analysis is also better able to recognize the issues of all constituents (distributional effects) in the project ranking by facilitating the establishment of accounts on sub-regional or sectoral levels (Shaffer, 1991). The procedure for performing multiple account analysis involves listing the alternatives to be considered and defining "accounts" that reflect the issues to be compared between alternatives. The options and accounts are presented in a matrix format for comparison (Crown Corporations Secretariat, 1993). Table 22 presents an example of multiple account analysis used to rank harvest system options. A forest company has a stand (500 ha) of 60 year old second growth timber within its operating area in coastal British Columbia that has reached commercial value. The stand had not previously been considered for harvest as the company focused on more lucrative old growth harvesting alternatives. However, changing constraints on old growth harvesting have both reduced access and increased harvest cost to the point that second growth harvesting must be considered to maintain wood flow. 56 Table 22: Multiple Account Analysis Matrix for Harvest System Ranking Accounts Clearcut SW200 CT450 No Harvest Option Option Option Option Financial Net Revenue ($) $6,000,000 $2,700,000 $850,000 $0 Stumpage ($) $2,800,000 $1,920,000 $625,000 $0 Summary Ranking 1 2 3 4 Consumer Fiber Supply for local mills (m3) 350000 240000 125000 0 Recreational Suppliers (preference) low medium medium high Fishers (preference) low medium high high Hunters (preference) high high medium medium Campers (preference) low medium high high Mushroom Pickers (preference) low medium high high Summary Ranking 4 3 2 1 Environmental Aesthetic Quality low medium medium high Water Quality low medium high high Deer Habitat Quality high medium medium low Stand Wind Stability high low medium high Summary Ranking 3 4 2 1 Economic Development Logging Employment (person yrs) 70 90 125 0 Sawmill Employment (person years) 38 28 13 0 Service Ind Employment (person years) 30 36 45 0 Silvicultural Employment (person years) 35 22 12 0 Summary Ranking 3 2 1 4 Social First Nation Cultural Values low low medium high Summary Ranking 4 3 2 1 Total Ranking Score 15 14 10 11 Harvest chance on the second growth stand is favourable as access infrastructure from the original harvest remains in place (except for water crossings) and terrain conditions are gentle to moderate allowing the use of low-cost ground-based mechanized harvesting systems. The wood quality is good and tree size distribution is well suited for the local sawmill facilities. The area is also endowed with the following alternative forest values: 57 • a chain of lakes and rivers that connect to down stream salmon spawning habitat and the community water supply, • productive mushroom growing sites, • a thriving deer population, • traditional First Nations medicine plant gathering sites, and • a legacy of roads left from the original harvest that provides access to local fishers, hunters, and campers. The forest company, faced with credibility challenges from the local community as a result of previous old growth harvesting practices, is preparing a total resource plan for the second growth forest and hopes to establish community support for its new initiative. Uncertain of the best harvest prescription for the stand, the company applies M A A to rank the options. The following steps are taken: • a list of feasible harvest alternatives (options) is proposed, • a list of criteria for option comparison is developed (evaluation accounts), and • procedures for acquiring and defining account data are established. Four harvesting options, 5 evaluation accounts, and 16 sub-accounts are considered, however the number of accounts and sub-accounts can be as few or as plentiful as necessary to reflect the issues influencing the decision. Harvest options include: clearcut, uniform shelterwood with 200 residual trees/ha, commercial thinning with 450 trees/ha, and no harvesting. Evaluation accounts include: financial, consumer, environmental, economic development, and social aspects. Table 22 illustrates the matrix of options and accounts considered. The final step is to populate the matrix with data that will enable comparisons between options. Unlike benefit cost analysis, multiple account analysis does not require that comparisons be made in financial terms for all accounts. Where monetary results can be projected (i.e., NPVs), financial comparisons are appropriate, and where qualitative information can be documented 58 relative comparisons are sufficient. Summary ranks are determined by evaluation account and totaled for overall ranking of options. If accounts are appropriately defined and the data used to populate the matrix are representative, the results should allow the planner to rank the options proposed. For the scenario presented in Table 22 the best option was commercial thinning (lowest overall score), however the no harvest option ranked a near second. This outcome should indicate the sensitivity of the harvest intensity issue to the stakeholders. If the forest company decided that the financial benefit from clearcutting outweighed the negative consumer and social preferences for the option, it should expect opposition if the option is pursued. Another advantage of displaying qualitative data in the summary matrix is that planners can look for tradeoffs between options. For example, the forest company may wish to apply the SW200 harvest option because of the financial advantage, but other stakeholders are opposed because of concerns for declining stocks of mushrooms and medicine plants, and a higher risk of windthrow. The forest planner may be able to address the mushroom and medicine plant issues by assigning leave blocks that preserve these values, and the windthrow issue may be addressed through special cut block and buffer strip design provisions. 59 5 DISCUSSION 5.1 Parti: Partial Cutting Case Study 5.11 Production 5.111 Falling and Bucking Both manual and mechanical falling and bucking methods were monitored during the Port McNeill case study. Manual productivities were 7.4 and 9.3 m3/smh (scheduled machine hour) for the commercial thinning and SW100 blocks, respectively (Table 5). The productivity difference between the two blocks reflects the residual densities of the two treatments. It is much easier to place trees on the ground with 100 residual trees/ha than with 450. It should also be noted that, because the SW100 block was felled after the December 1997 windstorm, falling conditions were more difficult than normal, reducing the productivity. Dodd (1995) compared two falling methods, referred to as North American Falling and Scandinavian Falling, in a study of a commercial thinning operation in Washington State in a 37-year-old western hemlock stand that was thinned to a residual density of 445 trees/ha. Both falling methods produced similar log lengths, however the Scandinavian faller removed all limbs and pre-bunched logs manually whenever possible to improve efficiencies for chokersetting. The North American faller delimbed the three accessible sides of the logs, leaving them where they fell (similar to Port McNeill). Reported productivities were 32 and 13 trees/pmh (productive machine hour) for the North American and Scandinavian fallers, respectively. In comparison, the Port McNeill commercial thinning had a productivity of 18 trees/smh (Table 5). The productivity differences between the two studies may be due in part to different study methods; Dodd's estimates are based on a projection of detailed timing results while the Port McNeill productivity is based on shift level monitoring. Bowden-Dunham (1998) compared harvesting production between an extended rotation harvest (780 residual trees/ha), a uniform shelterwood (90 residual trees/ha), and a clearcut. The stand, located near Roberts Creek B.C., was 65 to 85 years old and composed of Douglas-fir, western hemlock, and western red cedar trees. Bowden-Dunham reported manual falling shift level productivity on the shelterwood block of 12.8 m /h and 11.4 trees/h. This falling productivity is close to the SW100 results of 9.3 m3/h. The average tree size for the Roberts Creek shelterwood 60 was larger than for the SW100 (1.13 and 0.6 m3/tree respectively) and this would explain much of the productivity difference. The SW200 and SW300 treatments, mechanically felled with a Timbco 415 feller-processor, had shift level productivities of 15.2 and 10.5 m3/smh respectively. In a FERIC study, a Valmet 500T was monitored while thinning a 59-year-old Douglas-fir stand near Duncan B.C. (Boswell, 1998). Boswell's productivity of 13.7 m3/pmh (approximately 12.5 m3/smh) for the Valmet feller-processor, projected from detailed timing data, falls within the shift level productivity range recorded at Port McNeill. Although at Port McNeill the manual falling productivities were lower than for mechanical falling, the manual falling costs were lower. Manual falling costs were $8.71 and $6.96 /m3 for the commercial thinning and SW100 treatments, respectively, and mechanical falling was $11.84 and $17.15/m3 for the SW200 and SW300 treatments, respectively (Table 5). The difference in production cost results from large capital and operating cost differences between the two systems. The feller-processor costs $180/smh while the manual faller costs $64.62/smh (Table 5). This is significant because it suggests that, contrary to the trend of harvest mechanization, manual falling in second growth partial cutting remains the most cost competitive practice, and that technology advances in feller-processors will have to provide substantial productivity gains before mechanized falling and processing is competitive in this type of operation. This study also identified operational problems with the feller-processor, including the damaging of residual trees while processing logs, the retention of trees with poor crown form and low wind stability, and the positioning of processed log bunches out of lead for cable yarding. These problems relate mostly to issues of operator experience, equipment design, and work practice which all can be addressed through machine management changes. Two significant advantages of feller-processors working in partial cutting were also noted. First, the operator is exposed to minimal safety risk compared to that of a manual faller, and second, the feller-processor can continue to work in higher winds than a manual faller, although this wind-related margin may be less when residual stand quality issues are considered. 61 5.112 Cable and Ground-based Harvesting Systems Three of the four treatment blocks at Port McNeill were harvested with a standing skyline cable system, and the fourth was forwarded with a ground-based system. Table 23 compares cable yarding productivities for the three Port McNeill cable yarding treatments with those of four similar partial cuts on the B.C. coast. Phillips (1999) reported slightly lower yarding productivities for commercial thinning (6.32 vs 7.52 m3/smh) while the other three studies all had higher productivities for shelterwood harvesting (24.96, 25.63 and 20.67 compared with 11.2 and 11.09 m3/smh at Port McNeill (Table 23)). Two factors contributed to the superior yarding productivities of these studies: larger average piece sizes and lower residual stand densities. Larger average piece size increases yarding productivity by improving payloads and reducing "hook" element times. Lighter residual stand densities increase average piece size (greater d/D ratio), and provide wider inter-tree spacing which increases yarding speeds on both the "lateral-in" and "inhaul" cycle elements. Ground-based forwarding with log loaders has been used effectively in coastal B.C. for more than a decade, but its application to partial cutting has been limited and no comparable studies Table 23. Cable Yarding Productivity Comparison for Partial Cutting Study Treatment description Cable system Residual density Average piece size Average pieces/turn Productivity (trees/ha) (m3) (no.) (nrVsmh) (m3/pmh) Clark (1999) commercial thinning standing skyline 450 0.25 6 7.52 10.49 Clark (1999) SW300 standing skyline 300 0.34 6 11.2 16.57 Clark (1999) SW200 standing skyline 200 0.27 6 11.09 15.32 Phillips (1999) commercial thinning standing skyline 400 0.43 3.5 6.32 6.72 Bowden-Dunham (1998) shelterwood running skyline 90 1.13 3.2 24.96 29.37 Hedin (1994) shelterwood running skyline 57 0.93 4.1 25.63 28.20 Hedin (1996) shelterwood standing skyline 90 0.63 2.9 20.67 22.47 62 were located. Millstone Contracting, the logger involved with the Port McNeill study, has used small hydraulic log loaders in commercial thinning since 1992, both to pre-bunch for cable yarding and to forward logs directly to the roadside. Al l of the Port McNeill cable yarding treatments were pre-bunched, however the SW300 block was both pre-bunched and partially loader-forwarded to accelerate the completion of the block. Productivities for the loader pre-bunching were 16.4, 18.5 and 10.8 m/smh for the commercial thinning, S W200, and S W300, respectively. The productivities for the commercial thinning and SW200 blocks were similar, however the lower productivity reported for the SW300 block reflects the combined activities of pre-bunching and forwarding and cannot be compared directly with the other two. The SW100 treatment was harvested entirely with a ground-based system. The hydraulic log loader forwarded 26.3 m3/smh (Table 6) to achieve the lowest production cost for all of the treatments studied ($22.22 /m3), less than half the cost of the next lowest cost treatment ($51.38/m3 for the SW200). Three factors contributed to the superior performance of the loader on the SW100 block: 1) unusually dry summer weather allowing ground-based access with minimal site impact, 2) low residual stand density allowing the machine to maneuver and swing logs with little risk of contacting trees, and 3) lower operating costs for the loader relative to the swing yarder ($83 vs $249/smh) reducing the final production costs. An original objective of this study was to compare cable yarding productivities and residual tree wounding levels between bunched and unbunched corridors. Two corridors in the commercial thinning block were set aside for this comparison. Unfortunately, the onset of sap flow required the yarder to move before the corridors could be harvested, and the December 1997 wind storm eliminated future opportunities to complete this comparison. 5.12 Stand and Site Impacts 5.121 Wind Damage As some post-harvest wind damage was anticipated on the Port McNeill study site, a windthrow hazard assessment was conducted early in the harvest planning phase and recommendations were incorporated in the treatment boundary locations and buffers. These recommendations and actions were designed to address endemic windthrow. In December 1997, however, a catastrophic windthrow event occurred during a combined snow and wind storm damaging all 63 treatment units in the study. Forty-five percent of the trees sampled over the entire study block were either blown over, broken off, or leaning (Table 11). The SW300 treatment sustained the most damage and the untreated control had the least (52 and 37% of trees tallied respectively). The resulting storm damage was beyond expectation and a great disappointment to all involved. However, the event did identify two types of trees that were very prone to wind damage in partially cut second-growth western hemlock stands. These were trees of intermediate crown class, and trees growing in clusters on single root systems. The crowns of intermediate trees reside in the lower canopy of the stand and these trees have little need to develop rigid stem structures because they are normally sheltered from direct wind and well supported through crown interaction with adjacent trees. However, when intermediate trees are retained as crop trees in a partial cut, canopy interaction is lost, leaving them vulnerable to stem break and windthrow. Clusters of trees growing from a single root system have more aggregate crown sail area than individual trees and consequently develop higher overturning moments. Falling tree-clusters mechanically is a more difficult task than falling them manually so the feller-processor tended to retain clusters as crop trees. How do the Port McNeill wind damage levels compare to those documented for other similar treatments? Although catastrophic wind damage cannot be compared directly with endemic wind damage, it is worthwhile to consider results of other studies. Information on wind damage in the literature was scarce as most retrospective studies of partial cutting were intended for growth and yield determination and wind damage was often tallied simply as mortality. Graham et al. (1985) reported on surveys from 1964 of a 100-year-old stand of western hemlock and Sitka spruce in Oregon that was commercially thinned between 1947 and 1951. The volumes of mortality for six thinned treatments were compared with three unthinned controls. The average merchantable volumes lost to windthrow after 15 years were 52 and 94 m3/ha (or 4.6 and 7.3% of average post-treatment volume) for the thinned and unthinned treatments, respectively. Windthrow was the largest cause of post-treatment mortality (67 and 64% of total mortality on the thinned and unthinned blocks, respectively). 64 Williamson and Ruth (1976) monitored a shelterwood harvest in a 60-year-old western hemlock stand in Oregon that involved 12 treatments of different residual densities ranging from 9 to 54 m /ha basal area. The primary study objective was to determine regeneration response to varying stand density. Post-harvest regeneration surveys also tallied windfall occurrence. Average basal area loss due to wind damage was 13% (range of 0 to 39%). The worst damage (39% loss) occurred on a topographically exposed treatment with 24.5 m2/ha of residual basal area, while a relatively protected area with 15 m /ha basal area lost 4%, and the other treatments with less than 14.9 m2/ha basal area averaged 25% loss. The study concluded that windfall occurrence was more dependent on topography than cutting intensity. Fair and Harris (1971) retrospectively surveyed a stand of western hemlock and Sitka spruce in Alaska that was partially cut in 1950 at age 96. The study objectives were to evaluate the effects of partial cutting on stand growth, epicormic branching, and regeneration establishment. Two replications of three treatments were originally installed, however a catastrophic windfall event in 1962 adjacent to the sample plots in one replicate caused it to be abandoned due to excessive light exposure in the plots. Windfall occurrence on the plots of the second replicate was reported to be slight during the 17-year study. The report could make no conclusions on relationships between partial cutting and wind damage due to the loss of sample plots from one of the replicates. The literature review for post-harvest wind damage in partial cutting indicated a lack of research on this topic. As activity expands in second growth partial cutting more knowledge on this topic will be critical for improving harvest prescriptions. One way to expand the data base on wind damage is to expand post-harvest growth and yield surveys to include wind damage. 5.122 Site Disturbance Generally, site disturbance on the Port McNeill treatments was higher than the B.C. Forest Practices Code allows (10.2% vs 7 % of total block area) (Table 15). This was primarily because a wheeled skidder was used to assist with the recovery of windfallen trees from previously harvested blocks. Although the skid trails were rehabilitated after harvesting, the method used to assess the site disturbance classified the rehabilitated trails as detrimental disturbance due to the mixing of organic and mineral soil horizons. 65 A second source of site disturbance was the wide road right-of-ways. A total of 1.27 hectares was cleared for road right-of-way and about 0.86 hectares were surfaced for truck access. The unsurfaced area was used for log sorting and piling. If the sorting and piling had been done with a log loader rather than a skidder, the right-of-way would probably have suffered little, if any, detrimental disturbance. However most of the right-of-way measured was impacted by the skidder in the process of piling logs. Of the two site disturbance sources mentioned (skid trail rehabilitation and log storage on road right-of-ways), it is the wide road right-of-way disturbance that is the most concerning. As hemlock regeneration will establish and thrive on both of these disturbed sites, site degradation is not an issue here ~ contrary to the classification in the B.C. Site Disturbance Guidelines for partial cutting operations. However, the regeneration established on the site cleared for right-of-way will not achieve merchantable size before the final entry and will be destroyed by this next harvest. Minimizing right-of-way widths will retain more crop trees to capture increment in a higher value product recoverable at final harvest. Unfortunately narrow road right-of-ways mean that operational costs of the log sorting, storage, and loading phases will increase, and the low-cost harvest volume from right-of-way clearing will be reduced. 