Coming Spruce Budworm Outbreak: Initial Risk Assessment and Preparation & Response Recommendations For Maine’s Forestry Community Robert G. Wagner CFRU Director Keeping Maine’s Forests Implementation Committee Augusta, Maine November 18, 2014
2014 Quebec SBW Outbreak Map Source: Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs du Québec
Growth Spruce-fir Defoliation by SBW Outbreak in Quebec 2005-2014 Source: Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs du Québec
July 2013 -North of Forestville, QC. 90+% of the fir had damage. Some of the spruce was damaged. The photos don't show it, but this is the condition affecting every stand on every hill and valley in the region. Currently there are 2.5 million ha in Quebec in a similar condition. Only a stand sprayed twice with Btk was green (not shown). Quebec only sprayed 120,000 ha this year. Ked Coffin, JD Irving
Thank You!
Thank You!
10,000,000 millions of acres millions of acres 8,000,000 6,000,000 Series 1 Series 2 4,000,000 Series 3 2,000,000 0
SBW Status in New Brunswick
Jeremy Gullison, NBDNR 9
SBW Trapping and Defoliation in Maine 1955-2013 10,000,000 millions of acres millions of acres