5.123 Tree Wounding The frequency of residual stem wounding varied over the treatment units but showed no pattern that could be related to harvest method, season, or residual density. As the most and least severe stand damage both occurred on treatments that were harvested with ground-based equipment, a thinning study involving mechanized ground-based thinning was compared for damage levels (Hunt, 1995). This study was conducted in a 55-year-old Douglas-fir stand near Lake Cowichan on Vancouver Island using Timberjack harvester/forwarder equipment. Hunt reported that wounds occurred on 18% of the trees surveyed and the "Severe" category of wounds occurred on between 5.3 and 8.1% of the wounded trees. Although 71% of all the trees surveyed at Port McNeill were wounded and "Severe" or "Mortal" wounding occurred on 30% of the wounded trees, the two ground-based operations had lower proportions of severely wounded trees (11.1 and 16.7% for the SW100 and commercial thinning cleanup areas, respectively (Table 16)). While operating through the sap flow period at Port McNeill probably contributed substantially to the excessive overall damage levels, the ground-based operations at both Lake Cowichan and 66 Port McNeill occurred over the summer months, and yet severe damage proportions were much greater at Port McNeill. Some of the difference between the two studies may be attributed to the bark characteristics of trees in the two stands. Thin-barked tree species such as the western hemlock, amabilis fir and Sitka spruce found at Port McNeill are more susceptible to impact wounding than the Douglas-fir observed in the study at Lake Cowichan (Worthington, 1961). Phillips (1999) studied a "thinning from below" in a 70-year-old Douglas-fir/hemlock stand near Harrison Mills B.C. that employed a cable yarding system similar in size and configuration to the system used at Port McNeill. Thirty-one percent of the residual trees were wounded, 7% of the leave trees were wounded beyond the B.C. Forest Practice Code's criteria (Tree Wounding and Decay Guidebook, 1997) for short term retention (< 20 years to final harvest), and 8% did not meet the criteria for long term retention (< 40 years to final harvest). The combined wounding proportion of 15% (short and long term retention criteria) compares with 16.7,19.2, and 31.6% for the Port McNeill cable commercial thinning, SW200, and SW300 areas, respectively (Table 16). Again, harvesting during peak sapflow and re-entry for windfall cleanup contributed to the larger wounding proportions at Port McNeill. 5.2 Part II: Economic Analysis 5.21 Rotation Age Determination Second growth harvesting is gaining prominence and forest managers need to adopt rotation age scheduling to improve financial outcomes. This thesis discusses procedures for determining both financial and yield culmination rotation age for clearcut harvests, and comparing NPVs between clearcut and partial cut alternatives. However, the more complex topic of rotation age determination for partial cuts is not addressed. Worthington and Staebler (1961) did explore the issues of rotational planning for commercial thinning of Douglas-fir second-growth in Washington State and made three pertinent observations: 1) financial rotation age can be changed greatly by thinning, 2) rotations set by MAI culmination will be lengthened by thinning, and 3) rotations set by financial maturity doctrines may be lengthened or shortened, depending mostly on the age at which thinning begins and the intensity with which it is practiced. Rotation age analysis for this thesis identified that financial rotation age for western hemlock stands similar to the one at Port McNeill was reached earlier than MAI culmination age (53 and 67 63 BH years respectively). Financial rotation age is most influenced by the social discount rate, the amount of prior investment in stand establishment, and the value range of forest products recovered through harvesting. MAI culmination age is most influenced by site index. 5.22 Net Present Value Analysis A spreadsheet model was developed to compare NPVs of clearcutting and partial cutting scenarios for second-growth harvesting with the objective of quantifying differences between treatments and identifying influencing factors. The most significant results of the comparison were: 1) clearcutting always provided higher NPVs than partial cutting alternatives, and 2) NPVs for partial cutting scenarios varied directly with the residual densities of the first harvest, however extending the harvest return period reduced the influence of residual density on NPV. 5.221 Economic Implications of Residual Tree Wounding Loggers and foresters take extraordinary precautions and incur additional production costs to minimize residual tree wounding during partial cutting operations. This is done to insure that future stand health, stability, and product values are not compromised. An objective of this thesis was to quantify the economic significance of residual tree wounding on the financial benefits at final harvest. This was done through a literature review of related research and a NPV modeling analysis of the partial cutting treatments monitored at Port McNeill with varying levels of residual tree wounding. The NPV analysis found that financial outcomes at final harvest were quite insensitive to the wounding levels created during the first stand entry. Two studies were found on retrospective surveys of decay propagation in thinned stands. Goheen et. al (1980) reported that volume loss in second growth western hemlock stands was substantially less than in old growth stands because decay advanced slowly. Wound induced decay losses from operational thinning could be managed effectively with short rotations and short harvest return periods. Han et al. (in press) surveyed scarring and resulting decay advancement in thinned Douglas-fir and hemlock stands and then projected future log value loss through modeling. Both studies emphasized the influence of time on the consequences of decay loss. 68 5.23 Multiple Account Analysis Although NPV comparisons can be used to rank alternatives based on financial performance, many harvesting decisions today involve social and environmental issues that cloud decisions based solely on rates of return. Analysis techniques are available to project the monetary values of social and environmental attributes for benefit/cost analysis but this valuation process can be complex and contentious. An alternative process known as "Multiple Account Analysis" overcomes the valuation shortcomings by employing a mixture of qualitative and quantitative "accounts" for the ranking of alternatives. This thesis presents an example of how "Multiple Account Analysis" could be used to compare alternative harvesting methods and make tradeoffs between competing solutions. Because there is a growing trend towards non-economic constraints influencing harvest prescriptions in coastal B.C. it will become more critical for forest managers to rank harvesting alternatives using methods that consider the criteria of all stakeholders equitably. 5.3 The Future of Partial Cutting There is a growing trend to partial cutting in coastal B.C . In 1998 MacMillan Bloedel Limited committed to a five year phase-in of variable retention harvesting practices on all of its public and private tenures on the coast. In 1999 TimberWest Forest Limited followed with a similar commitment to variable retention harvesting with a four year phase-in period. Canadian Forest Products Ltd., Western Forest Products Limited and International Forest Products Ltd. are also implementing variable retention practices without the corporate declaration of operating policy. Is this trend sustainable? The author believes it is for two reasons: 1. First, global forest product consumers are now dictating the criteria under which raw fiber can be acquired, and for the first time Canadian forest companies are actively seeking certification for their forest management practices. Variable retention harvesting is offered as a surrogate for sustainable forest management. 2. Second, the preservation movement continues to erode access to coastal old growth forests, accelerating the transition into second growth harvesting. This transition will substantially reduce the supply of fiber for coastal pulp mills because: 69 • the supply of large pulp logs, prevalent in decadent coastal old growth forests, will decline directly with the preservation of these stands. • the milling of second growth logs is more efficient than milling old growth logs and substantially lower residual chip volumes will be available to pulp mills. An alternate supply of pulp fiber is needed and this could come from the commercial thinning of coastal second growth forests. As discussed earlier in this thesis, commercial thinning activities have been attempted periodically over the past 50 years in coastal British Columbia, but have never been sustained. The viability of commercial thinning is very cost dependent, and without a shortage of pulp fiber there is little incentive for forest companies, contractors, or research institutes to improve operational techniques. A glimpse of B.C.'s near future can be seen in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) of the United States. Here access to old growth forests has all but stopped and only second growth fiber is available — 30% of it from commercial thinning activities. Stands as young as 30 years old are being thinned viably. The PNW forest industry has accepted commercial thinning as a necessity and is striving to reduce operating costs through increased mechanization and utilization of equipment. Unfortunately for B.C. operators, there is an additional disincentive to thinning in the form of our Crown stumpage and cut control processes. The volume recovered from thinned stands is currently assessed at full Crown stumpage and tallied against the AAC for the tenure of its origin. With no relief from either of this constraints, tenure holders will be better off to source the needed fiber volume from conventional clear cuts rather than to incur the higher cost of commercial thinning. In Alberta, where tenure holders of Forest Management Agreements (FMA) can thin second pass reserve areas with no volume assessment against AAC and at minimal stumpage rates, commercial thinning is gaining in popularity. For commercial thinning to have a role in the future of harvesting B.C. coastal forests the following provincial forest policy incentives are suggested: • minimize stumpage rates for pulp grade fiber recovered by thinning — higher grade logs should be assessed at market stumpage. 70 provide assurance that tenure holder will have access to the final harvest on thinned stands, thinning volume should not be included in the 5 year volume reconciliation for cut control, stumpage should not be assessed on volumes below current utilization standards. 71 6 CONCLUSION This thesis studied operational and economic implications of partial cutting second-growth western hemlock forests in coastal British Columbia. Part I reported production and site impact observations from a case study of four partial cutting treatments, while Part II studied the economic implications of partial cutting alternatives through computer modeling and discussed "Multiple Account Analysis", an alternative benefit/cost analysis procedure for ranking harvesting system options. The operational case study involved a commercial thinning trial done in cooperation with the Port McNeill Division of MacMillan Bloedel Limited. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the productivities, costs and influencing factors of applying cable and ground-based harvesting systems to thin a 53-year-old western hemlock stand. A total volume of 18,525 m 3 was harvested from four treatment areas over a trial duration of two years. Al l harvesting phase costs (planning through to log delivery) were tallied and applied against volumes recovered from each treatment block to determine production costs. Costs ranged from a low of $22.22/m3 for loader-forwarding of a uniform shelterwood with 100 residual trees/ha to a high of $62.09/m3 for cable yarding of a commercial thinning unit with 450 residual trees/ha. Overall the trial demonstrated that both cable and ground-based harvesting systems are operationally feasible for these types of stands. However, a number of factors in the falling and extraction phases need to be considered to ensure operational viability. Two of the treatment blocks were manually felled and two were mechanically felled. Manual falling was the more successful practice in this trial because the fallers were experienced and were able to clearly view the work site and stand. As a result, they were able to make better residual tree selections compared to the feller-processor operator who had restricted visibility and limited experience. However, it is widely recognized that mechanical falling is safer and the author believes many of the shortcomings observed in this trial could be overcome with more appropriate machine selection, better work planning and more operator experience. Although manual falling productivities were lower than those for mechanical falling, manual falling costs were also lower. Capital and operating costs are much higher for mechanized 72 falling than for manual. Contrary to the trend of harvest mechanization, manual falling in second growth partial cutting remains the most cost-competitive practice, and technology advances in feller-processors will have to provide substantial productivity gains before mechanized falling and processing is competitive in this type of operation. Two types of extraction were observed at Port McNeill. A standing skyline cable system was used to harvest three treatment blocks and a ground-based hydraulic log loader was used to forward the logs from the fourth treatment block. Both systems were effective for the site, stand, and weather conditions in this trial. On the coast where weather and terrain conditions are variable, cable systems offer more flexibility than ground-based systems. However, given appropriate combinations of conditions (including harvesting prescription), loader forwarding can be as, or more, effective than cable yarding. The capital and operating costs of a cable system will always exceed that of a log loader and therefore where conditions allow, the loader-forwarder is a more appropriate choice. In this study and others in the literature, yarding productivity varied inversely with the residual densities of the treatment. Stand and site impacts for the Port McNeill case study were assessed through post-harvest surveys for wind damage, site disturbance, and residual tree wounding. Unfortunately, a catastrophic windstorm caused extensive damage to the study area when harvesting was only partially completed, and the target stand densities on the treatment units had to be modified. Because both initial harvesting and windfall salvage were carried out, it is not possible to make comparisons between treatments for site disturbance and residual stand damage. A post-storm windthrow survey identified that 45% of the trees sampled over the entire study block were damaged. The highest proportion of wind damage occurred on the SW300 treatment (52% of residual trees) and the lowest proportion on the untreated control (37%). Two falling practices observed on the SW300 block contributed to higher levels of windthrow vulnerability: the retention of intermediate crown class trees, and the retention of tree clusters on single root systems. In second growth western hemlock stands, intermediate crown-class trees and tree clusters should be targeted for removal during partial cutting. If mechanical feller-processors are used which cannot deal with clumps safely or productively, the areas around clumps should be left for hand falling. 73 The overall site disturbance level for the study block was 10.2% of total block area (or 4.87 ha). The highest site disturbance was recorded in the SW300 unit (16.9%) and the lowest was in the SW100 unit (3%). The most significant difference between these 2 treatments is that the SW100 area was only entered once by the loader-forwarder while the SW300 area was exposed to four machine entries: mechanical falling with a feller-processor, pre-bunching with a hydraulic log loader, yarding with a cable yarder, and finally, wind fall cleanup with a combination of loader-forwarder and grapple skidder. The post-harvest residual stand damage survey identified that 71% of surveyed trees were wounded and that 30% of the wounded trees were severely or mortally damaged. This level of damage was very high for four reasons. Harvesting of two treatments occurred during sap flow; the feller-processor's work pattern exposed residual trees to excessive wounding; damage occurred during the windstorm; and multiple entries occurred on three treatments to salvage windthrow. The net present values (NPV) of three clearcut and four partial cut harvesting scenarios were compared using the results of the case study. Under the assumptions used in this analysis, clearcutting scenarios provided better NPVs than partial cutting scenarios, with shorter rotation clearcuts having superior NPVs to those with longer rotations. NPVs for partial cuts vary directly with the residual densities of the first entries, however, as the return period between first and final harvest is extended, this relationship is diminished. The financial implications of residual tree wounding in partial cuts were examined using NPV analysis. The outcome identified that the final harvest NPVs were quite insensitive to wounding levels. This result is encouraging in that residual tree wounding may not be as financially consequential as is currently perceived by the forestry community. This thesis presents an example of how Multiple Account Analysis can be used to compare alternative harvesting methods and made tradeoffs between competing solutions. Because there is a growing trend towards non-economic constraints influencing harvest prescriptions in coastal B.C., it will become more critical for forest managers to rank harvesting alternatives using methods that consider the criteria of all stakeholders equitably. 74 7 RECOMMENDATIONS Falling: • If mechanical falling is to be considered in partial cutting, planners should specify machines with felling heads capable of directional control and placement of severed stems. This feature will minimize damage to residual trees while processing and allow processed bunches to be properly aligned for subsequent extraction. Mechanical processors should not be used in stands with target residual densities of over 300 stems/ha as adequate maneuvering clearance is hard to achieve. Log Extraction: • Use excavator forwarding in place of cable harvesting whenever terrain, residual density, and soil conditions permit. Harvesting Impacts: • Road right-of-ways in commercial thinning areas should be only as wide as necessary for equipment access. This will reduce site disturbance levels and improve the harvest yield at final entry. • When closely spaced tree clumps are encountered in a stand being partially cut, the entire tree clump should be felled due to the high susceptibility of these clumps to windthrow when exposed. • Curtail falling and extraction activities in partial cuts during the sap flow period (April to July) to reduce the incidence and severity of residual tree wounding. Financial Aspects: • The NPV analyses presented in this thesis illustrate that the greatest NPVs were associated with partially cut stands with the lightest residual densities. If silviculture, wind stability, and protection of alternative forest value objectives can all be met with light residual tree densities this scenario will provide the best financial return for the forest owner. 75 Future Forest Policy to Encourage Commercial Thinning: • minimize stumpage rates for pulp grade fiber recovered by thinning — higher grade logs should be assessed at market stumpage. • provide assurance that tenure holder will have access to the final harvest on thinned stands. • thinning volume should not be considered in the 5 year volume reconciliation for cut control • stumpage should not be assessed on volumes recovered below current utilization standards. 76 8 R E F E R E N C E S Adamovich, L. 1962. Problems of thinning and small log handling in second growth western hemlock stands with special reference to the Research Forest on East Thurlow Island. Master of Forestry Thesis, Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia. 157 pp. Adamovich, L. 1968. Problems in mechanized commercial thinning. Paper prepared for 1968 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Utah State University, Logan, Utah. Paper No. 68-127. 24 pp. Aho, P.E.; Fiddler, G.; Filip, G.M. 1983. How to reduce injuries to residual trees during stand management activities. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. General Technical Report, PNW-156. June 1983. 17 pp. Aho, P.E.; Fiddler, G.; Srago, M. 1983. Logging damage in thinned, young-growth true fir stands in California and recommendations for prevention. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Research Paper, PNW-304. January 1983. 8 pp. Ainscough, G.L. 1981. The Designed Forest System of MacMillan Bloedel Limited: an example of industrial forest management in British Columbia. H.R. MacMillan Lectureship in Forestry, March 12, 1981. Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. 20 pp. Benskin, H.; Mitchell, K. 1994. Commercial thinning. Paper presented to Honourable Andrew Petter, Minister of Forests, B.C. Ministry of Forests, Research Branch, Victoria, B.C. 32 pp. Bettinger, P.; Kellogg, L.D. 1993. Residual stand damage from cut-to-length thinning of second-growth timber in the Cascade Range of Western Oregon. Forest Products Journal 43(ll/12):59-64. Bonner, G.M.; De Jong, R.J.; Boudewyn, P.; Flewelling, J.W. 1995. A guide to the S T M growth model. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific and Yukon Region. Information Report BC-X-353. 38 pp. Borzuchowski, R. 1955. Partial time study of a second-growth hemlock thinning. British Columbia Forest Service, Victoria, B.C. Research Note No. 30. 14 pp. Boswell, B. 1998. Vancouver Island mechanized thinning trials. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada, Vancouver, B.C. Technical Note TN-271. 15 pp. Bowden-Dunham, M.T. 1998. A productivity comparison of clearcutting and alternative silviculture systems in Coastal British Columbia. Forest Research Institute of Canada, Vancouver, B.C. Technical Report TR-122. 15 pp. Bragg, William C ; Ostrofsky, William D.; Hoffman, Benjamin F., Jr. 1994. Residual tree damage estimates from partial cutting simulation. Forest Products Journal 44(7/8): 19 - 22. 77 British Columbia Ministry of Forest. 1997 Soil conservation surveys guidebook. Ministry of Forests, Public Affairs Branch, Victoria, B.C. 73 pp. British Columbia Ministry of Forest. 1997 Tree wounding and decay guidebook. Ministry of Forests, Public Affairs Branch, Victoria, B.C. 32 pp. Chavez, T.D., Jr.; Edmonds, R.L.; Driver, C H . 1980. Young-growth western hemlock stand infection by Heterobasidion annosum 11 years after precommercial thinning. Canadian Journal of Forestry Research 10: 389 - 394. Cline, M.L. 1991. Stand damage following whole tree partial cutting in northern forests. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 8(2): 72 - 76. Crown Corporations Secretariat. 1993. Multiple account evaluation guidelines. Province of British Columbia, Crown Corporations Secretariat, Vancouver, B.C. 23 pp. Dobie, J. 1966. Product yield and value, financial rotations and biological relationships of good site Douglas fir. Master of Forestry Thesis, Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia. 141 pp. Dodd, K.K. 1995. Commercial thinning: development, administration, cable thinning operation initiation and falling practices. Master of Science Thesis, University of Washington. 126 pp. Duerr, W.A. 1960. Fundamentals of Forestry Economics. McGraw-Hill, New York. 579 pp. Fairweather, S.E. 1991. Damage to residual trees after cable logging in northern hardwoods. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 8(1): 15 - 17. Farr, W.A.; Harris, A.S. 1971. Partial cutting of western hemlock and Sitka spruce in southeast Alaska. USDA Forest Service. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experimental Station. Research Paper, PNW-124. 10 pp. Froding, A. 1982. The condition of newly thinned stands. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Operational Efficiency. Report No. 144. 4 pp. Gaffney, M.M. 1957. Concepts of financial maturity of timber. North Carolina State College. Dept. of Agricultural Economics. A..E. Information Series No.62, 105 pp. Goheen, D.J.; Filip, G.M.; Sehmitt, C.L.; Gregg, T.F. 1980. Losses from decay in 40- to 60-year old Oregon and Washington western hemlock stands. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Forest Pest Management, State and Private Forestry, Portland Oregon. 19 pp. Graham, J.N.; Bell, J.F.; Herman, F.R. 1985. Response of Sitka spruce and western hemlock to commercial thinning. USDA Forest Service. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experimental Station. Research Paper, PNW-334. February 1985. 17 pp. 78 Green, R.N.; Klinka, K. 1994. A field guide for site identification and interpretation for the Vancouver Forest Region. Research Branch, Ministry of Forests, Victoria, B.C. Land Management Handbook Number 28. 285 pp. Greene, S.E.; Emmingham, W.H. 1986. Early lessons from commercial thinning in a 30-year-old Sitka spruce-western hemlock forest. USDA, Forest Service, Research Note PNW-448. 14 pp. Griffith, B.G. 1959. The effect of thinning on a young stand of western hemlock. Forestry Chronicle. June 1959. pp. 114-133. Han, H.; Kellogg, L.D.; Filip, G.; Brown, T.D. in press. Scar closure and future timber value losses from thinning damage in Western Oregon. Forest Products Journal. 25 pp. Hedin, LB. 1994. Shelterwood harvesting in coastal second-growth Douglas-fir. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada, Vancouver, B.C. Technical Note TN-216 10 pp. Hedin, LB. 1996. Shelterwood harvesting with a skyline system in a coastal second-growth forest. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada, Vancouver, B.C. Technical Note TN-243 8 pp. Howard, A.F. 1996. Damage to residual trees from cable yarding when partial cutting second-growth stands in Coastal British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Forestry Research 26: 1392 -1396. Howard, A.F. 1995. Damage to residual trees from partial cutting with two cable yarding systems in Coastal British Columbia. Part II. Prepared for the British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Economics and Trade Branch. 15 pp. Hunt, J.A. 1995. Commercial thinning a coastal second-growth forest with a Timberjack cut-to-length system. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada, Vancouver, B.C. Technical Note TN-235. 13 pp. Hunt, J.; Krueger, K.W. 1962. Decay associated with thinning wounds in young-growth western hemlock and Douglas-fir. Journal of Forestry 60: 336-340. Joergensen, C. 1957. Thinning experiments. B.C. Forest Service, Victoria, B.C. Technical Publication No. T.45. 24 pp. Jozsa, L.A.; Middleton, G.R. 1994. A discussion of wood quality attributes and their practical implications. Forintek Canada Corp., Vancouver, B.C. Special Publication No. SP-34. 42 pp. Kellogg, L.D.; Olsen, E.D.; Hargrave, M.A. 1986. Skyline thinning a western hemlock-Sitka spruce stand: harvesting costs and stand damage. Oregon State University. Forest Research Laboratory. Research Bulletin No. 53. 21pp. 79 Leslie, F.T. 1974. Evaluation of log skidding equipment for use in silvicultural treatments: Test I: Bombardier Muskeg Jimmy skidder. Crown Zellerbach Inc. Internal Report. 32 pp. Loftus, J. 1997. Economics and biology of commercial thinning in Coastal British Columbia. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada, In Proceedings of a Commercial Thinning Workshop, Special Report SR-122. pp. 24 - 28. McNeel, J.F.; Ballard, T.M. 1993. Analysis of site stand impacts from thinning with a harvester-forwarder system. Journal of Forest Engineering 5(1): 23-29. McNeel, J.F.; Briggs, D.; Peterson, B.; Holmes, M. 1996. Damage to residual trees during partial harvest - measurement, analysis, and implications. Paper from Proceedings of Joint Meeting of Council of Forest Engineering and International Union of Forest Research Organizations Subject Group S3.04-00, Marquette MI, July 29 -August 1, 1996. pp. 73 - 80. McNeel, J.F.; Dodd, K. 1996. A Survey of commercial thinning practices in the coastal region of Washington State. Forest Products Journal 46(11/12):33-39. Maxwell, H.G.; Mcintosh, J.A. 1974. Commercial thinning can raise merchantable timber volumes. Reprint from British Columbia Logging News, September, 1974. 4 pp. Mellgren, P.G. 1980. Terrain classification for Canadian forestry. Canadian Pulp and Paper Association, Montreal, Que. 13 pp. Miles, J.; Burk, J. 1984. Evaluation of relationships between cable logging system parameters and damage to residual mixed conifer stands. Paper No. 84-1608. For presentation at the 1984 Winter Meeting of American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 26 pp. Mitchell, S.J. 1996. Windthrow assessment, commercial thinning trial - Port McNeill. Unpublished Contract Report for the Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada and Forest Renewal BC. 13 pp. Navratil, S. 1995. Minimizing wind damage in alternative silviculture systems in boreal mixedwoods. Canada-Alberta Partnership Agreement in Forestry Report. Canadian Forestry Service, Edmonton, AB. Navratil, S. 1997. Wind damage in thinned stands. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada, In Proceedings of a Commercial Thinning Workshop, Special Report SR-122. pp. 29 - 36. Nevill, R.J. 1997. A review of tree wounding. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Technology Transfer Notes, Forestry Research Applications, Pacific Forestry Centre, No. 3. 4 pp. Nichols, M.T.; Lemin, R.C., Jr.; Ostrofsky, W.D. 1994. The impacts of two harvesting systems on residual stems in a partially cut stand of northern hardwoods. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 24(2): 350-357. 80 Omule, S.A.Y. 1988. Growth and yield 32 years after commercially thinning 56-year-old western hemlock. FRDA Report 029. 16 pp. Ostrofsky, W.D.; Seymour, R.S.; Lemin, R.C., Jr. 1986. Damage to northern hardwoods from thinning using whole-tree harvesting technology. Canadian Journal of Forestry Research. 16: 1238 - 1244. Phillips, E. 1999. Alternative harvesting on visually sensitive viewscapes. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada, Vancouver, B.C. Contract Report to Forest Renewal BC. 39 pp. Pilkerton, S.J.; Han, H.; Kellogg, L.D. 1996 Quantifying residual stand damage in partial harvest operations. Paper from Proceedings of Joint Meeting of Council of Forest Engineering and International Union of Forest Research Organizations Subject Group S3.04-00, Marquette MI, July 29 -August 1, 1996. pp. 62 - 73. Shaffer, M. 1991. Socio-economic evaluation of old growth conservation strategies -demonstration of a multiple account approach. Contract Report for the Old Growth Values Team of the British Columbia Old Growth Strategy Project. Marvin Shaffer & Associates Ltd., Vancouver, B.C. 101 pp. Shina, T. 1997. Simple method for measuring residual stand damage. American Pulpwood Association Inc. Technical Release 97-R-58. 2 pp. Sidle, R.C.; Laurent, T.H. 1986. Site damage from mechanized thinning in southeast Alaska. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 3(1): 94-96. Simons Reid Collins. 1996. A review of the economics of commercial thinning in British Columbia. Contract Report for B.C. Ministry of Forests, Economics & Trade Branch, Victoria, B.C. 78 pp. Stathers, R.J.; Rollerson, T.P.; and Mitchell, S.J. 1994. Windthrow handbook for British Columbia forests. B.C. Ministry of Forests, Research Branch, Victoria, B.C. 31 pp. Stone, M.S. 1993. An economic evaluation of commercial thinning Douglas-fir in the coastal region of British Columbia. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Economics and Trade Branch, Victoria, B.C. FRDAII Report No. WP-6-002. 146 pp. Stone, M.S. 1996. Commercial thinning of lodgepole pine: an economic analysis. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Economics and Trade Branch, Victoria, B.C. FRDA II Report No. WP-6-017. 153 pp. Wallis, G.W.; Morrison, D.J. 1975. Root rot and stem decay following commercial thinning in western hemlock and guidelines for reducing losses. Forestry Chronicle 46: 203-207. Wallis, G.W.; Reynolds, G.; Craig, H.M. 1971. Decay associated with logging scars on immature western hemlock in Coastal British Columbia. Forest Research Lab., Canadian Forestry Service, Victoria, B.C. Information Report BC-X-54. 8 pp. 81 Westerberg, D.; Hannerz, M. 1994. Natural regeneration of spruce under shelterwood. Skogforsk, Glunten, Sweden. Results No. 5. 4 pp, Williamson, R.L.; Ruth, R.H. 1976. Results of shelterwood cutting in western hemlock. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Research Paper PNW-201. 25 pp. Wright, E.; Isaac, L. A. 1956. Decay following logging injury to western hemlock, Sitka spruce, and true firs. USDA, Forest Service, Technical Bulletin No. 1148. 34 pp. Worthington, N.P. 1961. Tree damage resulting from thinning in young-growth Douglas-fir and western hemlock. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Research Note 202. 7 pp. Worthington, N.P.; Staebler, G.R. 1961. Commercial thinning of Douglas-fir in the Pacific Northwest. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experimental Station. Technical Bulletin No. 1230. 124 pp. 82 APPENDIX I PERMANENT SAMPLE PLOT DATA SUMMARIES 83 Port McNeill Permanent Sample Plot Compilation Worksheet Avg DBH 31.52 August 13, 1996 Basal Area per ha: 84.12 Avg LCR: 30.24 Volume per ha: 1150.4 Avg HDR: 75.28 Entry By: Manuela Bacher Trees per ha: 955.6 Site I. Hw: 33 Data Summary for Plot # 5 Proposed Treatment: Cable shelterwood (200) Tree Species DBH Crown Defect Height to Height to Basal Ar Height Volume No. (cm) Class Live Crw 1st Stub (mA2) (m) (mA3) 1 Fd 43.6 1 1 4 1 0.15 34.3 1.80 3 Hw 43.1 2 1 4 1 0.15 33.4 2.04 4 Hw 38.3 2 crk 4 1 0.12 32.9 1.61 5 Hw 19.1 3 1 3 1 0.03 24.7 0.32 7 Hw 11.5 4 1 2 1 0.01 18.7 0.09 8 Hw 37.2 2 1 4 1 0.11 32.7 1.51 9 Hw 43.5 2 1 3 1 0.15 33.4 2.08 10 Ba 16.8 3 1 2 1 0.02 23.4 0.27 11 Hw 33.9 2 1 4 1 0.09 31.9 1.24 12 Ba 22.9 3 1 3 1 0.04 26.5 0.54 13 Ba 14.9 4 1 3 1 0.02 22.3 0.21 14 Hw 32.9 2 1 4 1 0.09 31.6 1.16 16 Ba 32.7 1 1 4 1 0.08 30.8 1.19 17 Ba 20.8 3 crk 4 1 0.03 25.5 0.43 18 Ba 11.3 4 1 3 1 0.01 20.2 0.11 19 Hw 15.8 3 1 3 1 0.02 22.3 0.20 20 Cw 10.4 4 1 2 1 0.01 11.8 0.05 21 Ba 33.5 2 1 4 1 0.09 31.1 1.26 22 Hw 21 2 1 5 1 0.03 26.0 0.40 23 Hw 34.5 1 1 5 1 0.09 32.0 1.29 24 Ba 14 3 1 3 1 0.02 21.8 0.18 25 Ba 27 2 scar 4 1 0.06 28.4 0.78 26 Hw 21.9 2 1 4 1 0.04 26.5 0.45 27 Hw 33.6 2 1 4 1 0.09 31.8 1.21 28 Hw 38.3 2 1 4 1 0.12 32.9 1.61 29 Hw 56.7 1 crk 4 1 0.25 31.4 3.19 30 Ss 51.6 1 scar 3 1 0.21 36.1 2.87 31 Hw 46.1 1 scar/crk 4 1 0.17 33.4 2.31 32 Hw 35.3 2 1 4 1 0.10 32.2 1.35 34 Ba 17.9 3 1 3 1 0.03 24.0 0.31 37 Ba 33.1 2 scar/crk 4 1 0.09 31.0 1.23 38 Hw 18.4 3 1 3 1 0.03 24.2 0.29 39 Hw 37.1 2 1 4 1 0.11 32.7 1.51 40 Ba 26.9 2 crk 4 1 0.06 28.4 0.77 41 Hw 40.1 2 1 3 1 0.13 33.1 1.77 42 Ba 27.2 3 1 3 1 0.06 28.5 0.79 43 Hw 45.6 1 crk 4 1 0.16 33.4 2.27 45 Hw 29.7 2 1 4 1 0.07 30.4 0.92 46 Ba 19.4 3 0 4 1 0.03 24.8 0.37 84 47 Ba 40.8 2 1 4 1 0.13 33.6 1.95 48 Hw 30.6 2 fork/scar 4 1 0.07 30.8 0.98 49 Hw 21.1 3 1 4 1 0.03 26.0 0.41 50 Hw 17 3 1 3 1 0.02 23.2 0.24 51 Ba 23.4 2 1 4 1 0.04 26.8 0.56 52 Ba 26 2 swp 4 1 0.05 28.0 0.71 53 Hw 36.5 2 1 5 1 0.10 32.5 1.45 54 Ba 42.2 1 1 5 1 0.14 34.0 2.10 55 Ba 31.9 2 crk 5 1 0.08 30.5 1.13 56 Hw 44.7 2 1 5 1 0.16 33.4 2.19 57 Ba 28.7 2 fork 4 1 0.06 29.2 0.89 58 Ba 51.7 1 1 5 1 0.21 36.4 3.25 59 Hw 36.6 2 1 5 1 0.11 32.5 1.46 60 Ba 20.5 3 1 4 1 0.03 25.3 0.42 61 Hw 49.9 1 crk 5 1 0.20 33.0 2.65 63 Hw 19.4 3 1 4 1 0.03 24.9 0.33 64 Ba 24.5 2 1 4 1 0.05 27.3 0.62 65 Ba 28.9 2 1 5 1 0.07 29.2 0.91 67 Hw 33.7 2 1 5 1 0.09 31.8 1.22 68 Ba 29.1 2 crk 4 1 0.07 29.3 0.92 69 Hw 28.3 2 1 4 1 0.06 29.9 0.82 70 Hw 35.1 2 1 5 1 0.10 32.2 1.34 71 Hw 27.1 2 fork 4 1 0.06 29.3 0.74 72 Ba 31.9 1 1 6 1 0.08 30.5 1.13 73 Hw 34.2 2 1 4 1 0.09 32.0 1.26 74 Hw 47.8 2 1 5 1 0.18 33.3 2.47 75 Ba 24.1 2 1 4 1 0.05 27.1 0.60 76 Hw 30.9 2 fork 5 1 0.07 30.9 1.01 78 Hw 41.4 2 1 5 1 0.13 33.3 1.89 79 Ba 48.9 1 1 5 1 0.19 35.8 2.89 80 Hw 36.1 2 1 5 1 0.10 32.4 1.42 81 Hw 27.6 2 1 4 1 0.06 29.5 0.78 82 Hw 24.7 2 1 4 1 0.05 28.1 0.60 83 Ba 36.3 1 1 5 1 0.10 32.1 1.51 85 Ba 38.3 2 1 4 1 0.12 32.8 1.70 86 Ba 13.3 4 swp 4 1 0.01 21.4 0.16 87 Hw 32.5 2 1 5 1 0.08 31.4 1.13 88 Hw 51.2 1 1 5 1 0.21 32.8 2.76 89 Ba 36.4 2 scar 5 1 0.10 32.2 1.52 90 Hw 20 3 1 4 1 0.03 25.3 0.36 91 Ba 28.7 2 swp/fork 4 1 0.06 29.2 0.89 92 Ss 67.9 1 fork 5 1 0.36 36.7 4.82 93 Ba 31.7 2 1 5 1 0.08 30.4 1.11 94 Hw 18.4 3 1 4 1 0.03 24.2 0.29 95 Hw 36.8 2 1 5 1 0.11 32.6 1.48 96 Hw 24.2 2 1 4 1 0.05 27.8 0.57 97 Hw 41.7 2 1 5 1 0.14 33.3 1.91 85 Port McNeill Permanent Sample Plot Remeasurement Worksheet Avg DBH 37.4 Date:Aug. 7, 1997 Basal Area per ha: 54.19 Avg LCR: 33.90 Volume per ha: 738.34 Avg HDR: 87.52 Entry By: Nini Long Trees per ha: 455.56 Site I. Hw: 33 Summary for Plot #: 5 Treatment: SW300 Tree Spcs DBH Crown Defect Height to Height Basal Ar Volume Live Crw No. (cm) Class Live Crw (m) (mA2) (mA3) Ratio 1 Hw 44.1 1 15.7 30.8 0.15 1.95 49.03 3 Hw 42.8 2 slabbed 18.7 32.5 0.14 1.96 42.46 7 Cw 11.2 4 1 9.3 12.0 0.01 0.06 22.50 8 Hw 37 2 16.1 25.5 0.11 1.14 36.86 9 Hw 43.6 2 20.5 32.6 0.15 2.03 37.12 22 Hw 26.6 2 1 22.0 31.5 0.06 0.78 30.16 27 Hw 33.5 2 24.4 32.2 0.09 1.22 24.22 29 Hw 56.9 1 20.2 35.0 0.25 3.61 42.29 30 Ss 51.9 1 20.5 35.7 0.21 2.87 42.58 31 Hw 46 1 crack 19.1 30.2 0.17 2.06 36.75 32 Hw 35.8 2 gouge 20.0 33.2 0.10 1.43 39.76 40 Hw 26.7 2 crack 18.0 27.9 0.06 0.68 35.48 42 Hw 26.3 3 1 15.0 20.3 0.05 0.47 26.11 49 Hw 21.5 3 1 23.9 27.3 0.04 0.45 12.45 51 Ba 33 2 23.0 30.3 0.09 1.19 24.09 52 Hw 25.8 2 sweep 23.2 27.0 0.05 0.62 14.07 53 Hw 36.6 2 24.3 34.9 0.11 1.58 30.37 56 Hw 44.8 2 1 18.9 33.2 0.16 2.18 43.07 58 Hw 51.8 1 20.5 34.4 0.21 2.97 40.41 59 Hw 36.4 2 19.4 30.5 0.10 1.35 36.39 61 Hw 50.2 1 crack 18.9 35.4 0.20 2.89 46.61 67 Hw 33.8 2 1 19.0 32.5 0.09 1.26 41.54 69 Hw 28.1 2 1 21.4 28.4 0.06 0.77 24.65 70 Hw 35.1 2 1 19.3 32.0 0.10 1.33 39.69 71 Hw 26.8 2 1 19.4 27.2 0.06 0.67 28.68 72 Ba 52.1 1 22.4 37.9 0.21 3.45 40.90 73 Hw 34.3 2 21.9 33.0 0.09 1.32 33.64 74 Hw 47.4 2 21.9 33.4 0.18 2.44 34.43 76 Hw 31.1 2 fork 16.4 29.3 0.08 0.96 44.03 78 Hw 41.4 2 22.4 32.2 0.13 1.82 30.43 80 Hw 36.3 2 1 20.9 32.9 0.10 1.46 36.47 82 Hw 25.2 2 1 21.5 29.4 0.05 0.65 26.87 83 Ba 36.4 1 18.6 28.9 0.10 1.35 35.64 85 Ba 37.9 2 19.0 33.2 0.11 1.69 42.77 87 Hw 32.6 2 slab 22.4 33.6 0.08 1.22 33.33 88 Hw 51.4 1 21.9 34.9 0.21 2.98 37.25 89 Ss 36.9 2 25.8 34.1 0.11 1.47 24.34 91 Hw 28.6 2 1 23.6 29.8 0.06 0.84 20.81 92 Ss 67.6 1 fork 23.4 34.7 0.36 4.51 32.56 93 Hw 32.2 2 23.5 33.9 0.08 1.20 30.68 95 Hw 36.9 2 gouge 21.3 34.5 0.11 1.58 38.26 86 Port McNeill Permanent Sample Plot Remeasurement Worksheet DateiOct 17, 1998 Basal Area per ha: 44.90 Avg LCR: 35.75 Volume per ha: 617.17 Avg HDR: 82.18 Entry By: Marv Clark Trees per ha: 322.22 Site I. Hw: 33 Summary for Plot #: 5 After Blowdown Treatment: SW300 Tree Spcs DBH Crown Defect Height to Height Basal Ar Volume Live Crw No. (cm) Class Live Crw (m) (mA2) (mA3) Ratio 1 Hw 44.1 1 15.7 30.8 0.15 1.95 49.03 3 Hw 42.8 2 slabbed 18.7 32.5 0.14 1.96 42.46 8 Hw 37 2 16.1 25.5 0.11 1.14 36.86 9 Hw 43.6 2 20.5 32.6 0.15 2.03 37.12 27 Hw 33.5 2 24.4 32.2 0.09 1.22 24.22 29 Hw 56.9 1 20.2 35.0 0.25 3.61 42.29 30 Ss 51.9 1 20.5 35.7 0.21 2.87 42.58 31 Hw 46 1 crack 19.1 30.2 0.17 2.06 36.75 32 Hw 35.8 2 gouge 20.0 33.2 0.10 1.43 39.76 40 Hw 26.7 2 crack 18.0 27.9 0.06 0.68 35.48 51 Ba 33 2 23.0 30.3 0.09 1.19 24.09 52 Hw 25.8 2 sweep 23.2 27.0 0.05 0.62 14.07 53 Hw 36.6 2 24.3 34.9 0.11 1.58 30.37 58 Hw 51.8 1 20.5 34.4 0.21 2.97 40.41 59 Hw 36.4 2 19.4 30.5 0.10 1.35 36.39 61 Hw 50.2 1 crack 18.9 35.4 0.20 2.89 46.61 72 Ba 52.1 1 22.4 37.9 0.21 3.45 40.90 73 Hw 34.3 2 21.9 33.0 0.09 1.32 33.64 74 Hw 47.4 2 21.9 33.4 0.18 2.44 34.43 76 Hw 31.1 2 fork 16.4 29.3 0.08 0.96 44.03 78 Hw 41.4 2 22.4 32.2 0.13 1.82 30.43 83 Ba 36.4 1 18.6 28.9 0.10 1.35 35.64 85 Ba 37.9 2 19.0 33.2 0.11 1.69 42.77 87 Hw 32.6 2 slab 22.4 33.6 0.08 1.22 33.33 88 Hw 51.4 1 21.9 34.9 0.21 2.98 37.25 89 Ss 36.9 2 25.8 34.1 0.11 1.47 24.34 92 Ss 67.6 1 fork 23.4 34.7 0.36 4.51 32.56 93 Hw 32.2 2 23.5 33.9 0.08 1.20 30.68 95 Hw 36.9 2 gouge 21.3 34.5 0.11 1.58 38.26 87 APPENDIX II MACHINE COST SUMMARIES 88 Machine Type: Self-Loading Logging Truck Model: Kenworth W900 Power Rating: 260 kW New or Used: Used Year of Costing: 1997 Tractor Pole Trailer Ownership Costs Total purchase price (P) $ 70000 25000 Expected life (Y) y 5 5 Expected life (H) h 7000 7000 Scheduled hours/year (h)=(H/Y) h 1400 1400 Salvage value as % of P (s) % 20 20 Interest rate (Int) % 11.0 11.0 Insurance rate (Ins) % 2.0 2.0 Salvage value (S)=((P*s/100) $ 14000 5000 Average investment (AVI)=((P+S)/2) $ 42000 15000 Loss in resale value ((P-SJ/H) $/h 8.00 2.86 Interest «lnt*AVI)/h) $/h 3.30 1.18 Insurance ((lns*AVI)/h) $/h 0.60 0.21 Total ownership costs (OW) $/h 11.90 4.25 Operating Costs Wire rope (wc) $ 0 0 Wire rope life (wh) h 0 0 Rigging & radio (rc) $ 0 0 Rigging & radio life (rh) h 0 0 Fuel consumption (F) L/h 36.0 0 Fuel(fc) $/L 0.42 Lube & oil as % of fuel (fp) % 15 Annual tire' consumption (t) no. 12.0 0 Tire replacement (tc) $ 420 0 Track & undercarriage replacement (Tc) $ 0 0 Track & undercarriage life (Th) h 0 0 Annual operating supplies (Oc) $ 1200 0 Annual repair & maintenance (Rp) $ 22000 4000 Shift length (si) h 8.0 8 Wages $/h Operator 25.00 0 Labourer No. 1 Hooktender 0.00 0 Labourer No. 2 Chokerman 0.00 0 Labourer No. 3 Chaser 0.00 0 Total wages (W) $/h 25.00 0.00 Wage benefit loading (WBL) % 38 38 Wire rope (wc/wh) $/h 0.00 0.00 Rigging & radio (rc/rh) $/h 0.00 0.00 Fuel(F*fc) $/h 15.12 0.00 Lube & oil ((fp/100)*(F*fc)) $/h 2.27 0.00 Tires ((t*tc)/h) $/h 3.60 0.00 Track & undercarriage (Tc/Th) $/h 0.00 0.00 Operating supplies (Oc/h) $/h 0.86 0.00 Repair & maintenance (Rp/h) $/h 15.71 2.86 Wages & benefits (W*(1+WBL/100)) $/h 34.50 0.00 Prorated overtime (((1.5*W-W)*(sl-8)*(1+WBL/100))/sl) $/h 0.00 0.00 Total operating costs (OP) $/h 72.06 2.86 Total Ownership and Operating Costs (OW+OP) $/h 83.96 7.11 Combined Owning and Operating Costs for Truck & Trailer ($/h): 91.07 89 Machine Type: Hydraulic Loader Model: Linkbelt Power Rating: 65 kW New or Used: Year of Costing: 1997 New Used Ownership Costs Total purchase price (P) $ 120000 70000 Expected life (Y) y 6 4 Expected life (H) h 7500 5000 Scheduled hours/year (h)=(H/Y) h 1250 1250 Salvage value as % of P (s) % 25 20 Interest rate (Int) % 11.0 11.0 Insurance rate (Ins) % 2.0 2.0 Salvage value (S)=((P*s/100) $ 30000 14000 Average investment (AVI)=((P+S)/2) $ 75000 42000 Loss in resale value ((P-S)/H) $/h 12.00 11.20 Interest ((lnt*AVI)/h) $/h 6.60 3.70 Insurance ((lns*AVI)/h) $/h 1.20 0.67 Total ownership costs (OW) $/h 19.80 15.57 Operating Costs Wire rope (wc) $ 0 0 Wire rope life (wh) h 0 0 Rigging & radio (rc) $ 0 0 Rigging & radio life (rh) h 0 0 Fuel consumption (F) L/h 20.0 20.0 Fuel( fc) $/L 0.42 0.42 Lube & oil as % of fuel (fp) % 15 15 Annual tire consumption (t) no. 0.0 0.0 Tire replacement (tc) $ Track & undercarriage replacement (Tc) $ 28000 28000 Track & undercarriage life (Th) h 3800 3800 Annual operating supplies (Oc) $ 1200 1200 Annual repair & maintenance (Rp) $ 20000 24000 Shift length (si) h 8.0 8.0 Wages $/h Operator 21.74 21.74 Labourer No. 1 Hooktender 0.00 0.00 Labourer No. 2 Chokerman 0.00 0.00 Labourer No. 3 Chaser 0.00 0.00 Total wages (W) $/h 21.74 21.74 Wage benefit loading (WBL) % 38 38 Wire rope (wc/wh) $/h 0.00 0.00 Rigging & radio (rc/rh) $/h 0.00 0.00 Fuel(F*fc) $/h 8.40 8.40 Lube& oil ((fp/100)*(F*fc)) $/h 1.26 1.26 Tires ((t*tc)/h) $/h 0.00 0.00 Track & undercarriage (Tc/Th) $/h 7.37 7.37 Operating supplies (Oc/h) $/h 0.96 0.96 Repair & maintenance (Rp/h) $/h 16.00 19.20 Wages & benefits (W*(1+WBL/100)) $/h 30.00 30.00 Prorated overtime (((1.5*W-W)*(sl-8)*(1+WBL/100))/sl) $/h 0.00 0.00 Total operating costs (OP) $/h 63.99 67.19 Total Ownership and Operating Costs (OW+OP) $/h 83.79 82.76 90 Machine Type: Rubber-Tired Grapple Skidder Model: Ranger 667 Power Rating: 85 kW New or Used: Year of Costing: 1997 New Used Ownership Costs Total purchase price (P) $ 160000 40000 Expected life (Y) y 8 5 Expected life (H) h 10000 6000 Scheduled hours/year (h)=(H/Y) h 1250 1200 Salvage value as % of P (s) % 25 20 Interest rate (Int) % 11.0 11.0 Insurance rate (Ins) % 2.0 2.0 Salvage value (S)=((P*s/100) $ 40000 8000 Average investment (AVI)=((P+S)/2) $ 100000 24000 Loss in resale value ((P-SVH) $/h 12.00 5.33 Interest ((lnt*AVI)/h) $/h 8.80 2.20 Insurance ((lns*AVI)/h) $/h 1.60 0.40 Total ownership costs (OW) $/h 22.40 7.93 Operating Costs Wire rope (wc) $ 500 500 Wire rope life (wh) h 1000 1000 Rigging & radio (rc) $ 0 0 Rigging & radio life (rh) h 0 0 Fuel consumption (F) L/h 20.0 20.0 Fuel( fc) $/L 0.42 0.42 Lube & oil as % of fuel (fp) % 15 15 Annual tire consumption (t) no. 1.0 1.0 Tire replacement (tc) $ 1200 1200 Track & undercarriage replacement (Tc) $ 0 0 Track & undercarriage life (Th) h 0 0 Annual operating supplies (Oc) $ 1200 1200 Annual repair & maintenance (Rp) $ 12000 15000 Shift length (si) h 8.0 8.0 Wages $/h Operator 21.74 21.74 Labourer No. 1 Hooktender 0.00 0.00 Labourer No. 2 Chokerman 0.00 0.00 Labourer No. 3 Chaser 0.00 0.00 Total wages (W) $/h 21.74 21.74 Wage benefit loading (WBL) % 38 38 Wire rope (wc/wh) $/h 0.50 0.50 Rigging & radio (rc/rh) $/h 0.00 0.00 Fuel(F*fc) $/h 8.40 8.40 Lube & oil ((fp/100)*(F*fc)) $/h 1.26 1.26 Tires ((t*tc)/h) $/h 0.96 1.00 Track & undercarriage (Tc/Th) $/h 0.00 0.00 Operating supplies (Oc/h) $/h 0.96 1.00 Repair & maintenance (Rp/h) $/h 9.60 12.50 Wages & benefits (W*( 1+WBL/100)) $/h 30.00 30.00 Prorated overtime (((1.5*W-W)*(sl-8)*(1+WBL/100))/sl) $/h 0.00 0.00 Total operating costs (OP) $/h 51.68 54.66 Total Ownership and Operating Costs (OW+OP) $/h 74.08 62.59 91 Machine Type: Mechanical Feller-Processor Model: Timbco 415 Power Rating: 150 kW New or Used: New Year of Costing: 1997 Timbco Pierce Prime Processor Mover Head Ownership Costs Total purchase price (P) $ 375000 190000 Expected life (Y) y 7 7 Expected life (H) h 9200 9200 Scheduled hours/year (h)=(H/Y) h 1314 1314 Salvage value as % of P (s) % 20 20 Interest rate (Int) % 11.0 11.0 Insurance rate (Ins) % 2.5 2.5 Salvage value (S)=((P*s/100) $ 75000 38000 Average investment (AVI)=((P+S)/2) $ 225000 114000 Loss in resale value ((P-SVH) $/h 32.61 16.52 Interest ((lnt*AVI)/h) $/h 18.83 9.54 Insurance ((lns*AVI)/h) $/h 4.28 2.17 Total ownership costs (OW) $/h 55.72 28.23 Operating Costs Wire rope (wc) $ 0 0 Wire rope life (wh) h 0 0 Rigging & radio (rc) $ 0 0 Rigging & radio life (rh) h 0 0 Fuel consumption (F) L/h 32.0 0 Fuel(fc) $/L 0.42 Lube & oil as % of fuel (fp) % 15 Annual tire consumption (t) no. 0.0 0 Tire replacement (tc) $ 0 0 Track & undercarriage replacement (Tc) $ 35000 0 Track & undercarriage life (Th) h 3500 0 Annual operating supplies (Oc) $ 2500 0 Annual repair & maintenance (Rp) $ 33000 12000 Shift length (si) h 8.0 8 Wages $/h Operator 25.00 0 Labourer No. 1 Hooktender 0.00 0 Labourer No. 2 Chokerman 0.00 0 Labourer No. 3 Chaser 0.00 0 Total wages (W) $/h 25.00 0.00 Wage benefit loading (WBL) % 38 38 Wire rope (wc/wh) $/h 0.00 0.00 Rigging & radio (rc/rh) $/h 0.00 0.00 Fuel(F*fc) $/h 13.44 0.00 Lube & oil ((fp/100)*(F*fc)) $/h 2.02 0.00 Tires ((t*tc)/h) $/h 0.00 0.00 Track & undercarriage (Tc/Th) $/h 10.00 0.00 Operating supplies (Oc/h) $/h 1.90 0.00 Repair & maintenance (Rp/h) $/h 25.11 9.13 Wages & benefits (W*( 1+WBL/100)) $/h 34.50 0.00 Prorated overtime (((1.5*W-W)*(sl-8)*(1+WBL/100))/sl) $/h 0.00 0.00 Total operating costs (OP) $/h 86.97 9.13 Total Ownership and Operating Costs (OW+OP) $/h 142.69 37.36 Combined Owning and Operating Costs for Feller-Processor ($/h): 180.05 92 Machine Type: Swing Yarder c/w Motorized Carriage Model: Diamond D210 and Maki II Carriage Power Rating: 200 kW New or Used: New Year of Costing: 1997 Yarder Carriage Ownership Costs Total purchase price (P) $ 540000 60000 Expected life (Y) y 12 7 Expected life (H) h 16000 9200 Scheduled hours/year (h)=(H/Y) h 1333 1314 Salvage value as % of P (s) % 30 25 Interest rate (Int) % 11.0 11.0 Insurance rate (Ins) % 2.0 2.0 Salvage value (S)=((P*s/100) $ 162000 15000 Average investment (AVI)=((P+S)/2) $ 351000 37500 Loss in resale value ((P-S)/H) $/h 23.63 4.89 Interest ((lnt*AVI)/h) $/h 28.96 3.14 Insurance ((lns*AVI)/h) $/h 5.27 0.57 Total ownership costs (OW) $/h 57.85 8.60 Operating Costs Wire rope (wc) $ 14000 0 Wire rope life (wh) h 900 0 Rigging & radio (rc) $ 11000 0 Rigging & radio life (rh) h 6000 0 Fuel consumption (F) L/h 29.0 1.5 Fuel(fc) $/L 0.42 0.42 Lube & oil as % of fuel (fp) % 15 15 Annual tire consumption (t) no. 0.0 0 Tire replacement (tc) $ Track & undercarriage replacement (Tc) $ Track & undercarriage life (Th) h 0 0 Annual operating supplies (Oc) $ 1000 100 Annual repair & maintenance (Rp) $ 35000 2500 Shift length (si) h 8.0 8 Wages $/h Operator 22.77 0 Labourer No. 1 Hooktender 24.04 0 Labourer No. 2 Chokerman 20.41 0 Labourer No. 3 Chaser 20.61 0 Total wages (W) $/h 87.83 0.00 Wage benefit loading (WBL) % 38 0 Wire rope (wc/wh) $/h 15.56 0.00 Rigging & radio (rc/rh) $/h 1.83 0.00 Fuel(F'fc) $/h 12.18 0.63 Lube & oil ((fp/100)*(F*fc)) $/h 1.83 0.09 Tires ((t*tc)/h) $/h 0.00 0.00 Track & undercarriage (Tc/Th) $/h 0.00 0.00 Operating supplies (Oc/h) $/h 0.75 0.08 Repair & maintenance (Rp/h) $/h 26.25 1.90 Wages & benefits (W*(1 +WBL/100)) $/h 121.21 0.00 Prorated overtime (((1.5*W-W)*(sl-8)*(1 +WBL/100))/sl) $/h 0.00 0.00 Total operating costs (OP) $/h 179.60 2.70 Total Ownership and Operating Costs (OW+OP) $/h 237.45 11.30 Total Owning and Operating Costs for Yarder c/w Carriage ($/h): 248.75 93 A P P E N D I X III W O U N D C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S U M M A R Y 94 Tree Wounding Summary-Treatment Plots Trees No Light Moderate Severe Mortal (#) (#) Wounding Wounding Wounding Wounding Wounding Commercial Thin 13 36 14 8 8 2 4 Com Thin Cleanup 7 12 1 6 3 0 2 SW100 12 9 4 4 0 1 0 SW200 19 26 8 8 5 4 1 SW300 18 38 8 9 9 6 6 Totals 69 121 35 35 25 13 13 Percentages 100% 28.9% 28.9% 20.7% 10.7% 10.7% 95 d) co "D c CD > CD co E o CT) CO r-A ca co c c cn cn ^ o o o rr o CT) co c CN 0) cr 3 O a) > cu I CO c CD E o c co CD co CN CD CO CN co CN LO CN LO X CD c CO CM CO T3 C o O) c CO or CN CN CM CO CO CN CN o h CO Go CD a co fg O T- CD CN CO CD CD CL < I h TO n TO c c c § 5 $ CD > CD CO .9?! CD IX CD > CD co CN CO CO CM CN CN CN CM CM CD > CD CO CN co c CD E +~t • CO CD CO I c c CO o 'L. , CD e E-o IO CD -> • ® CO lg, 3 -o , CD CD CO CD CO 00 CO CD CD o a> > • , CD co ro c 3 o o o CD N ICO •4—> O IQ-CM ho CD, a; to CD "D O co CD CO CO -4—' o CL CD .O E 3 El CD > CD CO I JO A TO •c. o c o 1 '1 3 O CD Q. CO CD X 3 O X CD Q CD E 3 (0 CD O CD CL CO O CL CO CO o o 10-o CD CM co CD CO 3 o CD LO CO co, CO 3 o CD o o cc LO CM O co co LO LO CM CO CO co o 00 CM d o CD CO, o CD CN LO CO CM CO LO CO CO co il LO ob CM ,1 co I col CN ll CM CD CM CM co CO co CM 96 o CM lO o CM •<*-m CD CM m OJ o CN co m CM co m f~-00 o o o CN CN CN CN LO o CN -<* CO 00 o CM o IO o CO m 00 o o o CN CN CN LO o o CM CM ^— o CM CM CM CO CM CN r— CM x— CN CN o o o CN CN CN CN CN o CN CN CN CM CN CN CN o CN CN o o o o CM o CM CM T— CM co CN CN — -*— x— CN CM CN o o o CN CN CN CN CN T o CN CN CN CN CN CN CN o o o o -*— i— <-o CN 1 Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark | Bark I | Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark | Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark ! Gouge Gouge Bark I Bark I Bark I Bark I Bark 1 Bark Bark Bark 1 Bark 1 Bark 1 Bark 1 Bark | Bark j Bark CM d CM m CO m d d in CO T— CM d Root d CD d CO CN in CD CN CM d 00 d CO d CN d T— d oo d LO d 00 d d LO d CD d in d d a> d m d o O o o CO o CM o o o o o CM o CN CO o O o CN O CM o oo o O o CSI o m o o o LO o m o LO CM o CO o CO m CN O in r— m CO o CM co o CM CO .— CM CO CO oo Ol O CN co m o o o *<— T— i— T— CN CO o T— CN CO LO CO 1 26.6 1 24.1 CO CM | 19.2 I 14-8 J I 19.8 28.3 | 34.5 | 31.8 I 33.5 I 49.4 I CM CO 28.8 1 LO 22.3 I 1 Hw I Ba | Hw I Ba ! Ba I I Hw I Hw J Ba | Ba j Hw I Hw I Ss 1 Hw Hw | Hw 1 m CO 97 CD o CN CM CM CD co o CN CO LO CD oo o CN o co LO oo co LO o O CO LO G) o CM co 'fr CD T— o CN CM o 00 o CM o 00 r--o o CM o CN CM CN CN CN CN T— CN "*— CN r— o CM o co CN CO CO CN CN o o CO CM CN CN o CN CN CN CN CN CN o o CM o CN CM CN CN CN CN CN o CN o co CN CN CN CN CN o o CO CN CN CN o co co T— CN o o CM Bark Bark Bark Gouge Gouge Gouge Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark d d CM d d \— o T— o T— LO CN CM d d iq CT) CN d Root CO d CN d LO d d d Root co d LO d d CN CD CT) T— CN CN •c— o 00 o -fr CD LO co o LO O T— LO o CN o -fr o O CD LO o CO o CN o oo o o CD o o LO o CO o CN o o CM o CO o -fr CN "fr oo o CN "fr o oo o CN CO "fr LO CD CN CO •<fr LO CD o o \— CM CO CN CO o o CN co "fr LO CD 00 CT) 24.8 46.4 40.9 o co 26.9 30.2 42.7 40.8 38.7 CN 38.6 27.5 35.6 Hw Hw Hw Hw Hw Hw Hw Hw Hw Ba Hw Hw Hw oo CT) o CN T— co 98 CD 00 CN CD O T— co LO CO o co LO CO oo CD O t— CN LO r--O) CO CO o CO CN CN CN CN CN CO co o CO CN CO CO CN CN CN CN CN CN CN co CO o CO CN T— t— co T— CO CN CN Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark CD d d co d CN d d Root Root iq LO co Root LO d CO to oo CN CN CN LO co Root co 00 t— Root d co o CD o CD o o o o CN o CN 00 o CD o o T— OS o CO -a-CN O CD O CD o LO o co LO CO o CN o CD o o CN o X— CN co •<* lO CD CO CO o CN co LO CD CO cn CN co LO 22.1 42.5 30.6 36.8 Hw Hw Hw Hw 99 O _ _ n- _ TO CO co r CC c o ^ P CO > co co "- o 00 ro O T- CO CM A o ro cu — — »• 3g < x H w E - = c Q £ £ 5 Severity Increment "fr CO 00 "fr LO CD CM CO O T— CN CO LO CM O CO CD CT) CN lO oo O _ _ n- _ TO CO co r CC c o ^ P CO > co co "- o 00 ro O T- CO CM A o ro cu — — »• 3g < x H w E - = c Q £ £ 5 Tree Wound Severity oo CD co LO CN O _ _ n- _ TO CO co r CC c o ^ P CO > co co "- o 00 ro O T- CO CM A o ro cu — — »• 3g < x H w E - = c Q £ £ 5 Max Wound Rating "fr CM CM T— T— CM O CM T— O CO CO CO CO CO CO O _ _ n- _ TO CO co r CC c o ^ P CO > co co "- o 00 ro O T- CO CM A o ro cu — — »• 3g < x H w E - = c Q £ £ 5 Type Severity O CN CN CN CN CN CN O _ _ n- _ TO CO co r CC c o ^ P CO > co co "- o 00 ro O T- CO CM A o ro cu — — »• 3g < x H w E - = c Q £ £ 5 Height Severity CM CM CM CM CM O T— CM T— O CO co CO CO CO CO Area Severity •«fr Post-harvest Tree Wounding Severity for Commercial Thinning Cleanup Area # of Trees T— CD co o CM Wound Type Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Gouge Gouge Gouge Gouge Gouge Wound Severity: Moderate (6-10) Severe (11-15) Mortal (>15) Wound Height E LO d CO d 0.45 LO d CO CM 1.55 CD d CM 1.15 1.25 CN 0.75 1.55 1.65 Root Root Root Root Root Root None (<1) Light (1-5) Wound Area E o_ 1050 CO LO o CO o o CO o co o o T— CN O x— LO LO CD CN •fr co o LO co •fr-CN CN LO CM CO CN CN Wound Number T— CN co CM co T-CN T— CN CO "fr CN CN CO LO CD 0.01 ha CM DBH 00 37.5 31.4 25.6 27.3 32.5 Number of Trees: Number of Plots: Species Hw Hw Ba No Trees Hw Ss No Trees Hw Plot Size I Plot# <c— CM CO "fr LO CD 100 CM CO CM CD CN 00 CN ro CN o CO co CN CO CN CD 00 ro O T— CN co co 1^ CO ro CN CO LO o CN CO CN CN co ro LO o r— co CN co CNI CO CN CN CN CN o x— CN CN CM CN CM co CM CN CN CN CN o CN CN CN CN CN Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Root 0.35 0.85 CO T— CN 2.45 2.45 2.65 ci LO d oo d CO ro CN CM 2.45 LO CN ro CN 2.95 CO co CD co 1.05 1.75 i— CM' T— CO CN T— CD d ro d 0.15 d CN o CN o ro CN oo OS o co o CN 00 oo ro CN LO CN CD ro T— CD LO LO CN CN o o CM o o CO o CO CO CO LO CO o T o CN o CN CN co LO CO CO LO co O) o CN CO CN CO LO CD oo ro O T— CN CO T— •ti-LO T— CN co LO o CN CO 29.6 37.8 31.8 30.7 | 27.5 j 21.2 I Hw Ba Ba Hw Hw Hw 101 Scar Seventy Index Descriptor 1 2 3 4 WndArea <200 cm' 200 399 400 799 >799 crrT Wnd Ht >13m <1 3 m Root na WndType Bark Gouge na na Severity I Increment o o o o o CM o o CM CD oo CD o T— T— CM CM O o CM Tree Wound Severity o o o CM CM o CM Max Wound Rating o o o o o CM o o CM CM CM CM T— CM CM O o CN Type Severity o o o o o o o O o Height Severity o o o o o o o CM CM CM CM CM CM O o CM Area Severity o o o o o CM o o O o # of Trees o o Wound Type Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Wound Severity: Moderate (6-10) Severe (11-15) Mortal (>15) Wound Height CD CM co d 0.55 cn d cn d to co CD CO 0.43 0.39 d Post-harvest Tree Wounding for SW100 Treatment None (<1) Light (1-5) Wound Area CMP" E o_ CO O CM CM LO T— IO to IO CD to CD co co CM co CM CO CM CD Wound Number o o o T-CM CO m CO 00 T— CN o 0.01 ha CD CM DBH 33.8 47.8 CD CO 32.4 27.6 28.1 CM 45.4 45.9 Number of Trees: Number of Plots: Species Hw Hw Hw No Trees Ba No Trees Ba No Trees No Trees Hw Hw No Trees Ss Ss Plot Size Plot# CM CO CO CO 00 cn o CM 102 0) ro TJ c CD > 0) CO E o OS OJ A CD CO c c cn cn ^ o 1 o o DC o cn cn co o o CN CO CD O) 3 C O 4—<1 c d) > CO X TJ C o •*-» 'CZ CD > CD CO c CO DC CN CN CN CN CN CN CD CO co co CO co co IO CD CO cn CN CN CN CN CN CN co CO CO E CJ o o CN V CO m •c CD > CD CO is °-CO £-CO co CD Q CO CD CD CL i- *— >. < X r-TJ TJ TJ C C C §55 .5>l IX CD > CD CO CN CN CN T: CD > CD CO CN CN CO CD CD CO co o I* LO 1 c 3 o CD CL CO m co m c CD [E "co ' CD O o CN CD > CD | CO c 3 o LO o I CD, CD CD TJ O LO LO £1 CD > CD CO CO o 3 o 1 c 3 O O) CD X LO d LO co LO CN o CN o CO LO d o ol CN o co d o o 1 c o CD n E 3 z CN CN CO CN CN co CN CN Si LO co o o oc o co CO I CO I CO O) c 3 -o 0) CD CO CD co CO iS. o d CD N ICO: o IQ-I CO CO o CL CD .o. E 3 X m Q CO CD o CD Q. CO o Q. 00 LO CO LO loo CO CN CO I CO li CN o z co CO CQ LO co oci CO ll 00 CN ll o co ll X CD 103 CN CM •t LO CD rv oo CO CO cn CM •<*• T— rv. T— O CM co CM CO CM CO CM o o o o co LO oo co CD O) CM CM CO CO 0) CM •sr •sr LO CM 00 cn CM o o o 00 CM T— CM CM CM CM co co co co CM CO CO CO CO CO o o o o co CM co co co CO CO CM co co co co CM •sr CM o o o o T— f— T— T— x— T— CM CM CM CM co co co co CM co CO CO CO CO o o o o CO CM co co CO co co CM CO co CO CO CM CM o o o o co CM co •sr Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Gouge Bark Bark T— CD d CO o r-. CM co Root Root Root Root co d Root Root Root Root Root Root CM d Root Root Root Root Root d Root Root Root Root LO d CM o CM o CM o CM o O O cn o CD o LO o CM o CD o CO o CO o CO o CM CO CO o CM \— 00 o co o LO CO 00 o 00 o CM oo CM o CM o CM o CD o CM r~- OS o o 00 o CO T— CM CO LO CD T— CM co LO CD 00 cn o o o o o -CM CO CM CO T— T— CM CO LO CM 49.7 35.4 46.2 22.5 44.3 31.4 36.6 60.9 52.5 42.4 37.1 Hw Hw Hw Ba Ba No Trees Hw Hw Hw Hw Ba Ba CO cn o T— T— CM co T— •SI-LO T— 104 CD o CN •N-o CN •sr o o CO CO O CN o co LO CO •sf •sr o o co O CN o oo CO CN CN o CN CM o o co CO O CN o CO CN CO T— •(— T— v-o CN o o O o CN T— CN t— X— x— CN o CN o o CN co O CN o co CN co 1— co CN x— o CN o o CO O o T— x— Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Gouge •sr c\i co CN CO CO d io •si-d CN d Root CD d Root [v. d Root o co o o o •St-o o CN o o T— o LO o LO CN o o •ST o CN O CN o CN O LO o |v. CO •sr LO CD rv. o CN o o CN o CN CO 40.8 52.1 36.3 22.8 34.8 39.5 44.4 41.8 No Trees Hw Hw | Ba Hw Hw Hw Hw Ba CO rv. CO O) T— 105 73 C . CD' I" != CL . CO r-•i T cu E o o> CD A CD CD C C cr r- o o a: o CD to»i |cgj o I©* CD c ca m IEB e — CO CD CD CL <X^ T- n CD > CD CO c CD E o T3 C 3 o T3 C 3 O HI, l^1 .9?l CD IX CD > CD CO CD > CD CO CD > CD CO CD C CO CC CN o> CN CO CD 00 co CD 00 CN CM CM CO CM CO CO CO CO CO co CN CN CM CM CM CM CM CO CM CM CM CD > CD CO CO CD CD 00 o 1=1* CO CD CD 1 C 3 O CD CL CO CQ CO CO CD CO 3 o CD §" o CD co CO c CD E "co CD o o CO > • , CD CO ro c 3 o LO LO co CO a> CO I— CD "O O SI CD > CD CO |LO A-"ca •c o go 1 c 3 O 1 c 3 O CD E 3 CO o o CC| o co CM d CM LO o o LO co CM CD CM co CM •*r d o CM CO to CO c I c 3 -o CD CO CD c_ CO to iS o d CD N I CO o lo-co CO o CL CD XI E 3 2 X CQ Q co CD O CD CL CO O CL LO CM ll 00 CN 5 o CO LO CN ll CM LO CM CO CM 5 x co CM co co ll 106 o CN CM CM CM o co CD 00 co CD CD o co to O O o co CO 00 co to 00 o CM •ST co CO CD CO T— tO x— [v. X— CM CM CM oo o to o 00 •ST x— CM CM CM o CO co co CO CO CM co o CO CM o o o CO CO CM CO CM CO CM CM CM CO CO CO CM CM CM CM o CM X— o CM CM o o o CM CM CM CM o co co co co co CM co o CM o o o co co CO CM co CM CM co co CM CM CM CM CM o CO o CO x— o T— o o CM CO CM Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Gouge Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge SO CD d CM d Root Root •sr T— LO CM Root Root Root LO d Root CD d CM Root Root Root 0.15 Root CM CM SO •sr d Root Root CM d 0.25 x— o CM d LO d T— CM o CD o o CM o CM o co to CD O CM — o o o CM oo o o o •sr o o o co tO rr oo IO rv. to o tO o CD o o O O o CD o co o •sr CM o CO o o rv. o to o o CM o CM o co 00 CD o CM co •ST CM CO to o CM o o o CM CO CM co rr to CO CM CO LO CO |v. 31.8 32.1 43.2 35.9 32.4 46.4 CO CO 00 CO 44.2 49.4 SS No Trees Hw | Hw Hw Ba No Trees Hw No Trees Ba Hw Hw Hw CO 00 CD o — 107 o CN CN rr CD 00 o CN x— rr x— CD co CO co to o CN rr LO CD r-00 CD co to |v-oo rr h-CO CN rr CD oo o O CN CD CD o x— CD CO CO CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CO CO CO CN CN CO CN CN CO CN CN co CO CO CN CN CN CN CN CN co CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN co CN co CN co CN CN CO CN CN co CO CO CN CN CN CN CN CN CN Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Root d 0.04 rr d rf d d rr d CD d co d Root d Root rr d CN Root co d d x— CN CD x— 00 co CN rr co CO Root T— d 0.45 to Root Root Root CD d 0.15 to d rr d rr d h-d to CN o UO CN rr CN 00 o CD 00 CN CN o co o rr IO 00 o o rr o CN o CO x— o rr o rr CN CN oo O CD T— o CO to oo O rv. o co o CD o CO o o CN o rr o 00 o co o o T-o CN o to CN o rr x— CN o rr CN co co O CN 00 CN CO rf IO CD rv. oo CN CN CO rr CN CO rr to CO rv. x— CN CO rr to CO oo CN co rr to CD CN 37.1 49.8 22.2 33.8 26.9 Hw Hw Hw Hw Hw Hw CN x— co 108 CO LO o CN o CO LO 00 T— T— CO CD CN T— LO 00 CM CO CN CO O o o CN co LO CD CN co T-LO CD CO LO CN CO co CM •fr O o o CM CD T— CO CM CM CO CM o co co co co co co co CO co CO CO CN CO O o o CN co CN CM CN CO CN CO CN O o o co CM CM CO CN o co CO co co co CO CN co co CO CO CN CN O o o CN co CN CN co CN co O o o CN CN CM CN co Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Root d CD d Root co d Root LO Root T— Csi Root Root Root Root 0.17 Root Root Root Root 0.15 CD d "fr CM CN d Root CM d CD d CN t— CM LO CN Root LO d "fr CM CN CM CO CN o CO O CN LO CD LO co o •st-CN o 00 •fr o co CN o CM co o 00 o LO "fr o •fr o x— X— o CM O oo CN o CN o LO CN O LO •fr o O LO o CD "fr CD LO CN CM CO "fr LO o CM CO •fr LO CN CO •«fr LO CD oo CN O o o CM co "fr LO CD 00 CN 37.7 45.2 54.1 41.2 29.8 37.7 29.2 38.7 26.5 36.7 27.5 Hw No Trees Hw Hw Hw Ba Ba Hw Hw Ba Hw Hw LO co 109 601 CO LO rv o X— CS| o co rr LO oo co CD O) CN LO 00 X— CNI CO CN co rr o o o CN co LO |v-CD CN CO LO CD co LO CSI co CO CN rr o o o CM co CO CSI CSI co CM o CO CO CO CO co co CO CO co CO CO CN CO X— o o o CN CO CN CM CN CO x— CN CO CN o o o CO CSI CSI co CM o CO CO CO co CO CO CN CO CO CO CO CN CN x— o o o CN CO x— CN CN x— co CN CO o o o CN CN CN CN co Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Root rv o co d Root co d Root LO Root csi Root Root Root Root 0.17 Root Root Root Root 0.15 CO d rr CN CN d Root CN d co d CN csi LO CM Root LO d rr rr rr csi CM CNI rr rr oo CN o CO o CN LO h-CO LO co o rr CN o oo rr o co CN rv. o rr CN CO o 00 X— o LO rr o rr o T— X— o rr CM O CO CN o x— CN o LO CN o LO rr o iv. o LO o CD rr CD LO CN CS| co rr LO o v— t— CN CO rr LO CN co rr LO CD CO X— CN o o o x— CN CO rr lO CD fv. oo CN 37.7 45.2 54.1 41.2 29.8 37.7 29.2 38.7 26.5 36.7 27.5 Hw No Trees Hw Hw Hw Ba Ba Hw Hw Ba Hw Hw rr LO CD Iv. CN CD CM co •<fr CN -<fr o h-CD CM o CM CM CM CM CM CO CN CN CO CO CM CM CM CN CM co T— CM CN co CO Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark Gouge Bark Bark Bark Bark Bark CM d 0.12 CM O CN d d Root CD d CD d Root Root CD T— CD O CM o •fr-CM CO o CD o CD o LO o CD o CN v-ro CM CO T— CN CN co 12.1 28.2 41.9 37.3 Hw Ba Hw Hw CO 110 APPENDIX IV NET PRESENT VALUE MODEL 111 > DL Z <£> CO CM" «» CO CT) •* |CM o CD CD" CO n c <u > Or co •* i o" I CM </» • co o 00 CM" co c cu > CC o to-CO o oo •*! oo oo co m ml </> <n <o v> oo3 O) g O) O) o o d o m | I 1""" Si c n n r 3 (/) c/j O O 0-1 CD IQ-CU if o is? is £ ; cq X "O c CM E cc X ( ro ' c CM X OQ o ©I d o o| d o co* CO CO CO s: CD CM , O. CO |oo_ c\f 00 CM CO_ |CM co a: ° o -d LO ° ° to Tj-I co o co:j o o CM CM, CM CM CM CM if* LU CO 2>; > CO — Oi „ (J 0) -c » £ •6 ^ Q IIS, 5 CO CC o CO cc E 5 CD CD co CM CD LO if* o CO ICC ill £ ro X , "2 \'w , <" ICC £ , co X in I— >> X OQ O m co LO co o CO CO CO lo c E o O CO 112 arvest CT-100 CO JZ to*"" E, 0.00 o.ooj 0.00 0.00 o o d 66.95 156.08 223.03 1 Yield @ H CT-200 sz E, 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.63 100.39 204.75 o 326.77 Final Stand Level CT-300 "ro sz co** E, 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.65 211.58 249.46 o 497.69 CT-450 "co sz co~* E, 0.00 22.98 40.22 121.59 175.18 212.57 0.00 572.54 hinning CT-100 ro" <o** E, 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.00 81.35 115.35 1 Yield @ Tl CT-200 'cc? sz (o** E 0.00 0.23 22.66 96.34 74.23 193.46 Resid Stand Level CT-300 "co JZ CO*" E, 0.00 1.15 54.29 135.691 78.62 269.75 CT-450 JZ CO**" E, 11.43 28.63 82.24 121.06 69.48 0.00 312.84 lues from Stim Analysis Stand Level Yield Final Harv (@ 73 yrs) "co JZ CO*" E, 3.44 202.17 228.64 210.45 299.53 136.39 o 1080.62 Physical Rotation nT JZ OT** E 14.80 240.25 210.16 267.97 198.06 0.00 0.00 931.24 Financial Rotation "ro JZ to*" E 152.23 143.12 196.61 177.89 81.35 0.00 751.20 Yield Val DBH Class (cm) LO o CN to CN o CO m CO o •N-LO N" o LO to LO 113 Log Value for Clearcut Harvest @ Thinning Age Avg Value ($/mA3): $56.76 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 152.23 15.22 137.01 152.23 20 143.12 28.62 114.50 143.12 25 196.61 19.66 78.64 98.31 0.00 196.61 30 177.89 62.26 71.16 44.47 0.00 177.89 35 81.35 36.61 28.47 16.27 0.00 81.35 40 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 751.2 0.00 0.00 118.53 222.12 410.55 0.00 751.20 0.0% 0.0% 15.8% 29.6% 54.7% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $0 $0 $7,586 $12,883 $22,170 $0 $42,639 114 Log Value for Clearcut Harvest @ 73 Years Avg Value ($/mA3): $58.72 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 3.44 0.34 3.10 3.44 20 202.17 40.43 161.74 202.17 25 228.64 22.86 91.46 114.32 0.00 228.64 30 210.45 73.66 84.18 52.61 0.00 210.45 35 299.53 134.79 104.84 59.91 0.00 299.53 40 136.39 13.64 13.64 61.38 27.28 20.46 0.00 136.39 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 1080.62 13.64 13.64 292.69 348.53 412.13 0.00 1080.62 1.3% 1.3% 27.1% 32.3% 38.1% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $1,159 $1,091 $18,732 $20,215 $22,255 $0 $63,452 115 Log Value for Clearcut Harvest @ Culmination Age Avg Value ($/mA3): $57.52 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m 3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 14.8 1.48 13.32 14.8 20 240.25 48.05 192.20 240.25 25 210.16 21.02 84.06 105.08 0.00 210.16 30 267.97 93.79 107.19 66.99 0.00 267.97 35 198.06 89.13 69.32 39.61 0.00 198.06 40 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 931.24 0.00 0.00 203.93 310.10 417.20 0.00 931.24 0.0% 0.0% 21.9% 33.3% 44.8% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $0 $0 $13,052 $17,986 $22,529 $0 $53,567 116 Outturn Value Generator Avg Value ($/mA3): $55.84 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 140.8 14.08 126.72 140.8 20 114.49 22.90 91.59 114.49 25 114.37 11.44 45.75 57.19 0.00 114.37 30 56.83 19.89 22.73 14.21 0.00 56.83 35 11.87 5.34 4.15 2.37 0.00 11.87 40 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 438.36 0.00 0.00 36.67 109.61 292.08 0.00 438.36 0.0% 0.0% 8.4% 25.0% 66.6% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $0 $0 $2,347 $6,358 $15,772 $0 $24,477 117 Outturn Va ue Generator Avg Value ($/mA3): $61.19 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 0 0.00 0.00 0 20 22.98 4.60 18.38 22.98 25 40.22 4.02 16.09 20.11 0.00 40.22 30 121.59 42.56 48.64 30.40 0.00 121.59 35 175.18 78.83 61.31 35.04 0.00 175.18 40 212.57 21.26 21.26 95.66 42.51 31.89 0.00 212.57 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 572.54 21.26 21.26 221.07 173.15 135.81 0.00 572.54 3.7% 3.7% 38.6% 30.2% 23.7% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $1,807 $1,701 $14,148 $10,043 $7,334 $0 $35,032 118 Outturn Va ue Generator Avg Value ($/mA3): $55.61 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 152.23 15.22 137.01 152.23 20 141.97 28.39 113.58 141.97 25 142.32 14.23 56.93 71.16 0.00 142.32 30 42.2 14.77 16.88 10.55 0.00 42.2 35 2.73 1.23 0.96 0.55 0.00 2.73 40 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 481.45 0.00 0.00 30.23 118.38 332.84 0.00 481.45 0.0% 0.0% 6.3% 24.6% 69.1% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $0 $0 $1,935 $6,866 $17,973 $0 $26,774 119 Outturn Value Generator Avg Value ($/mA3): $62.40 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 0 0.00 0.00 0 20 0 0.00 0.00 0 25 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 30 36.65 12.83 14.66 9.16 0.00 36.65 35 211.58 95.21 74.05 42.32 0.00 211.58 40 249.46 24.95 24.95 112.26 49.89 37.42 0.00 249.46 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 497.69 24.95 24.95 220.30 138.61 88.90 0.00 497.69 5.0% 5.0% 44.3% 27.8% 17.9% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $2,120 $1,996 $14,099 $8,039 $4,800 $0 $31,055 120 Outturn Va ue Generator Avg Value ($/mA3): $55.95 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 152.23 15.22 137.01 152.23 20 142.89 28.58 114.31 142.89 25 173.95 17.40 69.58 86.98 0.00 173.95 30 81.55 28.54 32.62 20.39 0.00 81.55 35 7.12 3.20 2.49 1.42 0.00 7.12 40 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 557.74 0.00 0.00 49.14 148.49 360.11 0.00 557.74 0.0% 0.0% 8.8% 26.6% 64.6% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $0 $0 $3,145 $8,613 $19,446 $0 $31,203 121 Outturn Va ue Generator Avg Value ($/mA3): $63.04 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 0 0.00 0.00 0 20 0 0.00 0.00 0 25 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 30 21.63 7.57 8.65 5.41 0.00 21.63 35 100.39 45.18 35.14 20.08 0.00 100.39 40 204.75 20.48 20.48 92.14 40.95 30.71 0.00 204.75 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 326.77 20.48 20.48 144.88 84.74 56.20 0.00 326.77 6.3% 6.3% 44.3% 25.9% 17.2% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $1,740 $1,638 $9,273 $4,915 $3,035 $0 $20,600 122 Outturn Value Generator Avg Value ($/mA3): $56.23 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 152.23 15.22 137.01 152.23 20 143.12 28.62 114.50 143.12 25 196.61 19.66 78.64 98.31 0.00 196.61 30 143.89 50.36 57.56 35.97 0.00 143.89 35 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 40 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 635.85 0.00 0.00 70.02 180.05 385.78 0.00 635.85 0.0% 0.0% 11.0% 28.3% 60.7% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $0 $0 $4,481 $10,443 $20,832 $0 $35,756 123 Outturn Va ue Generator Avg Value ($/mA3): $66.12 Wound Level (%) 0.0% Diam Total S Peeler Sawlog Gang Chip&Saw Pulp Degrade Total Class Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume to Pulp Volume (cm) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) (m3/ha) 15 0 0.00 0.00 0 20 0 0.00 0.00 0 25 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 30 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 35 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 40 66.95 6.70 6.70 30.13 13.39 10.04 0.00 66.95 45 156.08 15.61 23.41 78.04 23.41 15.61 0.00 156.08 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 55 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Totals: 223.03 22.30 30.11 108.17 36.80 25.65 0.00 223.03 10.0% 13.5% 48.5% 16.5% 11.5% 0.0% 100.0% Log Value $85 $80 $64 $58 $54 $54 Revenue $1,896 $2,409 $6,923 $2,135 $1,385 $0 $14,747 124 ro ro NO —X co 03 _^ ro ro co ro ro ro _± cn CD i 4^ —k co 03 CO CD CJ) --g 2* 05  CD CO ro —k CO CD b CD bi ro co 03 co ->• 4>-2* bi 05  CD ro CD bi 4*. MMMM-'-'-'-i-i-*-'-'^-' coro-^ocooo-gcDoiii.coro-'O CD00^JO)Ol4i.C0ro IIII03lrjDlIIIlJ)In)D"IICDlIrj"lDl CD CO o o o 7T 7T o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o b ro b -vi b b Ol b Ol b 4^ b X x b b -vl b Ol b co b ro b ro b ro b ro b ro b ro b -vi b 4^ b 4*. b co b ro co CO o 00 ro oo ro -vl ro a> ro o CO ro ro o CO o ro oo CO o ro co ro co IO ro ro ro ro ro CO o ro vg IO cn ro -Pk CO o —x 4^ •vi fo CO ho ho bo 4^ CO bo CO bi vg b CO bi vg ho bo bo ho o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o o ro 4*. CD b CO b CD ro ro bi oo co bo CD b oo b CO ho cn ho co ro 4^ o> ho oo bo oo bi o 4*. •vi co vg bo -g CO cn CO 4*. ro o ro f° 4^ cn ro co cn o Ol 4^ ro 0 CO co 4*. ~g cn o CO CD 00 CD co 4^ ro CD co co co Ol o 4*. 4*. 4^ CO CD cn o CD fo b o ro b b CD co co co o 45-ro CO 4*. b -vi 4*. vg ho o b CD cn oo bi 4*. ro co b co co b -j b IO o ho cn CO CD o ro O) CO CO ro ro ^g CD 00 CD cn ro o CO o CD CD co cn CO p 4^ co 4^ CD o cn CD o co 00 ro o ro -g o CO b cn vg o b 4^ CO ro CO 4=> •vi b C) co •vi co CO co 4*. O) 4*. Ol ro -Nl CO o 00 4^ 4*. co cn cn co oo ro b o b ->g CO ro bo co o co co o ho CD CD CO X5 O CO m n CO v< o CD CD cn c 3 3 co >2 o CD. 3 x •g o CD O CO g CO § a CD (B* o l X < 2. CD CQ o 3 § o CD zz c CD_ CD CO CD O rr ro > c CQ C CO co co co o ro ro CO "D ro < co O CD •=• CO CD_ > CO cr cr I ro CQ' > ro co CD CO CO 3 CQ co 3 ro 5? O DO o ro c n rs % o X o -a o CO ro CL ro CD 3 ro 3 o o n CD 00 CD rj "5 03 — 2 0) sr TJ o 3. ^ o Z CD TJ ro —i 3 CD r> ro rj cn CD 3 CD TJ O O o 3 -o rr ~° rr CD CJ) O -v! -si ro CD ^ r* o 00 Ol o CD 5' n o -i CO rr ro ro cn > > < < CD CQ CQ ~ r-x a g ro ro _k co co co ^ ro ro co TJ o CD CD O) _k ro ro ro ro _k CO oo _k ro ro co _k _k _x _k ro ro ro _k O) co —k 4*. —x —x CO oo co CD CJ) —k 2» 4^ ri co 05 b CD IO —k CD b b bi b bi 4^ ro CO oo 4.^ CO x 4*. 4*. 2» cn ri co 05 b ho b bi 4^ co _k 4^ ro Ol ro CO CO 4^ CD ro cn co o cn CD co 4^ cn ho b CD b b co 4*. 4i. b -vl —k o CO —k —k oo oo ho —k 4* b 00 O) co ro —k CD cn CD CD ro -vl oo co 4^ —k CO -4 co -vl -vl CO —k -s| CO O) oo oo cn CJ) co O) Ol CO CO ro CO CO 4*. 4* CO cn o CO O) O) CD CO —k cn -r* x CD o 4^ CO O) b bi bi io b o b b 4^ ho O) CO O) CO -v| CO CO —k CO CD —k O cn CD ho IO 00 O) ro ro 00 CD O) 4^ co CO o cn ro ro cn CD 4*. 4^ —k —k CD —X co O) cn —k 00 Ol ~g co CD co -'•ro-».rororo-k,-kiorooo-*-' ->• ro ro ro K> 0)tD^4k4k^^W(J)(0(j)-'SN^4k^CO!DN)-*CD^ C0O0)-k-krO^I00CnO-kCD prococo-kiocDCDrocooo) b^buuikicujuikjk oiojiMJksrosuuoiui UUJkikJkOiO-'MKJO OlCJ)C0CJ)OCJ)C0 00O-vlc0 ro-vio-k-kcocnooroo-vi Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol 4^ 4^ 4^ 4^ 4^ 4*. 4^ -t> 4^ co 00 oo oo CJ) Ol oo ro o CO co -J O) Ol CO ro o CO co -si O) CO X I X X X X X X X CD X X X X X X X X CO 00 •s •s •€ •s 0) a •£• •s 0) ro ro ro ro ro oo co to ro _^ 00 00 ro ro ro ro ro CO ro 4^ CJ) CO NI ro -si CO CO o ro O) —^ Ol —* o CJ) Ol o CO CO ro bi CO 4.^ bo b CT) b) ro 4^ NI 00 4^ b) ho NI 4^ 00 o co oo X X X X X X X X Ol ro N| ro O) 00 ro ro Ol oo Ol ro ro ro 4^ bo 00 00 4^ CO N| ro CD 4*. oo oo oo ro ro ro cn o 0) o 7? co 3-4^rototororo4^->-roto CD 0) 3 4^ 00 4^ 4^ 4^ 4^ 4^ 4^ 00 4^ -ti 4^ 00 00 O04^WCO4^CO4^4^CJW4^WCOGOO0CJ4^4i 00 00 ro -»• •-vi 4^ oo ro oo 00 bo ro ro ro ro ro oo oo _i ro ro _i _i oo oo ro ro ro ro ro _x ro ro _i i to _i oo ro to oo ro —^ 4*. O) oo Nl ro -J CD oo o to CJ) -Nl Ol —i 4^ o CJ) 4^ Ol -si O) 4^ 00 ro Ol Ol ro bi o co CD ro bi 00 4^ bo b) b) b) ro 4^ "-si 00 4*. b) to NI bo oo bo 4*. co NI to CD 4^ ro 4^ oo ro oo oo ro ro to CO Ol 00 4^ 4^ ro oo 4*. CO oo oo ro ro Ol O oo ro o NI oo O) 00 o NI ro oo oo -ti Ol -si to ro X CO oo ro -si o to oo 4^ —i Ol CJ) 00 00 N| bo co NI Li Nl to 00 bi to bo b> Li bo to "-si 00 b io co "•si 4^ bo CD b 4^ 00 ro Ko 4^ oo 4^ 00 —^ 4^ 4*. Nl 0) N| CD —i CD oo 4*. Ol oo CJ) "-si 4^ CO CD -si -si O) io to oo co b) ro 4^ oo NI ro NI CD Nl ro Ol 00 -si o ro 00 oo i -sJ oo co cn ro o 4^ O) Ol o 4^ oo CJl 4S-—i o o oo O Nl o CO to O —^ Ol 4^ Ol oo 00 CD oo o oo 4^ k oo oo oo 00 to 4* CD CO co -*1 4*. O) 00 00 CD O) -1 -1 CD -si CT> ro 00 00 oo ro oo -s| 00 -sJ to -1 oo CT) CT) ro CJ) cn S IO -b0(D ro 4*. ro CT) ro oo 00 N| 00 ro "s| co ro 00 ro o ro CJ) oo -st 00 ro Ol to ro 4s. ro o ro CT) -ti ro Ol to -si ro CT) 4> oo ro to Ol co Ol ro ro ro 4^ CD ro bi bo bo b) b) b) to 4^ N| 00 4^ b) Ko NI -ti ro bo 00 00 4^ bo "-si Ko CD 4^ ro ro o) co oo -- oo co oo CT) 00 -s| Ol —* ro cn oo oo co CT) 00 CJ) co " — ro cn CT) oo ro co -si co to oo ro —^ cn ro oo Ol -si 4^ CT) -sj oo ro ro CO CO "t^ ro o -si 4^ Ol Ol CO o 4^ o co co oo ro CT) 0)tOIOCJ)CJ)CT)-slCT)CT)Cn ro o -i 4^ O "Nl b o oo o ro b -si o -i 4^ oo oo 00 4^ CD si W U Ol to to oo oi O CD CD o CO 3 ro o o o o o o p o o o o o o o o o o o o o o p o o o o o o o o o o ro b 4*. b 00 b oo b Ol b Ol b 4^ b oo b ro b oo b 4^ b oo b b ro b oo b Ol b 4i b Ol b 00 b cn it b ro b O) b Ol b ro b oo b 4i b ro o b -ti b Ol ro CT) ro Ol ro ro oo ro 00 ro -N| oo ro oo to oo ro Ol to N| ro Ol CD ro ro oo ro oo ro oo ro cn ro oo ro Ol to oo 00 oo ro ro ro oo to oo ro to 4^ ro N| ro 00 ro N) ro oo bo bo b> Ko CO bi ""si 4^ bi Ko Ol Nl b> N| Ko 4*. io 4*. bo bo bo b) co Ko 4*. b bo N| i b o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o p o o > CO on -s| 00 CT) 00 to CT) b co bi CO bi Ko Ol 00 Ol bi 4*. 4^ ro —^ ro bi oo b Nl b oo 4*. ro bi CO CO N| N| O) co 4^ ro o bo o b CO O) 00 -ti 4^. co —i 00 4^ O bi o cn oo to Ol 4*. o 00 ro CD oo o ro NI oo 00 oo CT) oo CT) ro o ro N| ro V ro 00 oo 00 Ol •Hi oo Ol 4*. Nl 4^ ro ro 00 4^ ro CD 00 CD oo ro 4* Nl w o ro co oo 00 4^ -ti oo _i cn to ro CT) ro 00 Ratio bo oo "-si -ti bo -t> ro "-si Ol Ol "-si Ol Ko -si Ko o bi oo 00 o Nl bo CD b) oo 4^ bo CT) ro 00 N| Nl Nl ro b Ol bo o co CJ) Nl N| 4s. N| bo CJ) Ko N| b oo 4^ oo 00 00 b oo Ko oo 4*. 4*. it ro CT) to CD oo o O) oo oo co NI 00 Ol ro Nl O) ro oo Ol CJ) oo co oo Nl CD co ro ro ro it ro Ol o Ol Nl CO -t> O 4^ o 4^ Nl oo o 00 -ti oo CD o oo Ratio b O) bi -N| b CD OO ro Ko oo bo to b CT) i ro i oo bi N| CJ) 4*. ro b) ro 4i CJ) 00 cn bo CJ) 4*. Nl b CJ) CD CT) CD Ol bi Ko ro b) o b o Ko Nj b o CD Nl ro 00 to 00 oo bi Ol Q p DO O [ CO g CO § o CD <B" o ro co O 5| CO CD cr o CO oo CO 00_ O CD j CO00C»C»C»C»OT ? 3 XXXXXXXOTXXXXXOTXXCOXXXXXXXCOXXXXXXX -iM-i-iU-iM-»M-» U(DO)UOOOOMCOU ro X CO X X *; CD x O) CA) O CA) CD 4*. Ol O) £x CA) CA) CA) ->• —k IS) . K X w, O) O 4^. -1  IO S v " " ™ UI ; (D • •! O) O) CO -vl IS) 00rO4*.C04*roC0lorO X X X X X X •> •> *> *> Is) co OJ IS) _^ O) —x 4*. o CD co CO bi vg co b) 1 -3" XJ 7T co o CD w o CD Ji. IS) IS) CO *> co" o CD CA)4^0JW4^WWC)4^WC^ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o b b vg b Is) b b -vl b co b CO b b O) b co b O) b b IS) b Is) b IS) is) CO b co b rs) b Ol b IS) b CO b ro b Ol b ro b Ol b Ol b oo b ro b -vl b Ol b co ro o CO o ro co ro o CO o ro -r* IS) Ol ro CO o ro o CO co ro co ro o IS) CO ro CO ro CO co -vl CO ro ro ro 00 IS) ro ro 4V. ro co ro -j ro ro ro oo ho oo CO IO CO o IS) oo ro cn jv. £x b So bo io 4*. ro b ro ro b ro Ko cn CD bo bo co vg b b co b co b b co 'co Ko b o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 4*. o o o o o o o o o o o o o CO b ro ro CO CO b 00 Ko CD CO -vl x cn bo cn co bo Ol vg co io cn Ko 4* ro cn 00 ho Ko ro b —X ro ro CO ro Ko co cn vg Ko 4*. b -vl b CO b 4^ —X O) b CD b o CO 4^ ro O) co •iv. CO 4* ro Ol CO Ol CO 00 4* IS) co co CO ro cn ro 4*. CO —X ro cn —V CO CO 4*. -v! CO vg ro ro CD co CO 00 CO ro oo CO 4*. CO o CO CD ro CD CO Ol ro 00 ro o 4* ro io co vg vg CD b co b 00 b cn x ro CO co bo vg O) o CD X b o bo O) b CO b Ol b oo V -vl ro Ol b o bo 4*. b co -vl cn oo cn bi 00 4* O) bi -iv. b CO X cn Ol IS) o ro CO ^1 cn co o o co ro Ol O) 4*. o 4*. cn CO oo o CD cn co 4*. co O) co Ol O) ro CD 4*. CO oo CA) co CD ro CD co -vl X Ol CO o o co co 4*. O) o o co ro -vi co 4*. co vg O —x O) b b O) b O) b O) b ro O) b 4*. bi co O) cn cn 00 ro 4^ 4^ b 03 b oo Ko co b CD vg O b cn CO o vg o b o -vl CO 4v. O bi vg bo o CO co ro co oo co b CO c"> co ^ s .3 X o p| QJ O CO ^ CO § S" CD 5T o CD CQ o3| CO CD Ef zi I cr o CO CD 3 co > CD ro — — > X g* ffi. A CQ co 3 ^ CD 5? J§l 70 gi O Q3 3 j O CD j 111 -iio-x-iw-ino-iro-i|\j-ij —k o) co —k —k -i ro , io co CA) ro utDrouoaoMfflu^cfium^souoi^p^cfl^ ro CO CO ro CO CO 4*. ro co ro ro ro X X _x. 4^ _x ro CO _x _x ro co co _x _x ro co ro ro O) 4^ cn Ol 00 X CD co cn co Ol CO CO •fv. 1^ co ro CD CO oo co 03 4^ o CO CD co cn 00 o 4^ ro vg co b b b l_k co CD vg -* bo b bo b b vj _x io b CO b L_x cn bi cn 4*. bi L_x b Lx. X CD O) o co 00 ro CO o O) b o o cn CO cn b O) Ol o co ro O) vg o 00 O) co X oo cn O) ro oo O) 4V. ro oo co O) ro CD O) ro CO 4^ 4^ oo Ol co 4* -J Ol Ol oo CD —X —x O) CO oo co vj -vl CD oo -vl oo co o -vl oo 4^ O) oo -vl CD O) CO ro o CO ro o CO 00 —X ro O Ol ro CO CD CO 4^ O) CD O) cn —X oo CD -vl o -vl •vl O) oo -vl O) CD O) ro CD CO -tv. ro ro O) —* co CO cn 4*. cn 4^ -'N)-»-ico-»M-kN)-i  N ro-i-i _i cn GO , -»• -kis) roco—^ooro—1 u(oc»uooooiocou*o)uc?^NOcom^ro^ 4^vg^jvjcJ)4i.iobvj|sj bio4^4^bb4^bvgjvoOTOTbbbvgoob OIOUUIOUMCDOOICOOOIAUCO roro^coo^oi^^CAJ^^CAJ^rocn ^As^b)fflbbffljbuiJj("j CA)COOCO^C»C)DO)rOO)4s*000)U10orO M^fflUffllOvlUlUOOIDpOUvl ^bibbiorosbuvibjfflAbib JX-IM»U!DO0IOOONJON|O IO N> ro ro oooooooooo c»Nia)oi4s.ooro->o ro ro ro > _i 4s. _i CO CO CO ro ro ro _i _i ro ro _i ro Oi ro Ol _i oo ro IO ro oo CO cn ro Oi CO Oi i CD 4s. 4s oo Oi CD CD Nl CD N| N| oo Ol ro ro Oi Oi ro Ol oo N| CO N| Nl o I —i is. co Ol —*• ro bi CO NI is. -* bo ro N| Nl bi Ol ro ro Oi N| ro Ol Ol 00 CO CD cn 00 co ro ro ro CO CO CO ro CO 00 _^ ro ro ro oo ro ro ro 00 00 ro 00 oo oo oo ro ro ro ro CO CO CO . O —* TJ 7? TJ TJ o CO 3 * CQ O —t 7T 00_ CT O CO o DO 4s.4s.4s.Cn4s.4s.Ol4s.01WCn4s.Ol4s.4s.4s.WW010105COOl4s.4s. CO Ol 4s. 4s 4s 4s oo _i ro ro CO 00 ro CD Ol co 00 oo _i o CO oo o o 4s. N| 00 oo CO oo _». o o o ro ro o o oo CD o CD CO ro o CD o O 00 CD 4s. Oi 4s. Oi o CD o i Ol 00 4s. Nl Nl —* Oi bo Ol is. 4*. ro Li bo 00 CD bo Oi C0 4*. is. bn Oi b bo bo i CD Nl Oi b ro is. b b ro Nl bi oo 4s. CO oo ro 00 Nl N| oo Oi o N| O CD Oi ro CD ro 4s. CO 4s. o o Ol Ol oo oo Oi Oi —' Ol 00 oo co ro co ro bi ->• ro ro ro 4s. oo cn ro CD co oi -i L». Li Li L». "js. oo bi co oo 4s. oo 4S. 00 oo Oi ro Oi ro CD ro Nl CD Nl ro N| ro CO Ol x Ko b bo N| is. Li Li bo ro Nl N| b bi ro ot Oi ro Ol 00 N| CO CD ro 4s. ro Nl ro N| w o N| ro Ol bi 00 Oi Oi bi bo '-i _i ro ro i ro _i _i oo ro _i oo oo 00 _i oo ro i ro co ro oo oo CD CO 4s. —i —i 4S. co co IO ro oo ro oo oo o oo Oi —i CD 00 N| CO 4S. N| CD ro ro oo —^ 4s. N| bo CO oo CD 'co bo b 00 io Li Li 00 o o is. b Nl Ol bi Nl 00 Li Ko bo b is. oo ro CD Oi 00 oo N| N| Oi oo oo Ol CD Ol b bi bi CO oo 00 bi ro Nl o CO i o o Ol Nl i 00 00 CD 4s. Ol fo ro ro ro _i oo oo CO o 00 ro ro Ol ro 4S. o —i 4s. ro Oi ro Ol —i ro —i i CD 4s. O 4s. O 00 00 ro oo oo Oi oo 00 ro 00 CD oo oo —i Ol CD Ol ro Oi o Ol Ol ro o 4S. CD CD OO O oo N| ro Ol CD oo co Ol oo Ol N| Ol Oi Ol oo oo —i Oi 4S. N| co 4s. —i —* 4s. N| o oo 00 ro ro oo. 4s. -»• ro ro ro -»•->• 4s. oo cn ro co co Oi Li Li Li Li ji. oo bi co oo it oo 4s. oo oo CD ro Oi ro Oi ro Nl Oi N| ro N| ro 00 Ol -i ro b bo N| is. li i bo Ko N| N| b bi ro CD CD ro Ol co Nl CO CD ro 4s. ro N| ro N| oo o N| ro Ol bi bo b bi bi CO oo -i ro ro -^rowoorocooicowoo o oo co o co co ro o CD o o Oi 00 Ol 4s. 4s. ro oo 4s. oo CD ro oo -1-OOOOCDOOCJ5004S.4S. NINIOOCDONIOCDCD OC0C0OO4S.N|-iC0-i000000-iOOO OOCD4s.004S.OO-iOCDO->.Ol00 4s.N|Nl-i JtosrobK)4ibbK)so) 00 4S.OOO1O10000CDCD-S-O1 Ol CD O 00 00 —i ro CD ro 4s. O CD CD w TJ o CO 3 S Q Q 00 o CO g CO § o| CD c? o I- xl CD CQ o 3| CO o o o o o o o o o o p o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o o o o o o o b CO b Ol b 4s. b Ol b oo b IO 4s b w b oo b ro o b CO o b Ol b Ol b CD b ro b ro b Oi b CD b ro b b Ol b ro b Ol b oo b ro b Ol b CO b CD b N| ro 4s. ro 00 ro oo ro oo ro 4s. IO ro 00 CO ro 4s. 00 ro ro oo ro ro 4s. CO ro ro co ro oo ro oo ro ro ro 00 ro CO 00 O ro ro ro o ro oo ro 00 ro N| ro 4s. ro oo 00 ro ro oo ro co ro CD 00 o b 00 b bo CO Nl CO N| b is. bi bo bo bo b Nl bi b b b CO CO bi 00 is Ko bi is. bi o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o p o o o o o o o o o If > co Ko oo bi ro is. Oi Ol 00 w CO Ko ro bo co CO ro b CO Ko o bo CO o is. Ol Oi oo Oi oo bo oo ro ro N| N| 00 bo 4S. Ko ro oo b N| Ko N| b Ol 00 oo Ko Ol bi 4s. bi co N| N| Nl oo CD Ol Oi ro co ro 4s. —x CO CD ro 4S. CD CD oo ro ro ro 00 ro oo 00 o oo o oo o 00 oo 00 CO Ol CD oo oo ro N| i CO 4s ro N| o o 00 CD ro ro ro oo oo ro oo oo 4s. Ratio Nl ro 00 oo io ro Ko CO N| ro bo N| bo CD b CD bo N| Ko CO N| Ol b co bi co b oo bi o b 00 Nl 00 bi i bi ro N| N| bo o i 4s. ro bo —i b o b o is. Ol Nl ro Ko o CD oo bi • CO DO DJ Cfl oo CD CQ' I1 c CD ol x| 7J " SI O Q) O CD ^ CD X cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn 4*. 45. 45. 4^ 4.^ 45. 4*. 45. 4*. CO co GO co co co GO CO CO cn 45. co ro o CO oo •vl CO cn 45. co ro O oo -vl cn cn 45. CO ro X CO I CO CO I CO I I CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO I I CO I X X CO X X CD •> cu 03 03 *> 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 *> *; 03 •> CO to X ro ro co co co X —x CO ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro CO to ;vl cn o —^ ro co ro co co co cn o co o ro ro vj GO cn Ol o ro o -vl o O) Ol CO to cn fo -vl ro co cn cn Ko £x 4v. 00 b ro ro cn bo CO io GO vj 4^ bi 45. co co co co IO ro ro CO 45. 45. IO 4* CO CO CO ro ro ro 45. ro ro ro GO ro 45. ro ro co —k co co cn *> T3 O 7T C/> O 03 O 7T O 7T cn cn ro ro o 7T CO W4k4i4x4i4iCn4i4iUUW4iW4iUA4iCnU4iU p O o o o o o o o o o O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o JO ro CD ro b ro b CO b ro b 4*. b oo b CD b CO b b ro b -vl b b GO b 4v-b ro b 4a. b cn b cn b b O) b co b OD b GO b O) b to b -vl b O) b OD b oo b GO o CO co ro CO ro ro ro cn ro co ro vg GO o CO ro 4*. ro ro ro ro CD ro ro cn ro CO ro GO ro Oi ro oo ro oo CD ro CD ro cn ro co ro cn ro CD to ro GO O GO o to CD CO X to 4V. GO ro CD cn fo cn io vg b GO co b b 4*. 4*. vg b vg 4* bi CO cn b GO b b Ko b b io CO cn o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 3 > cn •vl fo oo CD 4* Ko oo bi o 00 -vl co o O) to ro b Oi 4*. ro 4^ CD Ko CD bi CD b •vl bi CO b co '-vi 4v. CO -vl vg oo 45. vg CD CO -vl bo cn vg b 00 CO o 4v. 4v-ro 4^ cn CO ro o -tv. ro cn oo GO CO -v| ro CD GO GO cn cn ro co CO OD ro Ol GO o ro co co 45. Ol ro o CO co -vl CO GO _k CO to o •vl ro GO Ratio Ko o b 4^ ro cn CO co co oo b ro vg 00 bi 00 vg o bi X co co bi GO 45. 03 to co 'co 4*. vg 00 co CD co CD b CO b O) ho o bi co cn bo -vl o b CD CO CD bo -v> b o b 00 b -iv. oo 45. co -vl 45. ro ro 45. co po po CD 4v. CD cn CO cn 4* O) CD 00 cn o ro CO —X oo CO cn CO o ro CO ro o oo ro cn o 03 ro CO o CO 4* to o CO o 4v. o CO CO -vl co oo CO Ratio bi vg bi 45. cn bi CD o X ro bi ro bi oo CO co b cn vg fo 00 bo 00 X O) bi ro vg o ho to b GO bi o b cn co CD b Oi bo ro bo ^i bi co co -vl b -vl bi to bi GO b Oi CO CO 4*. CD CO co CO o Ko ro co ro cn co CD -x ro Ol o bi Ko vg co co co _x _x _k CO —X ro ro ro _x to ro ro _x ro to ro ro ro _k to CO ro ro CO X CO N) co oo GO cn o co o ro ro -vl GO cn cn o ro o -vl o CO cn to CO oo cn —*• 00 CO cn Ik bi Ko 45. 4*. GO b ro ro bi co b Ko GO vg 4*. cn ix to CO vg bi b bi co ro X CD ro _x ro _k co _k to co X Oi _k ro co ro co X IO 4* ro _k _x co _k _k X ro 4^ cn 4v. o 45. O) oo OD -vl CD GO OD bi 45. CO cn Ol o —k co co Ol o CO co vi CO co co ~g CO io b 4v. bi bo GO bi '-g b vg b co ro OD fo co vg CO co b X Ol bo co b b co CO b bi b o o CD CO oo 00 00 o ro O) co co co 00 00 CD ro b CO bi cn •vl co 00 CD -vl CO CO co vl cn o CO co CO -tk o O) -vl 03 CO OD oo —X oo Ol oo o GO o oo oo —x o oo —x —J cn ro 00 4*. cn ro cn -vl cn X 03 X cn ro co co GO Ol oo OD oo CD Ol —x 00 GO Ol vg 00 -vl cn GO oo co O) CO ro cn GO co cn Ol CD 4*. oo ro ro -vl oo OD -vl CO •vl Ol -vl X vg vi OD -vl vg cn cn oo -k ro cn o cn Ko •vi co co co _k _x _k co __x ro to ro _x ro ro to _k to ro ro ro ro _x ro CO to ro GO —k co ro CO 00 CO cn o CO o to ro -vl CO cn Ul p to o -vl o OD Ol ro CO 00 OD —1 00 OD cn Ik bi ro 4*. 45. CO bi to ro bi co b Ko i-k -vl GO vg 45. bi 45. ro CO vg bi CD bi co 00 CO 45. -vl cn b -vi -k 45. ro co —k ro 45. oo oo C0C0GD0)45.C00DIO-kC0-k-k-kCDOr0OroO45.O 45.cjD^^csc»owc»c^wororooocnoDcocDrocA3 45. cn en co -k-kcncncocjD-vjroco o ro ro oo co cn ~ * . . _ cn 00 00 CDD IO rOCOODCDGOCDDOOOO roGoocncDODro-vi 00 CD OD Ol CO GO v] v| to CO Ol CO CD CD CO 00 -Vl —k CO 45. O CD CD o cn 3 x Q p CD O " cn g cn 3 S" CD CD* o I- II <• P2. CD CQ O 21 5 O -k X cn CD — I c CT CD CO 03 cn 03 CQ cz 3 CD 03 31 OS O CD s  = ! X CO r-o _^ _^ CO IV) cn _^ co IV) CO _± X IV) _^ co -si CD CD o X co IV) cn CO O) (V) cn CD —i ho ho CO CO co 4S. bi IV) cn cn NI 4*. CO cn ho 4s. WfOfOWM-J.-'^-'-'-'-'-'-'-i ^uto-ioiDCONioicnjiuro-io 4s. CD 4s CO IV) X X X a ? 00 IV) IV) ro IV) Nl IV) Nl CO ho cn tv) cn TJ OlOl4S.4s.Ol4s.4s.O100OlOl4s.4s.Ol4s.4s.O100Js.4s.OlOlOlOl o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o b b b b b b b b b Li b b b b b b b b b b b b b b CD CD ro ro N| 4s. oo cn 4s. IO oo 00 oo 4s ro ro CD O) CD CD I CO ro ro ro CO IO ro ro ro co ro ro ro 00 ro ro ro ro ro OO ro ro ro CO ro 00 o cn 4s oo o ro CD ro CO —i 4s. —i CD oo o ro —i co CD co N| 4s N| b bo 00 bo cn b bo 4s. b 4s Nl cn Nl b cn b 4s bo cn o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o N| ho ho b 4s 00 b Li 4s. 4s ho ro Li 00 Li 4s. b Li ho Li Nl Nl Nl 00 cn IO 4S. 4s CD o 4s N| N| o oo CO ro Nl CD cn O) cn 4s N| ro ^ —i. ro IO ro ro IO 4s. —i oo CD ro Nl —i CD oo CD o O) o co Nl 4s CD 4s o o 4s 4s. Ol b bo co cn Nl 4s. b cn N| ho N| b 4s cn b b Li b ro b co CO cn ro CD cn N| oo oo 00 N| ro 4s. N| N| N| o O) co O) ro ro oo ro cn N| Ol CD o 00 CO CD ro oo cn 00 4s. CO co ro cn ro CD 4s 4s co o o o cn N| CO CD N| o 00 oo CO O CO CD CD co 00 oo CO o cn N| 00 N| CO b ro b cn 4s bo b b N| N| bo b N| 00 CO b b Li 4s b b CO ho co 4S. 00 cn 4s 4s. 00 00 ro cn ro ro CD N| cn 4s co cn — Nl 4s CD CD 00 N| 00 co 00 ro IO ro —i CO CD b 4s. b 4s. cn Z -7 O CD CD CO TJ CD Q CD' cn 3 x Q 9 oo o cn g cn § a CD S" o r- X <' 2. CD CO 0 3 1 o D oo 67 co c 0) •2 32 o ro m 3 CD 0) 3 C CD 00 CD 00 O 3" CD > C CQ c cn oo CO co O) CD CD cn TJ ro < CD O DO •=• CO oo_ > o •11 o z ro, ro oo 3 CD 3 co| 0) 3 TJ_ CD IP. O o o 3 TJ CO CO »-•• C CT CD ca' o TJ o co ro a. ro oo ft- 3 ro 3 TJ CD _. 2 oo 5J-, 0) TJ CD O 3 $| o 3-1 CO 3- CD Nl CO ~\ O) 00 CD Ol Ol CD Ol CO O 3 > ro CD 0) co oo o' o CD 3, CQ 3s  2-oo 3 ro 0) a o* 0) CT CD 00 > > < < ro CQ CQ ~ 1 r-x o g ro ro 4s -i oo Li Li —i CD 4s 72 oo 5' Q 72 . O 00 3 COM-I-'WM-'1,-'CON)-I oo ->• -i ro oi ro ro wscncoo-iCoWwffiMoi^Mcow-i^^^ro^Ws rohowbb4s.bibiNi4s.bbi'-'biho4s. bho cn ro _i _i i ro i _i ro ro _i _i ro _i _i _i ro _i _i _i 4s. —i CO CD ro N| —i CD oo CD o CD o CO N| 4s. CO 4s o o 4s 4s Ol b CO co cn Nl 4S. b cn Nl ho Nl b 4s. bi b b i b ho b co bo bi ho CD Ol Nl oo 00 —i oo N| ro 4s. N| N| N| o CD oo O) ro ro oo ro Ol Nl Ol ooro-*-AOoro-». K,-».ooro-i oo ro oo ro „, ro iv)howbb4s.bibNi4s.bb'-^bho4s."^c"bhobi oioooooNirooo-iOioo-i4s. uStDO)u,o-»u-»^a)o 00C0r0C0C04s.00OCD4s.Nl00 oicoro4s.Ni4s.roNi-icn-^->-CDOlCOCDOOOOCOCDOOCOOirO NI CD rooo4s.oo-j.o)rooo-j>oo cocnrooirocDJs-icoooo OO^JCOCOOOOOCO4S.OINIOONI b CD oo bo b b P b b co ho -i4s.NlO100CDOl4s.N|0000CD cooro-^oo4sro->-4soioo-i oo ro CD ooooiocnro-sO)4s.4s. N> ro ro ro CD s CO ro ro CO _^ ro _^ _^ _^ ro ro _^ _^ ^ 4s. _i _i ro cn CD cn ro CD -ts-co co ^ cn CO CD 4s oo —-4s Nl CO Ol ro oo Ol 4s 4s Ol O CD co 'NI b 4s. ro CD ai b ^ NI ro CD Nl io bo N| i bo cn 4s 4s N| CD ro ro N| CD b> Nl CnOlOlOlOlOlCn4s.4s.4s.4s.4s4s.4s.4s.4s.4s.WWO)OOWOOCOOOOOW CDOl4s.OOrO-^OCOOO-siCDCn4s.OOro-'OCOC»NlCDCJl4s.OOI\)-^ 4s.^|\OW^4s.^O00O^O0-^O0O0-k4s.4s.O0O0O0M^O0O04s.4s.4s^O04s.4S.CO Cn T3 r 4s.CJ1Ol4s.O100Cn4s.4s.OlOlOl4s.4S.OlW4s.4s.4S.4s.cnol4s.4s.4s.W CD CD CO XJ CD g CD' cn 3 x oo| 0) o CD CD* o CD CQ o 3 6 cn CO ET CT CQ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o > ro b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b Li b b b b ro Nl Ol 4S N| ro CD ro Ol 4s co oo ro CD ro ro ro 4s. CD ro ro ro ro oo 00 4s ro co ro ro oo ro oo ro ro ro ro CO ro ro IO ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro i ro oo ro ro i ro If ro o Oi Oi o o oo oo N| Ol —x CD CO —i oo o IO CD CO ro —i x co ro oo 4s o CD N| ro ro cn ro ro 00 'co b ro b bo b io 4s. bo b 4s 00 Nl bo b io b b cn ro ro b b ro b o o o o o o x o o o o o O o p O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 3* > ro CO cn 4s. CO x ro ro b bi b bo Li bo Li Li ro Li x 4S. co ro Li i b ro CO 00 x —i 4S. o oo oo IO N| Oi 4s 4s CD ro Ol N| ro o Nl 4s 4s CO N| oo o Nl Ol CD o 4s oo -ts o CD 72 » ro X ro ro . ro ro _i _i _i _i _i ro _i ro ro 03 »—t-o Nl cn 00 Nl CD x 00 00 ro oo CD o CD CD CD 4s. CO co CD cn o Nl 4s. oo o 4s. co oo —1 Ol o" b io Nl b b bi CO b bo b bo io Nl N| Li Li Nl Li 4s 4s Nl CO b 4S. b bo b N| bi b bo b cn o cn CD CD 4s Ol Nl CD 00 N| 00 00 Ol 4s Ol oo CD ro Nl 00 Ol 4s Oi 4s Ol 4s 4s. N| 00 72 4s. o o ro o 4s CO Ol oo _x CO ro 4s O CD 4S. CO Ol 4s —X o 4s 4s. 4s CD 4s 00 ro Ol cn i oo i—»-oo oo ro oo CD 4s o CD —x N| co Oi Ol Ol —i Ol CD O ro CO Ol i Ol 00 Ol —i —^ Oi o co oo o' b N| b 4s b bo Oi Oi bi 4s b bi co b N| Li b ro Li 4s N| io b b io b b io co b b b ro CD 00 N| N| ro 00 O o oo N| -ts V ro Ol ro Nl ro ro o 00 ro ro oo ro oo oo 00 ro CO ro ro oo o o —X 00 —i CD CD 00 ro io bo b b bo b ro CD 0} cn oo I cal cf' c 3 ro < ro oo ->• ro ro ro cn co cn -i ro -s| Li CD 4s. _i oo _i ro ro oo _i _i ro —i i 4S. oo " Nl Ol 00 —i co 4s oo —x 4s bi bi N| ^ Nl io i-i b Nl io bo Nl _i ro ro _i _i _i _i _i 4s. _i _i Ol ro 00 cn 4s 4S. —^ cn O co oo bi 4s. 4S. Nl b ro ro N| b bi N| ro ro ro _i _i ro _i ro ro _i i _i ro _i o N| Ol oo N| CD CO oo ro 00 co o CD Oi b io N| b b bi oo b bo b bo io N| Nl x Ol o CD CO CD 4s. Ol Nl CD co Nl oo oo cn 4s io -»• -i ->• _i_iro_i ro ro ^CD4S.C0pppON|4s.MO4s.p00-iOl LsiLjijisubiifflabslnbcoiD -s0100CDrONlOOOl4s.CD4s.Ol4s.4s.NlOO-i -s M N) W K, -s CO -i oicooi-iroji.cooo-' co • Nl N|-iCD4S.Ol05N| ro ro oo _i ro _i _i _i _i _i ro ro _i _i _i _i _i 4s. —V _i Ol CO co 4s oo —i -ts Nl 00 Ol ro 00 Ol -ts. 4s —i Ol O CD oo N| ro —x b N| ro bo N| li bo bi 4s 4s N| b io ro N| b b N| ro ro ro 4s O IO O 4s. 4s. Ol OO -s -"•OO-ilOOOCD^OCD-i bNiP,4s.bbobbi4s. roo)'-0NiNi-icn->.Nio 4s O CD —i 4s o ro CD CD ro CDiooo->.NicDoorooi-^ -»-COr04s.OCD4s.-iOl4s.-i Nicoo)cnoi->.oiooprop bibibbNilibP^-^Ni coooNio-'Ooororooi-»-00O->-0lOC0OlO00OOl rorocDNiNiooNico-»-oi-* 0- rs.4s.4s.CD4s.-ir001Ol->. 01- 'OiOOOi-ij^jpOCOCO robbrobb-ibbbb Niro-»-ororoooro-»--»--i 00 4s.N|-iOl4S.CDCDCDOOrO IOCDCDCD-PiCDrONirO-»-CD oocoacnoocscococo XXIXXXXXXXroXXXXXXXcoXXXXXXXXXXXXX •> S S *> S S S ? S s D v v ? S v S v M v ? v v v V ? v ? ? V V s M io M w CD v| li. ro cn 4a. i> CD v| v| ro ro o ro cn 00 co oo co ro cn bo b cn to Ik Ol b bo ro io cn bo ro cn io ro _k ro ro ro CO ro ro cn ro CD v| oo —k 45. cn bo -k CD cn b vl 45. Ik 45-M45.M^W^^45.W45.WWCOM45.45.4^ O 7T O 7? O 77 O —i 7T CO45.CO45.Cn45.45.45.CO45.CO45. 45. 45. 45.WW45.45.45.WOJW45.45.45.Cn45.W45.45.Cn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b b b b b b b Lk b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b w vl 45. 00 ro Ol 45. ro w ro ro 45. w Ol ro w w 00 ro ro ro 45. w Oi O) 45. ro CO Ol Ol w ro w w 0 00 w —* b vl CO 45. w o w CD O CD CD GO T3 CD O CD' CO ^ 2 IS o p| CD Q CO CO £1 CD o 1 X < ?2. CD CQ O 3 CO cr o1 3 > ro CD CD CO CD ro w w 0 CD ro CT) w 0 ro w ro 00 W W ro ro 45. ro w ro w ro O) ro Ol ro 00 ro ro 45. ro 0 ro 45. w x to ro w ro ro ro O) ro Ol ro CD w 0 ro cn ro 0 W ro co ro 00 — b ro bo b b ro vl W 45. co b b CO bo CO CD 45. vl 45. 'co Ko w b Ko b b 45. b b b w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > w ro vl co v| ro 45. cn b ro 45. b cn b 0 v| co ro ro 00 Ko cn 45. w co CD b 00 w 0 45. co ro w V 00 Ko 45. Ko 0 45. cn co cn v| v| co 45. 45. 45. cn Ko cn b 00 b ro w vl w w ro 45. ro 45. _k CD w w 0 w co ro co CO w 00 Ol ro 45. ro ro ro co w w 00 w vl w cn w w cn w ro ro 45. ro 0 w ro cn ro 45. ro 00 w v| ro 00 CD (—H O' cn b vl ro ro b ro 00 co cn ro vl b 0 co 0 Ko 00 ro cn ro 0 b cn b 00 io Ol w w 45. 45. '45. cn b CO 45. 0 CO w w CD vl vl b ro vl 00 Ko 0 b ro ro ro k v| w vl 45. 45. v| w w w 0 w 01 cn ro 0 CD CD w cn 00 0 45. cn ro CO w v| w 45. ro ro 45. w 45. w w Ol p w ro CD cn 45. w w cn 45. ro 0 ro cn 0 v| 0 45. ro 45. p co w it x to CD 5' co Cf) b vl bo O) bi w vl 00 bi co vl b 0 co cn b Ol b v| vl b CD b 00 vl ro b 0 ro 01 45. v| cn vj ro b 00 io ro b w co vj Ko cn co 45. b w Ol b 45-b Ol co 45. X =5 (Q c 3 CD < CD ??• ol g CD vi ro ro ro w CD • —x CO v| -k ro Ol 45. —x it x CO vj v| ro ro 0 'co b b ro lk b b 'co _k j. _k _k w _k cn 00 w 00 ro Ol Ko b CO Ko b Ko Ol ro ro CD ro v| ro 00 ro w ro 45. ro Ol co i-k b b b vl 45. w vl w w ro 45. ro 45. p w w 0 w CD to CO CO a> b vl Ko N3 b ro 00 CO cn Ko vl b 0 bo 0 Ko 00 -k ro ro ro w w 01 45. ro co —^ co co Ko b b Ko w 45. 45. o 01 00 01 w 45. cn _k w w w vl cn —k Ol b 45. w w CD 0 w CO ro 45. o vi b vi vi ro 00 w ro x to 45. ro co w vl ro 00 x Ko 0 b to to ro vl w vj 45. 45. vl W _k -k ro vi ro ro ro co ->• ;~ co • , - vi CD v| -k to 45. _k _k _k _k ro ro cn —k 45. CD vl v| —k 0 co b b Ko lk b b CO _k i. v _k w _k Ol 00 w 00 to 01 Ko b co Ko b io _k ro _k ro ro ro w to to cn ro CD v| CO —k ^ ik 45. cn co lk b b b vl 45. '-k -kOcnrocDw-kO-krowwro -k45.woiwa545.w-kroroo-kio45.w-k-k COUWOCOO)->Q4k<DN4k-'-'WUOOM^UO)4»00)NOJmQ4vM wbbbviblkocobbvib^bvib^bc3Dvibr^bbKorfi,b^45.bb Wv|CJ1MC»v|m^W01^CJ)Or^v|^COI045.45.^v|IOMv|ODWWCJ10CnW 0545.vl0045.0)CJ1WCnWOCnCO^CDC3JvlWMOCJ)a)^CX5^^WOMO-^vl Wv|45.45.0)CJ1v|OTC3JCJ1v|v|45.COCX)CX3CD^ODMWCJ1v|45.CD45^ ro o CD oo N| CT) cn 4s oo ro o o CO O 00 o Nl O CD o cn O 4s. o oo o ro o o o CD CD CO oo CD Nl CD O) CD cn co 4s CD oo CD ro CO CD o CO X I CO CO I CO X X X X X CO X X X X X X X X X X X X CO CO CD CO X CJ 0) 0) cu CO $ •£ •f-a a cu 00 0) OJ ro CO ro ro ro ro ro cn ro ro ro ro ro ro oo oo ro OJ ro ro ro ro ro ro CT) 4s Nl o oo 4s ro cn N| CD CT) 4s. oo oo oo 4s —i 00 oo ro oo —i CD p 4s cn 4s. o —* cn 00 b cn CO NI 4s N| ro cn ro cn ro CO oo N| 4s. CD CD cn N| cn cn ro oo CO bo cn cn cn Nl N| cn ro co 4s ro ro ro CO ro oo 4s oo 00 OJ 4s 00 ro oo ro ro 00 CO ro ro 4s 00 CL CD CO :> T3 CO T3 O 7T 4S.Cn4S.Cn 4s.4s.cn4s.4s.cn 4s 00 4s.O04s.4s.OO4s.4s.4s.4scnCnCn4s.4s.4s.4s.4s.4s.4s.cn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 p b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b Li 4s 0 ro O) 00 00 cn 4s cn CD ro ro ro —V CO O) ro 4s CD 4s 4s 00 CD Nl cn ro cn 00 4s ro 4s. cn ro 00 ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro 00 ro ro ro ro ro 00 ro 00 ro ro ro ro ro ro ro 00 CD ro co cn 4S N| cn 00 CD ro ro —*• 00 4s. 0 —i CT) CD N| N| —^ CO 0 00 —^ Nl cn on ro N| 00 4s cn b 00 4s bo b 00 is Nl Nl 4s 4s b b OO 4s b cn ro ro ro b b N| b 4s b 4s b 4s 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 ro cn 4s. Nl 4s. CO cn 4S. b N| io ro Li 00 CO _i 4s bo cn cn b Nl b b Li b 4s 4s ro b Li ro cn CD 00 4s N| N| cn ro ro Nl ro 4s CD 4s 4s 00 0 00 ro cn CO 00 ro CO 00 ro ro ro 1 ro ro ro co k 00 ro ro 00 ro ro ro i ro ro ro ro ro ro 4S. CO cn cn 0 N| 0 ro co 4s —i CO CD 00 00 00 co -ts CO N| CD 0 4s 00 00 Nl CD —i ro 0 CT) cn Li Li CO cn bo b ro N| ro bo co b N| b b b cn ro ro Li b b CO ro cn Nl b b 'co b b —i cn 4s. 00 cn CD i. 0 cn cn Nl 0 cn CO 0 4S. ro 0 cn 00 0 O co 00 00 00 co cn co co 4S - 00 4s 0 ro 00 0 00 co 4s CO 00 0 4s ro 0 CO O 0 4s ro 4s —v Nl CD CO N| O) 00 0 cn CD 00 Nl co co cn N| 0 4s CT) —V cn CD 00 N| 00 —*• 4S. 4s —i ro co f° N| on b Li N| co bo 4s b N| b b ro ro b b b bo co b b CO Li b co b 00 b b co 4s Li b b N| ro 00 ro N| cn CO 00 4s. CO CO N| ro 4s 00 CD ro ro CD 4s. cn O 00 4s Nl CO 0 0 00 ro 00 co ro 00 00 ro CO 0 —x CO 0 00 cn 4s b ro ro b 4s. ro 00 _^ ro ro _^ ro ro ro cn ro _^ _^ _^ _^ _^ ro ro ro ro ro 00 00 ro 00 ro ro ro ro ro ro CT) -ts N| 0 00 4s ro cn Nl O) CD 4s CO 00 00 4s. —i 00 00 ro 00 —^ CD 0 4s 0 —^ b b b Nl 4s N| ro b ro cn ro b b Nl 4s. b b b N| b b ro 00 b co —i b Nl Nj ro ro 00 O) -ts ro Nj ro 0 00 ro 4s ro —i ro cn ro N| CD CD 4S. 00 00 ro 00 it ro ro 00 ro 00 ro 00 00 ro cn 00 0 ro 4s. ro ro 0 ro ro b b b Nl is. N| io b ro cn ro b b Nl 4s b b b N| b b ro 00 b b b ro N| N| ro CT) • 00 co 4s N| N| on 00 o ro 00 CD 00 o 00 00 CD cn co 00 N| b CO Nl co 00 4s. -i co co cn co CD N| 00 ro co cn co C»MO0-iCDCOIOCJ1CDCDIOIONl00CD00CDCD00NlCDCn o 4s CD co ro ro co 00 ro ro o o co cn co co cn Nl b Nl 4s ro o CD -i cn CD 00 00 CD 00 CO CD O 00 —i 00 cn ro ro o o cn 10 ~ N| o o ->• b P° r" *• CT) 00 CD 00 - 4s. 4s. O 4s. cn 00 -ts 4s. ->• ro -i ro o 00 00 N| cn 00 00 00 4s -i o ro 4S 4s ro ro _i ro _i _i ro ro _i _i 00 _i _i CO ro ro 00 ro ro ro _i _i ro ro ro ro _i ro ro 4s 00 cn on 0 N| 0 ro CD 4s —i 00 CD 00 00 00 co 4S. 00 Nl O) 0 4s 00 00 Nl CT) — ro 0 CD cn Li Li b b co b ro N| ro CO CO b Nl b b b b ro io Li b b b io b N| b b co b b —i cn 4s 00 cn CD 0 cn cn Nl 0 cn CD —i 0 4s ro 0 cn 00 0 0 CD 00 00 00 00 cn CD co 4s 4s 4s. N| 4s —i cn CD N| CO Li b CD ro CD cn 00 00 00 cn ro O) z o co 73 CD O CD' CO 3? 2  3 0) O I CO g CO 5 O 0 CD* o I- 1 <• 2' CD CQ O 3| 5 o CO ,„ CQ £ ^\ cr 3 > ro co 00 CO 0J f I1 P_ CQ 3 ,tl OJ "S3 8: gi O OJ ^^4kJa^^Jk{k^^uuUUUUC<)U CO CO NJPOfOMMNirorOIx) lDCON0101^UWJ0(DCONCB01tUfO-iO(DCDN|0)01^UM-' rjoxxxxxroroxxcoxxxxxxxxcoxxxxxxxxci-. _1 ro ro ro co co ro CO _x _x _x ro ro ro ro ro ro CD _x _x _x ro co ro CO CD J5. co o C5 o vl cn co 45. p o —X CO Ol Ol cn oo cn cn 00 ro CD co o> ro ro co Ol CD v| CD CO fo C5 b fo ro vl cn bo cn CD 45. 45. CD CD co cn CD ro CD Ko 45. CO ro co vl Ko co ro co co 45. CO 45. _^ ro CO 45. 45. OJ CO _^ ro 45. ro _^ 45. 45. 45. ro co CD CD -c?1 CD O CD' : cn •a g 3 x Q Q o ' < CD o -X o i 3 73 Dl < CO D CD I 2 o o o o o o o b co b Ol b CO b oo b ro b CD ooooooooooooooooooooooo l>.bbbl»-bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb-k ^MCDCjioro^^coiocjicncj)rocnvivi-iro-k45.oio 3 > ro CD cn CD Tl CD CQ CD Ol ro 45. ro oo ro 45. ro cn ro ro ro CD co ro ro ro oo ro oo oo ro ro ro oo oo ro Ol ro ro ro 00 ro oo co o ro ro ro CD CO p CO o IO o ro ro CD ro vl ro oo CO ro b Ko b 45. b 45. b 'co b b v| fo b b vl b b b fo io co b Ko b o o o o o o o o o o o o p o o o o o o o p o p o o b oo b CO b vl Ko vl b CO Ko ro Ko ro b CD 45. CO Ko b oo b CD b Ol CD b 45. b vl co 45. Ko 45. vl co cn 'co vl CO Ko b o b 05 b o CO CD ro CD oo 45. X CO co CO co oo CO co CO vl ro 00 co vl o v| ro o ro o p ro co CO o co co 00 45. CO co co CO co IO cn co 45. ro ro vj co o ro ro v| 00 ro b X b cn Ko co Ko b cn Ko oo 45. b 00 b ro b 00 Ko CO b o 'vj oo o vl vl b CD b o 45. ro o b 00 b vl CO ro co oo b 00 45. X ro OS CO co o ro cn 45. o o CD oo vl 45. v| CD 45. 45. oo 00 45. o C5 vl cn CO ro cn 45. ro ro o o 45-45. CO o CO o 45. o co cn co co oo Ol oo co 00 oo 45. cn co ro b ro b 05 45. b o fo ro b 45. b o co 45. co X b 45. co v| b v] ro b co CD 45. co cn b CO co b v| cn co 45. X CO ro 45. o b vl 3 I 3, CQ -3-1 3>l co 03 CD 73 CD 51 CD co oo ro oo b CO o co co o o ^ io _x ro _x ro ro co co ro co _>._x._x._x.rororo-'ioroK, -»•-»•-»•., roco co^ooOjfro>iwu^O)^OJ(DCflC"wcooirocoW'u vibbiobiofovib^bbb45.45.bbbbbKo45.b vi Ko UM-'AUUUUUWU-'-iMM COCDOO-'CjO-iOOCOvlOOvlOvlOO bbfofobfo^bbbiobvi oo ro cn co o oo o ro co oo o CO CO CO 45. CO co co oo CO ro cn CO 45. vl v| b CD b o 45. ro o b oo b vl 'co ro ro co ro ro vi o ro co co '-* '->• CD CO 45 -x ro ro ro co -x co ro co co45.ooo^cnviuico45-cn^ vibbio bfofovib^ o CO cn ro Ol ro Ol to 00 cn ro 05 ro 00 ro CD CO cn ro co b CD 45. 45. CD b b b CD ro CD Ko 45. b ^ -i a ^ M U co vi ro ro-j.coro-iOvi45.45. CnC0OOl45.CDj v0vlj^ 45.bbbPbrob-i 45.ro-^cn45.oooro OIMO)«-»MCOO)U vivicncorocnoooco -i00-iCTiroM4.-'-'-i 45.oo45.vico<-nro-»-oo a> P co d co co t° CD ^ O-^45.O45.v|Cn-».C000 ooco-*cnro-*co-»-oco vi vi ro —^ 45. co CD cn ro co _i _x -x —x —x —x —x —x —x 00 45.ooocncocn-»--»-oo um^uwcocooojj, Cool^tD^bl-'JiC!) 01UCOSO)45UMOO) coroco45.ro-».-».ororo 45.oovivicococno5-5.c-n IO ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro co CO Ol -ts co ro o CO oo Nl CO Ol -fs CO CO X X CO I X X X X CO CO CO X X CO X "a oo •g 00 00 00 :» oo ro co ro ro ro ro ro ro ro -ts -ts -ts CO CO ro CO i Ol CO CO ro —* CO b Ol is. ro Nl Nl CO co Ol Nl CO Nl bo ro CD oo N| CD X X X CO 5> s> oo ro ro oo ro Ol 00 ro ro 00 00 Nl ro ro ooro-»-4s.oocooo-i ro oo -i-iooro4s.ro-i4s.4s.rooo 7T TJ o 7T Cfl o OOCnOlOlOl-ts4s.4s.CO-ts-OOJS.OlOi4s.OlOl-ts.OlOOJS.4s.OOOO4s.4s. 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O O 0 b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b 01 co 01 00 ro 4s. 4s ro 00 -fs. 4s ro N| 01 ro 4s ro -ts 00 ro cn 00 ro ro CO ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro 00 ro ro ro ro ro 00 ro to to ro i. 00 ro N| CD 00 N| 00 ro 4s —i 00 P 00 0 00 ro cn —^ Nl 0 0 00 co 4s b b b b b b Nl co b b b b Ko b is. Nl b b b b b b b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Li b ro b N| ro is b b ro b Li is is Ko co Nl Ko is. Li b Li Li Ko co b 4s co 00 ro 00 00 cn CD 00 00 Nl 00 00 00 CD CO ro CD 00 4s ro 1 ro ro ro ro 00 i 00 ro 00 ro 00 00 00 0 Nl 4s. 00 01 N| 0 ro CO Nl N| 4s. 4s N| 0 0 00 —i 00 01 01 01 00 00 b Nl b b Li b Nl b b Li b b Li Li CO Ko b b b b co b Li b Ko b 00 00 00 00 00 01 co 0 CO 00 00 00 C30 0 00 CD 00 00 01 00 00 0 i O) co 0 00 00 4s ro 01 ro 00 0 0 4s ro 4s i co 00 4s 0 00 C3 it 00 ro CD Nl CD 00 00 4s 00 Nl CO 00 CO 00 N| CO 0 00 Nl 4s ro O 01 0 b b b Li b N| Li b b b b b Li b Li Nl b Li ro Ko b Li Li Li b b N| 0 CD 4s N| O 00 cn 4s. 00 CO N| 00 4s 0 CD CD 00 CD co 4s 00 4s i CD to ro 00 ro ro ro 00 00 ro co N| CO 0 b b Li b b Ko ro 00 ro ro _^ ro 10 _^ _k ro ro ro ro -fs. 4s 4s 00 00 ro 00 —i cn CO 00 ro —j. b b 4s Ko N| Nl b CO b N| b N| b Ko ro _i ro 00 _i ro _i ro Ol 00 ro it 05 00 00 Ko b b Nl b b b to _i Nl _i _i ro _i _i 00 Nl N| 4s _i _i _i _i p 00 ro 00 ro 00 00 _i 00 0 ro CO 4s 00 ro Nl CD ro CD b Li 4s N| 0 0 b -* CO cn 01 Ol 00 00 b Nl __o* Nl Li b 01 b b Li b ro 00 01 CO Ko b b cn b co b Li b ro b ro ro b 01 01 ro N| CD CD 00 01 N| ro 00 —i 0 ro CD cn 00 4s 00 00 0 0 —s CD 00 0 00 01 01 4s to CO to N| _i 0 to O ro 01 —i CO 0 CD 0 0 Nl —i 0 00 00 CD N| CO 00 01 01 4s. 00 00 0 0 00 Ol Nl 4s CD N| 00 00 00 -fs. CD -ts 00 ro cn 00 ro ro ro CD -fs. CO cn ro cn 01 CO ro ro 00 00 Nl —* ro 00 00 00 00 ro ro 00 ro ro _k ro ro _k _k ro ro ro 4s 4s. 4s. CO 00 ro 00 —i Ol CO w ro —' b b is Ko Nl Nl b co b Nl b Nl b ro v ro . ^ CD No cn oi ro _i ro 00 _i ro _i ro Ol 00 ro it 05 00 00 Ko b b N| b b b CO -s COO 4S. b b 00 CD O 4s. 00 00 " 01 N| 4s. Nl -i o ro co b 00 N| _i _i 00 co 00 00 b 01 ro 01 CD Nl o 4s ro 01 00 CD ro 4s 4s b 00 00 NI ro CD —i to CO o o CD 00 00 00 Nl 4s ro CD O 4S. 00 O0 CO 00 CO OO 4s. o .. _ 00 CD 00 00 00 Nl Ol ro ro 00 00 4s o o Ol b 01 00 o coocorooicoooro-. o cn co ro o 00 co co ro 01 CD NicocDOooitorooi co CD to 01 00 00 cn o CD CD CO T3 CD O CD' cn ^ 2 3 X O p o 3 D CD C? O 1- X <' <2. CD CQ 0 3 1 o -s x CO CD co^ Us CO 03 3 co > 03 •9- <2. 5- CQ zzr 00 3 CD 73 £ CD ? o 03 73 03 D 03' 3 O CD c 3 3 5? §• X o 00 6T CO c 3 3 00 «2 o =8: 00 O T3 O CO CD Q. CD 00 l—h 3 CD 3 X O CD 03 -i Q. O 3 •a "o_ CD co Ts-ai m 3 CO 00 3 c CD 00 CO 00 o 3- CD > c. CQ c cn 00 co CD 00 CD CD cn TO CD 73 O 3- o z CD "D CD —i 3 00 3 CD 3 »-*-CO 00 3 CD 32 o ft* O o 3 . 32 cti "2. 2 00 ^ < CD O DO ;=- cn Q3_ > 3" 03 TO CD 4s 00 CD CO Ol CO " <° b 00 co co CO > > < < CD CQ CQ " ^ C x o g i> 73 7? ro -s 00 co 00 b NI -s NI ro 00 o 3 7T cn zr CD CD 32 o 00 CO CD OO oocno>a>cjicji GO rO —* O CD CO -vl CJ) Cflj5UN)-'O(0C»SroW45WW-iOCDC0Nro IIIIICOOrjorjrjIICOlIICOlT ? v S S S o> ? in in S v M ? « i" S ? CDIIXCDIXXXXCXIIXIXI B ? s S i« ? S s v ? m ? S v v v _A ro CO co co ro ro CO x CO 45. _l co _A _A ro co CO ro _A co _» _A _». ro ro ro CO ro ro ro o Ol ro O) vi ro co o ro o CD CO O) o 00 ro ro o -vl o O) ro vl 45. oo o o ro CO 45. cn v| CD co io 45. CD CD co co co Ol 45. —* b bo 45. bo bi CO bo b) CO vi bo vl CO CO bo 45. bo ro CO ro CO b) CD 45. ro ro _^ _i ro co 45. ro 45. 45. _A co CO _A CO CO ro _i CO CO _x CO CO CO ro CO o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o o o p o o o o o o o o o o o o o o b b b —x b b b b b b b LA LA b b b b b b b LA b b b b b b b b b b b b b b cn oo o 00 O) 45. j CO v| ro 45. ro v| CO 45. vl CO ro 00 ro ro CO GO cn v| cn cn O) CO ro CO co co ro ro x CO ro co CO IO ro CO ro ro CO CO ro ro CO ro ro ro ro ro 1. CO IO ro ro ro CO 00 ro CD O) O) o o vl co CO o ro o 45. CD vl o ro Ol GO o CO —^ 45. cn 00 CD o v| 00 CD cn bi 45. 45. b ro v| io b b b b b b vl co b b b b co co 'co vl b b b CO b Ko co v| b Ko o O o o o p o IO o o o o o o o o p o o o o o o O o o b b _x 45. b b b b b b b LA Ko b b LA 45. b b b Ko LA Ko LA b b b LA CO b b vl b co CO o cn 00 o CD 45. 45. vl oo 45. 45. ro o CO CD co v| CO co CD CJ) vl 00 oo o vl v| vl 00 cn 45. ro co ro ro co ro ro IO N) ro ro —x ro —A ro ro 00 ro o 00 o Ol co O) co oo Ol 45. p co ro oo vl ro vl O) co ro co oo cn v| 00 —^ co 45. v| o ro cn o b b io 45. b vl vl b 45. b b Ko LA 45. LA b b CO b b vl b b b 45. 45. b b Ko b b Ko b b vl CD cn O) vl o O) CO CO CO 45. 45. oo O) vl CO CO co oo O) CO oo x CO O) 45. oo o CD oo CO CD oo 00 CD CD oo co o 00 CO O) vl 00 oo cn co o CO Ol CD oo ro co CO GO 45. CO ro 00 o o ro ro ro vl CO vl O) vl 00 vl vl o 45. o oo o P° 00 v| CD 45. vl 45. 45. cn o cn o 45. CO cn o vl O) b b b b b b b b b 45. vl b 45. LA co LA Ko x b b b 45. b LA 45. b b b 45. b b b b b b cn O) O) o O) v| oo vl 45. co O) CO o IO 45. CD Ol co Ol Ol 00 ro oo ro 45. vl O) co vl cn co 45. vl CO CO co CO co IO CO ro ro ro ro CO O ro 00 o vl oo CO b Ko b b co CO Ko co v| b O CD CD 4?" o 0' cn Q S?I 0) o cn ;" cn 3 > ro co CD cn CD 5, CQ 3 > GO 73 CD c 3 0 < 0 5- °l 73 %. gl O Q) 3 og| o 0 c ? CD' X ro Ol CO ro GO O) GO ro vl ro ro GO ri o 00  b ro o CO CD 45. co CD GO O oo ro ro ro GO o GO v| ro o O) CO ro vl —A 45. 00 ro o ro p o ro CD ro 45. ro cn b Ko 45. b b b GO ri o 00  b b 45. LA b co 45. b b b b b b vl b vl b b b 45. _A co ro CD ro b 45. ro _A O) GO _A ro ro co _A _i _i ro v| _A ro ro _A _A vj _A ro ro _x _x _A ro 00 b ro o ro co 00 CO b Ol vl ro CO b —A co 45. ro 00 Ol b 45. Ko P 45. o ro oo b v| b ro co b oo O) b GO vl ro b co b oo co cn 45-45. 45. 00 b vl CO 45. b v| b o ro ro cn b o v| 00 b cn 45. CO CJ) ro CO co ro b co co v| o O) oo co vl 45. Ol 00 00 o ro Ol O 00 CD CO v| oo o b vl oo cn cn cn vl oo x v| 45. cn to cn oo Ol CO Ol oo 45. CO o Ol oo CO O) cn O) ro —x vl io O) oo vl oo O) 45. v] ro 45. v| cn ro cn v| oo D) cn co o o CD ro oo oo CO —A 45. GO 45. ro oo 45. cn oo o cn ro cn o ro CO co oo CJ) cn CJ) GO v| cn cn ro O) —i ro v| oo vl cn Ol CD O) CO —^ vl Ol 45. 00 O) —1 O) oo v| CJ) O) o ro Ol co ro co O) co ro vl ro ro CO oo ro x o CO p 45. CO O) co o CO ro ro ro co o co v| ro o O) co ro v| it oo ro o ro P o ro CO ro 45. ro cn ro vl CO LA b io 45. b b b CO oo b 45. b co 45. co b b co b b vl b vl b b b 45. co ro CO Ko b b b _x _v CD oo CD _A oo co _A _A 00 oo _A _A _A _A CD oo _A CO -A _A -A _A —A —A —A CD X v| CD vl o I oo v| CJ) vl 45. I Ol CO o co Ol I vl O) ro co 45. GO 45. co ro —A oo o —A —1 o ro ro ro b b b CD vl b b vl O b 45. o 00 o —1 oo 00 b b 45. vl 1 45. Ol o Ol o 45. GO cn o vl O) b b O) o O) b b O) GO 45. vl CD o I CO _A Ko I b O cn 45. b oo 45. b b b 45. b b b b b CO 45. cn o o o vl oo cn vl CO Ol 45. GO ro 45. CD cn GO 45. oo ro oo ro —A —A 45. O) O) oo vl 45. CO GO vl oo cn O) co oo _A 45. i oo O CO O) CO GO _A 45. co I v| 45. ro i CD CD k vl —A cn —A oo 45. CD o vl —A CO v| -»• cn cn vl 45. O) CO ro GO co oo oo cn 45. co oo vl CO ro CO CO O) CD co vl vl ro ro CD co cococococococococoOT mNfflcj^uMJOtflcoNico^-t'UKi-'OtoooNiisui^uio-'Oioaisioiuiji X X X X X CD X COXOXXCDCOXXXXCOXCDCDXXXXXXXXOCDXXCD S S S S « M M S S S o M S S S M « M S « ? « s « S S OS S » ro-i->-ro-i-iro^ro->--i->-ro->.ro -iJiSJsOl-i-^UlOJiOM-i^CO MQCONJW-fiW^M-t'COCOCO^IOCOMCOCO^rO-fi ro CO £ P ro CT) ro 00 NI -ts o ro o ro CT) ro Ol x -ts CO o ro O) -fs. ho its. CO bi CO CO i-i i-i its. CO bi ho N| 4s.4s.-i ro co CD 4s. ho bi co ro ro -fs. ro co 4s —i —i co TJ bT 3 =1 co CD S, a. 3 -a CO TJ 4s4s.4s.Oi4s.00 4s.W4s.r000004s4s.cnWOl4s.4s.Oi4s.W OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO b b O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 _i 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 _i _i 0 CO ro ro 01 ro 4s ro CO ro -fs. ro 0 4s ro CO CT) O) ro 00 00 01 cn ro Nl 01 ro ro 00 4s 01 ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro 1 X —i ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro CO ro ro ro ro 00 ro ro 00 CO 00 ro CT) 00 00 0 CT) ro cn 4s 00 CD Ol ro CD 00 N| 0 01 CD CD 00 co 01 CD 00 —i 0 00 _i 00 00 CO 00 00 b b b ho b 4s 1 b b ifs. b b b b b 4s b b b b b its. b b i Nl b 4s. b N| b 4s ro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 i ro 0 4s Li ho b Li Li 4S. ro b Li b Li its. Li b b b V b Nl co ho Nl b N| b Li b b Li Li b b b ho i N) 4s 0 00 ro ro CO ro 00 ro 00 CO ro CD ro Ol CO CT) CD N| CT) 0 ro CT) 00 CO N| N| 00 cn CT) ro i «i ro ro co ro CO ro ro ro CO 00 ro ro 00 ro 00 00 ro ro -fs. -fs 01 CO N| 4s. _i 00 O) co CO ro 0 O) 4s ro CO p 00 00 -fs. 0 CO —i CT) -ts — 0 CD Ol 00 0 0 00 cn 0 0 CD Li Li Li ho is. 4s. b 4s b b b ho b 4s. Li b Nl ho b CO b b b ho b b b b N| b b N| b b b -fs. O CO -fs. Ol 01 ro cn 00 co ro ro cn Ol 4s. 4s 01 ro 4s N| ro 01 4s 0 00 00 00 CD 01 CT) CO 00 0 N| 0 ro 4s. CO 4s. N| ro -ts ro CO CT) 01 Ol O CT) 4s ro 0 0 00 00 ro 0 4s 0 4s CD 00 N| N| 4S CO Ol CT) CO CO 01 CO N| •ts. CT) 00 01 CO ro Ol cn N| CO 01 CD ro CD ro CT) CO ro N| 0 0 Ol CD ro 00 N| 0 b 4S. ho b Nl b b b Li b b b 4s b N| b b Li b b 4s b b ho Nl co N| co ho b b Li b ho b ro CT) N| ro ro 4S. co CO CT) Nl ro CO 00 01 CD CO Ol 01 ro CT) O) Js 00 —* 00 —^ 00 Oi ro 01 00 ro co b 00 00 00 o 00 00 00 00 b 4s o CD CD CO "O CD o CD' CO o~ 2 3 x Q 0 CO o CO g co 5 D CD aT o < <5. CD CD 0 3 1 of CO CD cz CT „ CD DO 3 co > 00 ro X CD co' 00 CD 73 0) < CD Ol 73 O DO 3 O CD CD CD X ro _k _V ro _k _k ro ro _k —i -fs. N| 4s 01 —i —i 01 0 -fs. 0 —i b I b ho b ho b b b Nl _i ro _i ro _i ro _i ro ro _i ro —i 4s. 00 —i 00 •it P CD 00 N| N| Nl b ro ho 4s b b b b 4s.rororo-».ooro-A 4s.4s.-s 000)Ult>00)Ji^MW01 i-i-iJsLiGobfONl 4s.hob Nl _i _i 00 ro ro 00 ro 00 _i ro ro CO _i _i 00 4s ro _i 00 00 ro 00 ro 01 _i 00 00 ro ro 4s 4s 01 ro 00 b 4s. —1 its. CD 00 00 ro 0 CD 4s. ro ifs p 00 Nl ho 0 00 CD -fs ro 0 CD b 00 0 0 00 01 0 0 CT) ro 00 CD Li ho 4s its. b its. b b CO ho co 4s Li co 4s ro b co b b b b b ro b N| b b Nl b b b i N| 00 00 cn 01 ro 4s Nl 00 k k cn 01 00 4s 00 0 -fs. N| 1 4s 4s i 00 00 co CD 4s CD 00 N| 0 N| 0 4S. CD ro 01 CT) ro -fs 01 01 4s CD co 00 4s CD 00 ro Nl —i 0 O) N| ro CD —x 4s 00 4s N| 00 00 CT) CO x 00 O _i CD 00 00 CO CD CT) ro 00 Ol 0 0 00 CD CT) Nl 4s Nl 00 0 Nl CD Ol ro 0 00 ro 00 00 01 00 CD 00 CD —i 00 CT) CD N| CO 00 ro CD 4s 01 ro N| 00 00 00 Nl Nl Nl 00 CT) ro N| ro 4s 01 00 00 Nl ro 00 00 00 ro-^-^ro-s-sro-i.ro-i-».-iro-».ro->.ro -*roro-».4s.rororo->>ooro-i 4s.4s.-i -i4iM4itflJJtflO4iOIO-i4iCtl^W^(0ro00SOOffiWAO0)*^*K)Up) i-^bi-^brobhobbbNiNiNibho ho is. bbbb^-^itsi-ibbhoNi is. ho b _i _i _i _i CD CD 00 N| _i —i 4s —i —i 4s ro —i CD CD cn _i 01 0 CD i 4s ro 0 0 00 ro ro 0 —X -fs. 0 —i -ts CD ro N| N| 4s ro 00 Ol its CO CD 00 b 00 N| Nl Ol 00 b -fs N| ro b 00 b 01 co X co ro b 01 N| Ol b N| b P 01 b CD b ro is CD b b ro CD ho CD Nl 10 co N| Nl 0 co 0 ho Ol b b ro 01 00 b ho 01 O b b Ol ho CT) —i Nl Ol 00 b it ro 01 is _i k ro 00 Ol CD 00 4s 4s x CD CT) CO 00 i ro 0 00 x ro 00 ro ro CO 0 CD CD co 00 0 i Nl Nl N| CD 00 O 01 0 ro 00 ro CT) CD Nl 4s 00 Nl 00 00 00 01 01 —i —i 0 CD -fs. N| co CD 00 ro 00 N| CD 00 4s 4s 00 — N| 4s — 01 00 00 —>• 4s — Ol 00 4s 00 CD — N| 4s CD cn 4s 00 JO!DCOs|(J)W*U\3JOtDCOSC9("*UMJOmC8NO)C"Ji CO IO O ^ OOOOOOOOOO CD O CD CD S S S S S S S £ S S S £ £ S <» £ $ 3 £ 3 £ <» S S S £ $ S € £ £ col ro o CD* CO C0Ufflffl(DC"00^^sM^M^MUMMuJioU>I^IO^IOI0a^-»>l C»45v|v44^Olbv|W'^'^vJ4Av40jb D CD X ro -»• ro ro ro 45. co ro -'MUW^CJU-'AMM^ co 4v.r045.-j-45.45.45.-1-Q p| CD O CO g co 3 1 CO CO £ £ "O T3 O 7T O —\ 77 D ro CD* o 4>.4>.oiCflaiCJlCfl4i«4>.C/iOlOl4>.4>>4^ ro CQ o 31 ro CO co 45. ro ro ro co 00 CO co 00 O) co Ol co bo CO co 45. vi vl 45. Ol CD v| 2 ro Ol v, w ro 45. ro 45. ro to co 01 45. _A ro co _A ^ CO 45. ro CO to ro 45. 0 co 01 vl —^ ro ro ro Cn —1 —' vl vl 45. vl CO CD bo bo co co 01 45. fo v| vl CO 45. 45. 45. bo co co ro _i _A • ro _A _A 45. vl 45. ro CD CD 00 ro ro _A _A ro ro ro to ro _i _A _A ro CO CD 45. 45. Vl ro 45. O CO CO — b fo v| b v| b 45. 45. Ol —1 v| ro Ol 45. to 01 45. 0 to CD CD co 45. co vl LA bo ro b b co CO 01 v| to co 0 vl vl b v| Ol fo b Ko b vl b 01 Ko b —V b b v| 00 0 01 cn X ro vl 01 vl b CO 0 co 00 to 45. CO co 45. CO 45. CD CD 00 co Ko -A CO CD —^ —^ 45. Ol CO 0 01 Ol I Ol 0 CD —A 0 0 vj —A CD CD cn —A ro CD Ol co 45. 0 00 45. 00 CO CO Ol CD CO CD CD 00 CD CO co ro CD 00 Ol Oi 45. vl ro 00 01 Ol ro CO 00 0 Ol 0 v| CD 0 0 co O O 0 CO Ol O) vl ro 01 ro co vl v| 01 co ro cn 45. ro CD Ol 00 —* v| 01 45. 00 v| CD 45. co to Ol 01 v| x| CD CQ' §• O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b LA LA b b b LA b b b b b b b b b b LA b b b b LA b LA b b b b b b b _^ vj 10 00 O) vl Ol ro ro to 45. CD 45. ro Ol ro 45. 45. 45. Ol ^ O ro CO 45. co ro CO co co ro CO ro CO ro ro to IO ro ro ro ro to to co ro ro CO ro CO ro CO ro CO 0 co CO CD O 00 ro to co O) CD vl 0 vl ro cn 0 co 00 O) 00 00 ro CO co CD CO —5-ro 00 00 ro b fo 45. b b b io b b Ko b vl Ko co b b b b Ko Ko Ko v| Ko 45. 45. 'co 45. co v| v| 'co 0 ro 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 co b b vl b b b Ko Ko '45. vl b LA b Ko 45. 1 b b 45. b b b Ko 'co LA 45. x LA Ko b b b O) vl ro ro ro 45. co —A 45. 00 00 0 Ol CD 0 vl 45. v| CO 45. 0 00 co CD O) 45. 10 to CD CD vl CO co ro ro X ro ro to ro _A ro ro ro ro ro co CD 45. it v| ro 45. O co 45. 01 v| 45. v| CO 05 co 45. 45. Ol x vj ro Ol 45. ro 01 45. 0 ro CD CD co 45. b vl LA CO Ko b b CO co b b ro co b v| b b v| b Ko b Ko b vl b Ko ro b LA b b vj CD O) 0 O v| CO 00 cn 45. 00 ro co vl v| CO co 0 45. 45. CD co 00 co 00 ro 45. vl ro ro Ol 0 00 CD O 0 00 45. CO to 0 45. 01 01 vj 0 to O) CD CO 00 cn 10 cn CD CO cn cn 00 45. 45. 00 CD ro ro cn 0 CD ro cn 00 p Ol —* CO 0 00 to —* CO v| —» p 0 00 —1 01 vl 00 CO CO CD 45. b b b 45. _A 45. 45. b LA CO LA LA b b vl b vl b b b LA b LA CO vl b co LA CO b b vl vl 0 vl CD ro vl 00 CD ro ro Ol Ol to N> to co CD Ol vl O 10 v| vl ro CO cn cn 45. CD co 00 00 CO CO to CO CO co CO CO CO CO ro CD CO ro w —1 ro b Ko b b b Ko Ko 45. co CO CD 3 co > CD X •3 CQ co 3 ro 6? S 5- "I 73 O Q3 3 o£ 0 ro c 1 &| X ro ,, 4^ ro ro ro co to ro  K,-^ro-^45.-^Noro-^,,-^45.-^ro-^co->-->-->-co oo^oocDcxDoice^^-iviro-^ro^roo: b45.vivi45.bbvivi45.vibbbbb45.^iovivib 00 CD ^ 00 00 0 45. 00 0 1 1 Ol _A co ro 0 1 45. 1 Ol 1 Ol 00 0 to 1 CD —V co 0 cn ro cn vl co CD cn CD 45. b b CD 0 ro ro 45. 45. CD ro cn CO p Ol CD O v| ro CO vl b cn CO 00 — cn LA 00 co CO v| 45. vl CD b 0 ro ro cn b _A CO _A 1 b b v| b CO b b b b ro 1 cn vl b co CD co b b co 0 co CO vj 45. —A CO 45. vl 00 ro cn Ol —A —^ co CD Ol cn CD ro v| CO —i. co cn —A 45. CD co co Ol —A co ro co —A —A —A CD CD Ol 0 ro 0 00 Ol cn CO —^ CO CD Ol ro —A CO vl 0 vl co —1 45. 45. CD ro 45. 45. CD Ol CD vl ro Ol cn CD cn CD CO ro 45. cn 0 Ol —1 00 CD 00 CD 45. 45. co ro ro CD TI Q) CQ CD CJ) 32 o co CO CJ) _^ _^ _^ ro x co ro co ro CO _^ _^ ro ro •fs _k ro oo ro -ts _». CT> •fs cn co cn cn cn -fs CO o oo on 00 ro ro o cn -si —^ ro •fs. -s| -si CO o oo cn cn -si co CO ro js js. co •fs. cn cn cn ro js bo bo CO bo js ro NI CO -»ococosjcocn^uMOCosjo)Oi^u-io11JU'NU'^UJ rorjoirjDDDiroiiiDirjDiiiiirfliiroiajiiro DO DO a oooogooggoogoogggSSooggoogooggDo m 3 «UUMUWUWM«MUUMN)J«WMMUMUUWW cr O CD O UU^fiU^MMU^t>UN)^UCn^^ti^U^tiUCnJi oooooooooooooooooooooooooo co co CD CD CO TJ CD o CD' CO o CO X CO D oo ' I—f 0) CO c 3 3 00 5s  CD Q o oo o CO g co 3 D CD CD* o I- X <' 2. CD CQ o 2 32 o -fs 00 3 c CD CD CO 00 o 3- CD > CQ c CO CO CO co oo —I < CO - o oo F-  CO CO CD CQ' CT O 3 > ro b b b b b Li b b Li b b b b b Li b b b b b b b b Li b ~—' ro ro ro 4s ro o ro cn ro 00 ro CO 4s -ts oo ro ro 00 oo ro cn ro oo 00 00 ro ro ro ro ro 00 ro ro oo ro oo ro ro ro ro CO ro ro ro CO ro ro ro ro oo ro oo x ro cn ro ro ro oo 00 cn ro ro 4s D5 oo oo ro oo cn —i ro CO oo 4s 00 -ts bo b b b b ro b b b ro b b js b b b b b b b b N| b ro b o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 3~ > CO ro Li ro b ro b ro b Nl js. b ro b js js Nl Li b js Li ro Nl ro b b b CO oo co 00 ro cn ro oo CO ro o oo oo oo CD -"i -* cn ~ CO CD ro ro cn •a oo CO V ro oo ro cn cn cn ro oo oo cn oo 4s ro _i ro oo oo oo _i CO ro _i oo cn ro cn oo ro cn 4s 4s o CO CO 00 —i 4s 4S co coo oo cn ro ro cn CO 4s. oo o' cn b NI b js js. b ro b b Li b b js. Li b Li b Li b Nl b b js. b b -si 4s. cn cn oo ro ro o CO O -O) 4s CD Nl o cn -ts o Nl CD oo CD 4s 7J 4s cn 00 _i 4s CD 4s. _i oo ro oo 4s. 00 _i _i oo 4s 00 ro CO 4s o oo ro oo ro 1—•» O cn co 00 -si 4s oo 4s CO OO —i CO CD ro ro 4s oo a> CO oo po CD —* CO o' V b b b b b b b b ro Li N| b Li js. js b b b Li Nl b Li b b b ro -si o oo cn CO oo CD o oo cn cn N| ro ro Nl cn CD Nl cn N| co CO 00 co oo CD CQ' o TO o CO CD Q. CD 00 «—*• 3 CD 3 o oo CT CD CO 3" cp_ I—*-CD O o Q. "oo O o CD CD CO T3 CD 00 CD. > XI O •n. m o z CD Tl CD 00 3 CD 3 CO 00 3 TJ. CD 32 o O o "5 CD _. 2 00 ST 3" "C oo 2 _i _i CD C30 i ro CO cn js. —i b N| TJ_ oT o 3. 7T CO CD CD CO > > ~! < < CD CQ CQ " 1 C x a g -- ro CO Nl co ro b ro ro NI oo O CD c _ 3 3 2. CD X coo 4s. coo ro 00 cn oo cn cn ro 4s CO co ro o oo 00 cn oo ro ro ro ro 4s o cn N| ro oo ro 4s ro N| Nl CO -fs O oo b Li b N| b b ro js. js. b i-i js. b b b ro js. CO CO b b ifs ro N| b oo CO _i ro oo ro cn oo cn ro oo CO cn -fs. ro _i oo oo oo _i oo ro cn i. ro cn oo ro 4s 4s o CO 00 oo oo 4s. 4s CD cn ro cn ro ro cn CD -fs b b Nl b js js. b ro b b b b b Li b b b oo b Nl b b js b o N| 4s 4s 4s N| ro o CO CO _i cn 4s oo oo CD 4s _i CO Nl o CD oo CO Nl 4s. CD cn cn co ro ro cn o oo 00 cn CO oo CD -ts oo 4s N| o oo -fs CD N| -fs N| cn co oo 4s oo N| oo oo cn cn co cn CO 00 O oo 1. oo o o 00 oo oo cn oo oo 4s. oo oo oo oo CO 4s 4s cn CD N) CO —i oo oo 4s 4s N| —s cn 4s cn ro oo cn oo cn cn ro 4s co CO ro o CO oo cn oo ro ro ro ro -fs. o cn Nl ro 00 ro -ts ro N| N| co 4s o oo b Li b N| b b ro js. js b Li js b b b ro js. co i-i b b CO js ro N| b _i_i_i_i -i-"-oo->-oo-i-i->.->. -i-i -i _i_ioo-». 4s.cnCO-i-iCO4s.-i00roCO4s.00-i-i00 4s.CO-i 4s —i co r\o —i ro ocjioooo4s.-iNi4SL04s^cnocDcoiuro4s.rococoocnco^cD i-ibbbi^bbbcooMcoNibi-iJs.js.bbPP1NiP,i-ibcoob -^i\ONiowcnocnorjo-^cDNi4s.4s.cnNoo3-».cncnNicnc»cD roo4i00cno)-'4iOoro4isia)(j)uicooMso!D-'U-'-' CDO-iCOOC»Nl4s.00 00 4s.CnCDWCOC04scncOC04s-iCnOJOOC^ CO 45. co fO l\) Oi tO co NO CO co _^ ro ro ro _^ CO co _^ CO _^ CO ro CO ro Oi cn CO ro ro _». co cn CO CO CD cn l\) Oi CD co 45. o co 45. Oi co oo vl ro 00 45. CD O cn CD co o CO vl cn CD CO 00 v| bo to 45. ho cn cn l\) Oi vj bo bo 45. 45. vi CO CO CO 45. cn 45. vl cn bo CO co co CO Oi cn bo Oi bi CO IO co CO to ro ro ro CO ro CO ro ro CO ro ro 00 ro CO ro ro ro CO co ro ro ro ro CO OiOiOiOiOiOiOiOiOiOiCJ^U\Cjja\CJicJ}(J\CjjCj\CjiJ^J^. 45- 45. 45.45.45.45.45.WCOCOC0 CO CO CDC»vJCJ)CJl45.wrO-^OCD00vlC3DCJl45.CA"h0-^OCDC»vlOT coixcoxrocorjorj-roirjoroiro o -1 ZL 77 77 cn 3 cn' ro o cn T3 CJ1CJl45.WC^45.CflCnCn45.45.45.C045.03Cn45.C045.Cn 45. CO 45.010145.000)45.0045.0145.45.00 00 CO 45. ro CD ro 00 o ro ro CO ro o ro' cn 3 I O p| D) O cn g cn § O CD cc? o <' <?J ro CQ p 3| 1 o - XI cn ro CO^, CT O1 o p o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o p o o o O p o o o o JO ro Oi b CD b b Oi b ro b cn b vl b CD b cn b v| b CD b ro b 45. b ro b 45. b v| b co b oo b oo b CO b CO b co b v| b Ol CO b 45. ho CO b ro b ro O b v| b 45. b CO b ro CO CO CO CO CO ro ro CO ro ro ro oo ro CD CO ro vl CO o co ro ro ro Oi ro CO ro vj CO o ro 45. co co ro 45. co ro cn oo o ro vl CO GO ro v| GO v| ro oo ro CO GO IO co o ro cn ro 45. ro co b 45. v| b b v| b b ho 45. b b 45. b v| b 45. fo b vl CD b co 45. b b b CD b b ro o o o o o o o p o o o o o o _^ o o O o 45. oo o o o o o "3 > CO vl cn ro CO ro o Oi v| ho CO vl b O) ho CD b 45. b cn fo cn co 45. 45. ho 45. b cn co Oi b b 45. CO b CO ro cn b Ol CD 00 v| O vl cn b ro b 45. b Oi b o b v| CD co b vl b o fo CD ro 45. ro cn CO Oi ro CD CO o Ol CD ro vl co 45. CO Ol oo ro 45. co 45. CD co co co v| co cn ro o vl cn co ro o oo O co CD 45. P1 ro o ro CO co o GO oo v| ro cn v| co cn Ratio ro co CD vl v| o 'co v| CD ro b CO b o CD ro b O) b co b ro CD ho ro vl 45. b vl b oo 45. o b 45. b o 45. cn b ro b vl bi CD b CO b CO 45. b oo b Ol CD co b oo b v| b ro b 00 b cn 00 cn vl co CD Ol Oi i. o CD it cn i. o vl CD CO CO ro o o CD oo _l, Ol IO V ro 45. ro Ol o 45. CO co CO oo CO Oi co CD oo ro vl o o o 00 oo ro v| Oi ro 45. 45. GO cn CD o o ro CO CO CO cn Ratio b co oo b o b Ol b co b cn b CD b ro b cn b cn b cn b ro b 00 b CO vl cn b o CD b vl CD vl vj O) b oo Oi 45. 45. co b b vl CD vl b 45. o 45. CO io 45. CD 00 ho v| vl oo b co b cn CO CD cn 0) x| ro CQ' < o cz 3 ro CD o c zs I1 CD X oo oo 45. Ol co co k CO ro Oi cn ro Oi ro CD GO co ro 45. co o GO GO 45. ro Oi ro CO to co co ho 45. ho b b ro Oi vl co co i->. 45. 45. v| CD CD -^ooco-ico-».corocoroo)0)->-Goroio-»--»-vI-^MCX345.C0001CDCOOGOvlppppv| b45.b45.1i-vibbbbbbbbbbbb ro ro co ro to CO CO CO ro GO co co GO ro _1 cn ro -A co 45. ro ro CO GO —1 ro —x co 45. cn Oi co CO —i. O Ol CD v| 45. cn 45. 45. CD CO v| Ol o vl CO o 00 o CD cn o CD Oi oo v| Ol vl Oi ho CD vl b CD Oi b CD b b b b ho v| bi b 45. b b 45. b b b b b LA b b CD b CD b b b o CO Oi o v| to o to cn CO ro o ro 00 vj v| O 45. o Ol ro Oi CD GO oo co v| 45. v| v| v| oo 45. cn co Ol 45. o Oi Ol 45. oo o GO oo 45. cn ro oo ro ro 45. 45. 45. Ol 45. GO co cn cn Oi CO Ol ro vl —^ vl cn 45. o oo Oi 45. CD to ro co oo cn v| Oi ro Oi cn Oi 45. ro O Oi ro —A Ol —^ —A co ro 00 co CO Ol v| CO cn v| Oi CO 00 to oo 45. ro 00 ro CD —^ vl 45. 45-vl GO CD —1 Ol cn 45. 45. 45. CD GO 45. CO cn CO GO co 45. cn GO GO GO ro Oi Ol ro Oi to CD GO CO ro 45. CO o CO CO 45. ro p ro CO to co co fo 45. fo b b ro Oi vl b co 45. 45. vl CD CD v| CO co ro 00 GO 45. CO CO o ro Ol GO CD to GO Oi o Oi CO vl CO Ol ro CO to co oo vl CD 45. b 45. -1. vl b b CD b co CD b b co b b b oo CD I I *. i CO CD _i CD _± _^ _^ _^ CO CD _^ CD I oo _i Oi 45. _A CD ^ _A _1 cn v) 45. Oi o 45. o CO to I o co Ol to 45. I o co oo Oi CO GO ro o o ro —A to 45. GO O o —A GO b oo CD co Ol vl b b o b ro ro cn 45. co CD vl I b vl o oo CD v] LA 45. Ol CD ro GO i CO CO b b b b ro Oi b b i CD b vl co —A co Oi Oi b 45. 45. 'co b v| b o ro ho vl fo vl GO o v| Ol Ol CO 45. oo i 45. Oi 45. Oi CO CO Ol o oo Ol CD 45. vl o oo —1 Oi 45. CO o cn GO CO vj vl ro i v| ro 45. ro CD Ol GO cn v Ol —V o o 45. CO CO CD Oi O CD o Oi CO Ol Ol oo 45. —^ Oi o 45. CD CO ro oo 45. 45. 00 00 ro Oi v| -»• GO 45. Oi Oi 45. to vl v| v| ro ro vl to Ol oo cn Oi CO GO CD v| GO ro ro co _^ co —x co cn -ts co ro NI co ro 0§CO°§§°St0mU','UI>J""000"vl0) 01  C0rO-»-OC000Nia>01JsC0-s COXCOXXXXCOXXXCOCOXXOTCOXCOXODXXCOXCOXCOCOCOOTXOT oogooggSgQogggooooggDocogQogooggoogQjgoooooooogDogg co ro ro ro ro ro ro co ro oo ro x co oo ro CO Js ro _k ro _k ro IO 00 oo Nl o CD ro oo cn ro CD CD cn co CO Js. N| N| CD JS. N| Nl Js —i Js. Nl p N| ro oo co cn N| fo cn bo Ko CD N| bo CD cn cn Ko b bo js bo bo fo b 00 N| Nl ro CO ro ro ro ro ro oo ro ro •ts. ro ro CO to CO IO ro CO ro _k _k IO ro ro 00 00 ro ro ro CO TO O O 7T oojsoojsjs.js.js.js.jscncncnjs.cncnJs.cncjiJscnoo cn cn Jscnoicoooijs.oiJs.oioicnJs CD CD col TJ CD O CD" co 3 CO 00 o I co t> co 3 CD CD O < 2. CD CQ O Z\ "6 O co CO ET 2 CQ' o o o p o o o o o o o O o p o O o o o o o p o o o O o o o o o o o o o 3 > ro CO Js. b ro o b cn b CO b CO b oo b Js b O) b cn b Js b 00 V ro b cn b ro b CD 00 b ro b N| b ro ro b CO b ro b cn O Js* b Ol b ro b Ol b ro b Js b cn b co o ro cn 00 ro ro oo 00 ro ro N| ro co ro cn ro Js ro oo oo o ro oo ro cn ro Js 00 oo ro oo ro CO oo 00 ro oo 00 o ro oo co 00 oo ro ro oo ro CO 00 oo oo ro Nl ro oo to oo ro 00 ro oo ro CD CO co ro 1[ CO CD 00 Nl b js co b b N) fo b Nl N| b fo CO Ko b b b b b b co b b b fo b b o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o _^ 3 > O) js 00 bo o fo N| CO b oo N| oo b Nl b N| js coo b Js. b cn b o b cn N| CO b cn oo ro co b cn b o co CO b o b CD b o b N| OO b N| b ro b b o N| IO Ko co js. O) co CD —x N| b CD Js ro 00 CD 00 cn oo N| ro N| CO ro ro co ro Js cn ro Js oo ro Js ro oo CD ro JS. cn N| CO cn ro Js ro ro oo cn ro o CD Nl Ol o cn p js. ro o CO oo Ratio Ko cn CO cn oo Nl Js b oo js o js. o b N| b ro b ro co co js oo b ro js. CO CO oo b ro ro 00 Nl oo b N| Ko o b oo ro N| b Js b cn co N| b o CO co b N| Nl N| js o jt fo 00 b oo N| CD oo cn 00 CD CO ro cn o cn ro cn ro Nl ro o o Js Nl ro CD 00 00 V cn oo CD 00 oo oo cn o 00 oo cn oo Js co ro co Js o Nl CD o Nl CD to oo Ol o Nl CO cn to o o co Ol CD o Ratio cn io bo o 00 O b cn b ro b cn fo b 00 b Js N| co CO CD b oo Nl js 00 b b Js io JS N| cn Ko Js ro IO b oo b ro js CD N| oo b oo jt Ko Js b Ol b cn b co b ro b oo b o oo ro b oo oo b ro oo x 00 ro ro ro _^ ro ro ro ro CO ro 00 _k ro _k 00 00 ro oo oo cn Js. ro N| o CD ro oo Ol ro —1  CD cn 00 00 Js CO N| CD Js N| N| JS b ro Nl co Js N| Ko b x b co Ko —1 CD co b ^ b b fo b b js CO ro JS. Nl -i ro to oo oo NI ro oo oo cn b i-s Nl '-- Nl oo oo ro oo ro _v ro Js ro ^ _k ro _k oo ro ro _k _k ro p N| _k Js p Ol oo N| ro CD Js CO ro js. oo Js ro oo CO Js Ol Nl cn Js ro Ol o CO CO Ol o ro Lk b N| b js. b b b b co Nl b js. b b Ko Nl b Ko b Ko b b Lk CO CD N| b Nl fo ro Ol Nl oo o CD N| ro oo oo _k ro oo x 00 oo Nl o N| N| Js Js —i cn 00 Ol N| Nl Ol Nl CD oo js. N| Js cn x 00 ro Nl 00 CO cn o ro to ro CO —k o CD oo CO oo oo to O o N| Js. Ol N| cn oo oo 00 ro Ol Ol co oo Ol Nl CO Js. CO N| ro oo co oo ro o Js. N| CO oo Ol to Js ro CO oo 00 cn CD Ol Js oo Ol Ol oo oo Nl oo ro CD —* cn CD N| ro Ol IO oo CO oo _ Js. Js Js. . . oo oo co ~ oo ro ro oo o oo ro co N| N| o N| oo N| oo ro 00 CO ro Js. ro ro ro ro ro ro 00 ro 00 to CO CO ro CO Js. IO _^ ro ro ro 00 00 oo CO Js ro Js. N| o CD to 00 Ol ro CO 10 NJ Ol oo CO JS p Nl CD Js N| N| Js -s Js N| p N| ro oo oo Ol co fo N| b ro Js. Nl Ko b b co fo CO 10 NJ CO b -"• b b Ko b co js b CO Ko b b -"• N| L Nl CO > oo co ro co b o CD 00 Js O IO oi cn cn ro b b b cn o CD —i —' ro co —^ N| co co r cn -s oo ->• ro cn co b cn js cn oo -i oo cnrorooooocooooocnro oooooirooirooioicD oo o oo cn oo cn fo NI fo js ro co to cn oo oo js JS CO N| NI oo NI ro Js. js. oo cn oo coo ro ro oo " ' " Ol Ol O CD NI b oo cn -i oo ro oi co co oo ro o cn o oo o coo o coo 00 js o co ro co js to co cn oo oo ro NI oo Js 00 CD OO CO ro co cn oi cn oo cn coo Js N| js ro coo oo Js Js o oo co Ol CO oo co oo c?' CQ =rl O CD J 2? CD X CJ) cn Js. co a s s s js ro ro —s —i CD CT) Ko CD CO CO to O -i co co co cn OOOO b b b js.js.ro-s! co ro ro co co CD ro o co cn cn -i o o o b Js. ro b o ->•-»• co cn Js. co —* js. ro co oo b js. fo b oo co co co oo ro Js. o o co o ro b b js. b O Js. —i CT) CO co CD CD CO TJ CD O CD' 0) o~ 2 3 CD DO O I CO g co 3 CD CD o < 2. i CD CQ o 5| - II CO CD ET CO-CO 3 co > 00 cl CQ =rl oo 3 ~—' CD C? °l JJ H. gl o oo 3 og| O CD ' CD CD X js.ro ro ->• ->• -± to b ro b cn Js co -s. js. ro oo oo b js Ko b ro co oo NI oo oo ro oo oo NI ro co cn Js. ro -. -- -± <o b Ko b oo _x o ro —x o b o CO b Js O ro b x 00 js CJ) CO 00 —x js. O) co ro —x Pars Ba Cw Fd Hw Ss 12.79846 4.233199 6.920509 6.78773 6.920509 0.712304 0.828954 0.963856 1.194287 0.963856 -0.00495 -0.00986 -0.00773 -0.0134 -0.00773 -4.266202 -4.139118 -4.319071 -4.41882 -4.310416 1.78296 1.71677 1.81382 1.86778 1.82284 1.10382 1.04742 1.04242 1.09989 1.05729 Page 1 ro ro ro ro CO 00 vl OT X I I JE *> Ol oo oo ro OT oo oo vl b OT CO coraiinjOia)a)[iiiiiinjio"iiiiii"n a)!i)$5a)§$ii)ti)B)$ii)0)?ii)S$$s$$[i V| 45. oo 45-ro oo oo o Ol ro o oo ro oo IO 45. ro ro co CO OT 45. co CO v| it CD co oo 45. CO 45. CO bi bi 45. bo 00 bo vl CO CO CO CO bo bi ro bi CO b _^ ro ro 45. oo 45. 00 _^ ro 45. CO ro co ro ro 45. CO ro ro o 77 CO o co o 77 o -I 77 45. 45. 45. 45. 45. C0OiW4iM«U^^4iUU^MUJ5K)U4i^4. o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o O p o o p p p ro -A b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b LA LA b b LA LA LA Ol ro CD 45. OT ro CD CO CD ro oo oo co ro 45-CD ro Ol co ro Ol cn oo CO 00 ro ro ro co ro co ro ro ro 00 CO ro ro co ro CO co ro oo CO co ro OT oo IO CD —* ro o Ol o —* ro CD —* CO CO ro oo 45. ro co 45. 45. CO b b 45. b b b co b ho b co b b b b 45. 45. vj vl v| b 45. b co o o o o o o p o o o o ro o O ro LA b ro 45. vl LA io 45. ho b ho LA 45. LA LA io b ro ho b b b b b b CO CD Ol oo oo CO o OT cn o _A CO CD CD 45. 45. v| 00 CD IO 45. o co CO CO ro ro CO ro CO CO ro ro CO CO CO 45. co cn cn 00 45. co CO 45. 45. OT CD v| 45. CD —^ co Ol cn ro cn —* Ol OT ro CO vl v| cn oo OT CD p o —^ co LA b b b LA b b vl LA vl co 45. b b vl 45. io ro b vl b b LA b b Ol CO oo vl CO CO oo CO o vl vl o 00 CD CD v| CO cn v| CO vl o CO v| ^ Ol oo CD ro o Ol CO ro CO i 45. v| IO CD CD 45-_A CO co vl oo CD ro oo v| vl Ol Ol 45. ^ Ol Ol ro CO ro co —»• oo ro 45. Ol CO Ol 45. co OT v| co CD cn vj oo 45. bo, b b ro v| co b CO b ho b 45. LA b vl v| b LA vl CO b b CO 45. b ro CO 00 vl ro vl Ol 45. ro o vl 00 v| Ol oo co O 45. oo 45. v| co ro cn co 45. CO ro CD CD cn -a CD o CD' CO O CO I Q Q CD Q O CD 0) cn c 3 3 CD -3 TJ o I—K -it cn m 3 CO v< 0) ZJ c CD CD CO CD O > cz CQ cz CO oo co CD CD *> ZJ a CD CD* O I- X <' 2. CD CQ o 5 CD CD co •o Tl 2. < CO ~ 0) CO CO cn c o-X CD CQ' 3 > ro co 0) CO CD X A CQ oo 3 ^ CD 2* s§ o P o oo 3 O CD c ZJ ZJ 2. CD X o •a o co CD CL CD CD ro ZJ o CD cr ro co ZT CD CD O O CL ro o o ZT 0) ro CD K - ZT 0) CD —^ 00 cn oi 45. cn O LA b 45. ro T) o ZJ. o Z ro. TJ CD CD ZJ CD ZJ CO 0) 3 "a_ ro TJ o O o 3 -g. 57 o' Z> 77 tn ZT ro ro co > > -5; < < ro CQ CQ ~ 1 £ X a g S 73 ?? o 00 o 00 co ho co co 45. cn co co ro OT 00 00 ->• vi b b b 10 -»• vl 45. co 45. b ro % ~^ b 01 -»• o co b b 00 ro 00 10 it ro to CO co 45. 00 co v| —A p CO 00 45. co 45. co vl b b b b b b ho b b —>. b co 00 ro to CO ro 00 _A CO ro to CO CO CO 45. cn Ol 00 45. CO CO 45. OT co CO 45. CD b CO 00 Ol to cn — Ol OT to co co v| Ol 00 OT CD p 0 45. b LA vl b b LA b b CO cn LA vl vl 45. b b vl 45. v| ho b vl b ho LA b cn Ol b vl co CD vl vl OT vl CD 00 OT 01 vl ro ro 0 OT 00 OT CD Ol OT OT 45. CD 00 CO ro 45. cn CD 0 OT to CD 45. 0 CD 45. OT cn OT vl Ol OT OT CD Ol 0 CO O 10 CO to to OT 0 ro CO 45. ro CD co v| —A CD 45. 01 0 0 CO ro 0 0 OT 45. Ol OT CO v| CO OT ro v| 00 vj 01 to CO k co cn ro 00 45. 45. 00 ro Ol 00 ro cn u u M K, wK,u-'-'-'rococo-'roco-i45Co-'-'U4545 OTpp^^T^45.l^ppp^prOj045.rOWOTpvI-5.pppp vi b b b b criAbsubssioiDbbcolnMblulb) cn 00 co _^ _A co _^ co _A _^ _A co vl 00 _^ 00 v| 45. cn cn 45. to O —A ro to ro —A — vl to 45. CD 45. —A CD co OT vl CO to cn vl CO 45. co b —1 cn cn 01 b co CO GO 45. CO ro LA CO Ol 45. CO vl CO GO co co 45. b to ro 0 b ho cn 01 vl b Ol b . CO 45. 00 b vl v| b b 45. to b b ro to —A ro CD OT v| OT v| CO -A ro 45. ro CD CO ro v| Ol 00 ro CD to vl 45. v| CD 00 45. 0 ro ro OT v| k ro 1 to 45. 1 vl Ol co 45. O CO cn Ol OT IO ro ro ro 45. CD co 00 CD _A 00 00 ro OT 00 v| OT Ol ro OT 45. cn v| 00 CD 45. OT 00 CD vl vicnOTa>cj>c7}ODOT o(oco^lcfl^o)JO<Da^lOlOl^u^)-'0(fla)^lcBalU^)-'0(flcoNJi^J-'0 X CO CO X X X CO CO cu cu X CO CO cu cu X CO CO cu cu XXX s $ *> CO CO cu cu X X *> *> X X X CO CO Q) 0) X X U M W CO K) M ->• 45. N) GO CJ1 IO 45. cn co co co co 45. CD co o o -i oo 45. co co 45. co ro -A to cn ro 00 scDW4ibcrib)Nvisb io cn 45. ro CO 0 45. O CD ro CO 45. cn ro v| 45. 0 ro CD co vl Ix CD CO 45. vl b ro CO Li -i CO OO CO v| co co co 45. Ol CD CO cn cn CJ) ro ro ro ro ro ro co co ro ->• ro ro ro rororococororocoro corororocorocoro o _^ _^ _^ _^ o o 7? o —1 7? CO T3 SI co o 0) o —1 7T O -1 7T CO O 0) o 7T CO O rn c7 * ui 45. 45.010145.45.0145.010145.0101010145.45.co 45. 45. 45. 45. 45.45.coco45.45.co45.co45.45.co O CD CD CD o CD' CO a CO X Q o| 0) o CO g co 3 & CD C? o <• <pj CD CQ O 3 CO X co<g o- o 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b b b b b b Ko b LA Ko b LA b LA LA b b b b b LA b b LA b LA b LA b b b —V —A Ko 0 O) v| CO vl cn 00 0 CO a) CD 00 45. O cn 45. ro CO vl CO GO vl CJ) O) 00 O) GO CD co 0 v| 00 ro ro CO ro ro ro 00 ro CO 00 ro CO 00 co CO ro 10 ro ro 00 co ro CO GO ro 00 ro co ro co ro CO GO GO ro CD CD _A CD v| 45. 00 01 ro CD CD co 0 45. IO 00 O) CO O) 0 co 45. 0 GO 00 00 00 ro 45. —^ 45. ro GO p ro CD b CO ro b b b b b 45. Ko 45. b b b b b Ko b co b CO 45. 45. b 45. vl Ko b b Ko 45. 0 0 l 0 0 0 ro 0 CO 0 ro ro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ro 0 X 0 0 0 IO 10 co bo b to b b b b 45. 45. Ko co LA LA ^ 45. vl b Ko 45. b b b b Ko v| vl vl b Ko Ko b b b b 45. ro ro ro V ro CO cn ro O) 01 CD CO co 0 Ol O) 45. 00 Ol vl ro vl CD v| vl CO co cn vl ro co CO ro ro ro ro ro CO CO ro 10 ro ro ro 00 ro co 45. GO 45. 45. 01 ro co CO co GO 00 45. cn ro 00 45. O) CD 45. co X Ol vl O) 00 00 01 01 GO cn 0 CD 45. 0 vl 45. co 00 00 01 v| vl 0 00 CO b co 45. b b vl Ko b —A b 45. LA b b LA b Ko b LA b b Ko Ko b b vl b vl b b 45. b b 45. O) ro CO CO 00 ro 00 CD 10 Ol CD O) 45. 0 cn CO 45. CO _i CD CD CD GO ro cn 00 00 0 00 O) 10 V _A O) CD 0 0 CD O ^ ro CJ) ro 00 vl 0 vl CD 00 00 O >A CO ro 0 00 10 0 v| 0 00 0 00 00 CD GO CO vl O) 01 0 45. —^ 00 O) co 00 0 45. Ol 0 CD v| 45. O) 00 0 ro v| ro CO 45. ro Ol 00 -i GO CO — ro CD vl 45. co 45. ro b 45. b b b b vl b b LA b b b b b 45. b 45. Ko co b 45. b b b co b b b 00 CD 45. ro vl 00 CD ro ro 0 v| ro CO 45. 00 ro 0 0 CD ro ro CO O) vl CJ) 00 co co GO GO GO GO 45. 3 > ro co 0) CO 0) 3. CQ I co 3 ~—' CD o' o 70 O 0) 3 og O CD C — Zl ZJ S" & X 00 01 ro 00 ro CD CO co ro 00 ro 45. CD 45. CD ro 0 CO CD cn ro 00 45. 45. GO V 45. ro 00 CD ro O) ro " vl ro -A CO 0 45. 0 CD ro CD 45. Ol ro v| 45. 0 IO CD GO v| 00 CO co v| CO cn 45. p cn LA b LA v| b b 45. b b b vl vl v| b Ko b ro O) 45. ^ b co 45. vl b Ko Li b i 45. b b b ro co CO ro ro ro ro ro CO ro 00 —^ -i —* O) -i 45. —^ GO -i b b b 45. 45. b CD Ko b LA b 01 0 ro ro b 00 vl 00 —A CD 0 O) vl _A 01 ro ro ro 0 ro —A CD 0 01 Ol cn CD O) ro 00 45. CD CO 00 CO 00 45. ro 45. 00 ro 00 IO CO GO ro ro ro ro ro 00 00 45. _A 01 —* O) CO 00 cn Ol ro Ol 0 CD 45. _A v| b Li b Ko b GO b b Ko ro 45. b O) 45. 0 Ol CO -i 00 —1 0 CO Ol 00 ro O 0 0 45. 45. 45. ro cn 0 —X CD 45. CD CO ro CO 0 vl 45. 01 cn —* ro 01 -i Ol 00 00 —^ cn 00 Ol GO 45. 45. CO CO CO CO GO 45. cn 45. 0 vl 01 ro 00 00 01 vi vl 0 00 Ko b b 45. CD vl b b 45. b b 45. CD CO 00 vl b 45. 00 00 0 00 Ol -A ro 0 00 ro ro v| ro 45. ro —1 CD 00 v| O) cn 01 —i v| 00 v| CD Ol v| CD O) CD 00 O) 00 CD -i v| 45. CO ro 00 CA>roN)cororo-»-45.rococnro45.co45.coK, ro roco45.-»-ro45.ro45.roco-iCo-iC045.cn oioocowoo4iCDcoocD-icx45.-irocnroG) LibLA^bb45.bbbvivjvibiob45.LAbb45.vibioLAbLA4ALAbbLAb CD x —x CD _A _A CD _A 00 v| _A vl CD 00 _A 00 _1 vl 00 I 00 —A CD _i vl O) 0 O 45. O _A 1 p IO 00 0 O 45. Ol 00 CD 0 —v OO —A O ro ro —1 CO 0 ro O 00 GO GO CO CD ro CD v| Ol O 45. —^ ro 00 —i co b b vl b 0 Li vl 45. O) ro CO O 45. vl 0 ro Ko 45. b Ol b —^ b CO b b CO 45. co _A Ko b ro 00 O) b GO CO b k O) b 1 b b b ro CO b 0 b 0 ro k co ro 45. —A CD —A b co vl —^ ro CD 0 ro -A 45. 45. Ol 0 45. cn 0 O) Ol 00 45. v| b 0 co CD 45. 0 —A 1 CD O CD —A CD cn 00 0 CO 0 CO O ro CO 45. 45. v| vl 45. co 10 Ol _A CD ro CD _A 00 00 0 CD vl ro 45. ro CD CD cn O) O) O) O) co 00 IO cn v| 45. it 00 00 O) cn ro ro Vl Ol 45. 00 Vl 00 Ol vi O) -i 00 vl cn 45. v| 45. GO 45. v v x s -fs. ro co —i —* -fs. co co CD CD CO CO ro CO CO CO 03 CO 03 co OO ro —^ N| 00 Nl CO N| oo oo oo 00 oo oo oo oo oo Nl N| N| Nl N| N| N| N| CD oo N| CO cn oo ro o CD oo O) cn Js. 00 ro x CO X X CO CO CO X X X CO X X CO X X CD X 00 oo 00 03 a 00 -> 00 cu •s co cn co 00 oo ro ro 00 Js Js oo ro Js CO 00 ro oo ro co oo oo -fs N| CO oo — o Js Nl -fs — Nl js. io cn 00 CO CO N| bo '—-co js CO '--CO ro CD ^ O CD CD CD O co o~ 2 ZJ CD rororocoio-'iocoro cn CO o TJ o 5- oo 7\ o -I rojs-ro eo TO ro to ro ro ro ro ro ro o —\ 7? ro o —t 7? Q P DO O CD CD* O cjijscnjscncnjsjscjocncnjsjscnjs.js.coocjicjo < 9.. CD CQ O 31 CO ET X CD CO' o O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Js b cn it b oo b oo b O) b CO b oo o io b 00 b ro o b cn b O) o CD oo b N| b cn oo b CO o o b b _ CD 0) 3 co TJ 00 CQ CD oo CO CO ro N| co ro ro Js co o oo CD ro CO to cn co ro oo ro oo ro oo ro oo ro ro oo ro CD oo ro oo cn oo oo oo o ro Nl oo oo oo ro oo o ro CD b b b io js Nl ro b ro b js js b b js. b b b b b b b o o Js o o ro o o o ro o ro o 3~ > O) b b N| js. 00 io co b IO b CO b CD b ro Nl CD co O) N| O b b o Nl 00 js ro b CO b CD b b o js N| ro O) CO N| Js ro Js ro oo ro 00 N| Nl oo oo ro o ro ro ro oo ro o CO CO co ro ro ro oo oo ro ro ro oo p ro Js CD ro p ro Js oo N| CO TJ 00- o' b o Nl ro CO js Js Nl N| b 00 js. IO b CO io oo b o b o b oo b oo io o b cn b o b co oo b Js b CD N| CO oo js ro b CD N| N| Nl CD cn oo oo 00 CD cn cn Js. o ro oo 00 00 CO -fs CO CD en o 00 cn oo oo oo o N| oo CD N| 00 oo o CD CD ro O) CD CD oo CO cn o 00 TJ 00 <—»• o' b CO b cn b OO b CO b b CD b ro b N| b Nl b 00 Nl CD b 00 b CO b ro b b Js. b OO ro o b cn b CD js b 00 js cn b CD oo 3P =5 CO OO ro co CM 03 O CD § 31 ? & X Js ro Js oo CD 00 00 x OO Nl ro 00 N| io b js N| b N| ro o wen u -» w u ro N p-^rococopjsNi jsiobbbbNib cojsjscorojsooooro CDOO-'OJS.NIJS-INI IkbJs.b-'.brob'-'. ro ro x _x 00 oo ro to 00 co N| N| —x — o Js io Js Nl b js. b CO oo CD Js N| co ro CD CD cn o 00 Js —i oo o 00 oo CD Nl Nl Nl o oo N| ro Js cn O) CD cn oo rororOiOooororooo roooo^procoro roNibrob->.bb oocoooocncocno rocojsNicoNiJso JscoJs.cncorocnoo Ni-iNicoJsrorocn roooro-^rorooo-ioo roojs.ppjs.Niy,->. b-^bb-k-bJsooNi cocnJsooNiroroNicD JUIJ»UI-i(DOO00 O->-OC0CDCD->-C0->-oooo->.oocDcncnJsoo Js ro oo oo CD ro ro 00 cn CO oo oo ro ro oo Js. Js 00 ro Js. oo oo ro Js CD oo Nl oo ro CO ro oo oo CO Js N| p oo —»• o Js. Nl Js —* N| Nl io co js Nl b N| js Ko b b b b N| b X b js b co ro b N| co CD cn _^ CD CO oo oo oo N| oo b CD CD CO _^ CD X co oo cn Js. o ro Js oo CD cn 00 —x o CD oo o CD —x co co cn o CO cn b b b —^ oo oo b N| O b b 00 N| co !_>, b b ro b js b 00 ro b CD b x CD b b oo N| CO CO 00 —x co b cn co Js 00 js. N| Js oo —x oo Js coo ro CD b N| Js Nl oo CO —-oo N| N| oo CD o CO N| o CD ro CD CD ro cn x N| Nl N| CD o cn ro 00 —-N| ro oo —X Js. oo CO 00 Js X oo ro ro cn co —x 00 Js oo CO ro CD Js Nl Js CO 00 ro oo oo cn N| CD CD N) co -ts ro NI co CD -ts CO -fs ro ro co CO N| co cn ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro _^ _^ ro ro ro ro o ro ro —x 4s —x — CD CD — CD o o —^ -s ro N| ro ro CD oo co 00 CD cn cn cn CD io 4s O O O o o o O o O b CD ro CO b CD b Js b CD b CD i. o _k ro _k o _x x _k •ts o x _k b b b b b 4s io Ko b Li. b Ko b Nl Nl oo cn CD CD 00 CD cn 4s cn oo -" -ts oo IO 4s Pag oo CO 00 oo ro _^ ro CO 4s. Nl N| CD CD CD Nl cn CD b b b b !_k N| b b x N| 00 00 o ro O Nl 00 o o CD N| CD CD 00 4s O 4s CD cn -ts 4s 00 00 -»• oo ro ro ro CD co oo o XXXXXXCOCOX s ? v s S S a"» v CO X I I I I 0) v V S V S CO oo CD ro co co -ts js ->. co oo cn NI o ro to cr oo N CD ro oo : CD cn ro ro oo CD cn NI oo ro co ro cooooooo,,rooooococo„rooooooo MwoimUc«oouJ»UAoioi^ bbbKob-i-bjs.bJs.bbb o b o o o Ko b b o o o NI ro o oo o NI o cn ro b b b o cn Js CO o ro io b CD ro o oo 00 CO ro 00 co co cn co ro o oo Nl oo ro 00 o oo Nl b b b b Ko b N| b Lk oo b ro cn N| ro 00 Nl ro oo oo cn CD b Ko oo oo cn ro jv co CD NI CD O P P° b b £j SJ] co cn w ^ oo oo cn ->• b b CD CD CO TO O CO D CO X Q Q oo o CO g CO 3 O CD cb* o r- X <• 2. CD CQ o 2: x -=r 2. 3 CQ CO DO 3 eo > oo oo 3 ^ CD 2" d 5° 73 . O 00 O CD C — 3 3 K" Q. 2. CD X CO c 3 3 0) cT o m 3 co Nt o 3 CQ a oo i—t-CD > c CQ TI o o Z CD Nl = TJ CD CO CD Nl CD CD CO TJ CD —l ZT 00 CD oo 3 CD 3 co ro o o < CO 0 00 E" co 1  £ CD > "2 CD CD 00 3- 00 5 3 oo 3 CD 3 CO oo 3 -g_ CD TJ o 73 CD 3 CD 00 CO c —I CD 3 CD 3 i o —\ 7T (ft 3" CD CD _k ro _k CD Js. Nl CD CD Ik NI co co CO > > ~ < < CD CQ CQ ~ X r-x a g H 73 73 CD 00 oo co CO JS. Nl cn ro on -»• Nl o oo oo ro 00 CD ro oo ro CD CD ro o o Js N| Js ro NJ N ->• N| ro co oo oo o Js. co oo ro cn JS. cn i o b o co oo oo coo oo co o Js co Ko ro co oo oo CD -s cn CD Js CD O oo o Js. ro oo Js oo ro ro o oo CD oo CO N| 00 N| co oo oo X CD O Nl o oo cn ro NI ro ro co CD JS. o oo b b oo ro oo o oo cn cn o oo co js. \-> ->• o 00 -»• oo oo ro JS. 4s b o o Js X CD S N| oo N| N| CO CD CO O O N| Nl CD CO O b co oo ro co o oo cn cn o CD co cn ro co ro CO cn co cn 45-CO ro cn cn CO CO o cn k 45. cn cn co CO io 45. co CO cn co ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro _^ ro _^ ro v ro ro ro CO co CO CO o oo 45. co 45. 45. co 45. CO 45. cn CO CO ro co ro CO ro ro CO CO CO co co co vi vl CO ro 00 ro cn o 45. CO 45. CO io CO ro 45. cn 45. cn 45. io CO vJvlvia>C)C}DCJ1O1OlO1O1Ol45.45.45.00CA)G5!OrOW ro-^ocovi-icoc»c^wM-iCOMoro-iOcovirotuw^,lJJ XXXXXXXXXX co I I X I X s ? s ? s X X X X X o •s s s s *> s X X ro ro ro co ^0)0)01 cn co vi bo on cu o 7T cn s> CD CD •a o <g o -i o S c O CQ CD CD O 77 cncncoro45.,,-».45.45. —^ cn co cn co co. _i jo 45. cocobicjja>ioboLi. ro ro 10 ro 45. ro co_ cu cr CT CD 0. ., ro ^ ^ ro to —^ —^ 00 ^ cn 00 „,->-rororoK,ro->-, rocooo45.NJoo)^°oocn o •. 1. v ro •. co ^ ^ cn ro 45. 01 corororocococo,,ooojcoro ,0000 oviovicoooicoro-iiocnr^roo cococobkiMsiocnrocri 01 co 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p p 0 0 0 0 ro b Li b b io Li ro Li Li b b b b b Li Li io io b b O on co 0 O on —i Ol co 45. cn cn O vl —* 01 CO on o o o o b 45. cn CO 0 O ro ro ro 0 0 0 O _i ro ro CO 1 0 ro _i 0 _i _i 3~ 45. 01 b vl b co vl vl ro cn CO CO b cn b 00 b 00 b ro CO 45. 01 45. vj b 00 45. CO b cn CO v| b ro ro v| 00 b co it b cn b cn b 01 > u 45. 0 ro CO co CD ro 45. 45. 45. CD CO a> 45. 0 45. CO 00 0 45. ro 45. ro ro p 00 cn GO CD CO cn 45. ro 45. ro ro 45. CO 0 CO vl CO on ro ro 45. ro 45. CO Ra b 0 b co b CD b 01 b 45. b b CO 45. b v| b vl b v| b CO 45. 01 X 45. 00 v| cn vl cn b 00 ro CD ro ro on ro CO cn b 0 45. cn b 00 0' vl ro 0 co —i. 0 CD p vl 0 00 co on cn v| 45. CD cn 0 45. co ro cn v| vl 0 45. CD ro on 01 cn co cn CO p 00 vl 45. cn co 0 v| vl cn cn CD Ra vl 45. 45. CO vl b v| 01 b ro vl CO 45. ^ b cn b 01 co ro b 00 CO 45. CO vl 45. b cn vl CO b ro 45. ro v| vl b ro it b CO co 45. 0' GO Ol 45. 45. co 45. CO GO o cn ro b co o co CD CD CO o CO =S CO Q p CD O C/> J; w 3 a CD CD* o 1- X <• 2. CD CQ o 3 X CD CQ* CO CD 3 co > CD ro — < o CO c: 3 3 CD •2 TJ O I—*-jtfc Ol m 3 co o CQ a CD- CD > CQ CO co vl CD CD CO •0 CD < CO o 00 CO c 3 CD CD > CD CD 3 CD 3^ CO GO O O "5 rc CD CD 3- ~° ZT CD 45. v| Ol cn co 45. 01 00 Li b b co CO > > -5: < < CD CQ CQ ~ I C x o g 00 co vl co 00 01 GO IO CD o CD 3 oS O CD cz 3 3 Sf Q. rc CD X TJ o 3, CD vj = -i TJ CD CD 3 CD 3 CO CD 3 -g_ CD TJ O I—t- TJ CD 3 CD CD CO c CD 3 CD 3 i o —\ 77 CO ZT CD CD • CO 45. 1 0 —i CD — io O v| ro CD _i vj on b —k vl 0 00 on 0 ro CD 00 ro ro 45. 00 00 00 CD 0 CO 0 45. ro on ro cn 45. on • 0 45. 1 0 45. < -i Li 0 co ro < b vl co b ro GO 45. _i CD 0 00 GO v| cn -i CD CD —i 45. vj —V 00 cn CD ro v| 00 on 45. CD 1 45. I 0 O) Fd — b 0 b CD b b —i b cn ro 45. _i CD 0 CO 0 ro 00 O v| 00 01 45. 00 vl vl cn 0 ro ro — GO on CD X _i _i • 45. cn « b b 45. 0 CO vl CD cn k b 45. 00 CD vl 00 ^ ro vl 00 v| 00 00 00 vl CO 00 ro 1 45. 45. • vl 0 co on co —i —1 b 0 CD CD b co —i b on ro cn ro 0 0 00 0 vl ro 45. vl 00 01 ro 00 —i vl cn 0 CO 45. cn CO on co CDCOCDCDCOCDCSCOCBOOCONSN-NI cnuM-iiDcosoiuioocoai^u co co cn ro oo on oo CO 00 ro CO Js oo OO ro "Nl oo cn — ro -Nl cn cn cn —*• —^ CO to cn CD CO •IS. CD CO js ro co js X mniiiiii oooogSgggg ro ro -i ro ro CQ o c CQ CD O ro to oo cr Js co ro ro ro to ro ro o 7T ro ro ro IO ro ro ro —». 00 CO oo cn —v ro 00 cn js CD bo CO js co oo oo ro oo 00 oo Js CO Js co Js Js CO cn CO NI bo —x co CD io ro io ro io ->• o ro CD -»• co co io 00 CD cn CO Js js o o o o L_x b CO b —x oo CD CD ro o o o o o ro co co ro co co ro ro co co js. b ro b js co ro o ->• oo o b cn oooo Iv b '-- b oo oo oo co TI 03 CQ CD ro X _k Js o X IO _k _k _k o _k _k o ro X b oo ro o b b Js js N| b oo ro ro b co b cn b cn js cn b ro b CD js Js b to CO 00 CO o 00 ro ro o ro Js. CO -NI 00 oo Js ro oo cn ro cn 00 CD oo o Js Js CO Js oo oo to cn b oo b cn b b Js ro cn b 00 Nl -NI b Js b N| js Nl js co b oo js oo b Js CD -s cn -± CD CD f—1 00 N| CO o cn (Zj Js ro N| co N| co b o ro oo b oo Ko o js. b o b Nl b o js o CD O 00 N| oo oo Nl CO o oo js. ro oo ->• oo Js b TJ o co CO —1 CQ co 45-45. o oo CO co CO co IO 00 ro vl ro X CO Ol 45. CO CO 00 CO 00 45. CD ro cn CD No. Tree Summary f Entry By: IV Date:0ct. 1 Port McNeill Permanent Sample Plot Remeasurement Worksheet CO CD X X CO CD X X s» X X CO CD X s£ CO CD X St X X X s» X S£ X S; CO TJ O CO o —i TJ O ?* CD O CD -i vl ). CO CD 00 CO 00 45. co 45. Ol ro 45. vl 00 vl ro CD ro oo b ro CO Ko ro CO b oo vl co v| 45. co ro b ro 45. 45. co to b 45. 45. 45. co b ro CO b co cn "cT J3 a OP X ro -ro X ro ro v -O CD CO CO o o ZJ CO •p_ O CD Ct? o —\ -I CD CD CO XJ CD —i ZT CD < o cz 3 CD XJ CD —! ZT CD CD CD CO CD_ > CD CD XJ CD —\ ZT CD ro o CO 45. CO 00 b CO b —V CO b CO b ro fo ro o Ko ro b ro p ro ro 45. ro o ro ro b ro o Ko IO o 45. ro o b I- <' CD O X CD CQ' zr o —\ —i CD CD 3 CD —\ -I CD CD CO XJ CD —i ZT CD < o cz 3 CD XJ CD —! ZT CD CD CD CO CD_ > CD CD XJ CD —\ ZT CD co ro 00 o CO oo oo o b co x b oo o b co o b co o 45. CO o Ko co ro b co ro CO 45. co ro 45. CO 00 co CO ro CD b co j? X CD CQ' ZT o o 3 —1 ZT D' O 0) cr CD 00 oo b ro ro o CD x P o p i ro o b CO o b cn p o b Ol o b "Nl o b o b v| o p o b CO o b Ol o b oo o x Ol o b 00 o b v| p o 3~ > JO CO CD CO CD_ > —1 o o 3 —1 ZT D' O 0) cr CD CD CD fo 45. o b CD 45. CO o '-Nl 45. o b "Nl o b o b o 45. CD b co Ko ro o b v| ro 45. cn o b oo v fo 00 If > CO < O CZ 3 CD CO CD X > < CQ X o TJ > < CQ r— o F° co -si o CO "Nl fo ro 45. b co 00 io 45. CO CD 45. ro co cn b x co "Nl b 45. co o fo CD co GO co 45. b CD GO cn CD ro co CO co 00 Ko vl CO ro b CO GO oo b vl CO vl VI co 45. vl CO TJ CD i—»- o' r- <' CD O s CO CO oo ro GO cn GO 00 00 CO CO 00 CO b -Nl IO Ol b oo ro 45. 00 ro o b 00 o 45. co 45. o cn b ro o co v| cn oo b ro oo v| vl CO 45. Ko ro ro o 45. CO CD CD b CD vl 45. b Ol o CO vl CD x o ro b cn oo oo co CD TJ JS-Cs' X i o CD 3 co o b co b CO O b co o b co O 45. 00 ro b CO ro 45. co co 00 00 ro CO b CO I O o c ZJ ,—r CD CO CD 5" Q. CD X o co 00 IO v| 00 ro CO CD 1 45. io CD CD ro o ro • o b o 45. CD Ol o vl ro co o 45. ro vl CO 00 45. CD CO 03 —V b 45. v| 45. ro vl CD v| vl 4k CO CD 00 i o b o CD oo CD o b ro 00 CD Ol 45. 45. fo co co CO CO o b 45. ro 45. ro CO CO 00 ro J5. b CD o vl 1 o b o vl vl co o CD CD 00 00 Ol CD CD CD ro o Ol o CD Tl Q_ b CO co oo CD X CO CD v| vl oo i. 45. 00 oo ro 1 o b x CO 45. X CO 45. ro oo vl CD vl 00 vl vl 00 X b cn vl ro CD k co IO ro 00 45. k b o 45. CD • i o b o v| v| CO o CD CD CO 00 cn CD CD CD ro o cn o CD CO CO TJ co CQ CD CO CO co cr> to CD to CO CO co CO 00 to CD to CO 00 co CD CD CO CD to TJ O CO CO CD 00 co ro ro i ho co ro CD Ti cu CQ CD CO 4s CD ro oo oo CD CD 4s 00 co co |b ro CD 4s o CD CD CD CO TJ O eo D CD X CO CD •5 21 o Si m -5" cu Ql cu 3-1 O cu CD c?1 CO CD oo oo ro CO O cu co CO CD o 3 CD CD* O o b co ro o| b ro 4s 4s o ro ro o b ro CO CD < CD o| ICQ' X CD CQ' CD o Q_ O 3 CD CU CD 3 »-»- "co ro o o CD CD CO "O CD cf1 c 3 CD TJ CD CD CU co cu CD CJ CD o o b CO 00 b 4s. ro CD 4s ro oo oo 4s 4s IO 4s 00 CD co CTI bo I Nl 4s oo ro b ro N| oo b N| oo CD 3 > ro 3 > co Xi cu co CJ CO 00 c 3 CD < CD I oi CO X co 4s 7) 00 O o c 3 CD 0) 3 co CD I CD X o oo oo io o 4s Nl 4s ro o 4s ro 4s ro o CO CD 00 CO o Nl ro CD •is ro CD CD ro o ro oo CD oo 00| oo oo ro I co| CD O Nl js 4s 00 00 IO CD o 3- o z CD CD CO 3 CD 3 co| CU ' 3 TJ. CD IPJ o ii CD 3 CD 00 CO c CD 3 CO CD CD > < ICQ X D 73 I 4s.| b CQ r—, O 73\ co 4S. b ro 32 o co CO 00 o I N|| IO oo o 4s o b ro oo CD Ul 4s ro Nl CD oo 4s CD CD 00 CO CD oo 00 Ul CD 4s ro oo 00 CO CO I CD CO ro o Ul o co CD CD oo oo Ul CD CD N| 00 Nl Nl oo I CD CD to o Ul o CO co CO TI CJ CQ CD CD ro OJ ro ro ro CD 00 ro ro CD OJ ro to ro Ol ro co co 10 oo ro CD Ol CD ro ro co ro ro oo ro CD OJ ro 0) Ol 00 OJ CT) 00 CO CJ 00 TJ o CD CD 00 TJ Q) CD CD ro ro ro co ro ro cn ro co ro o CO TJ o co co oo 

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.831.1-0090348/manifest

Comment

Related Items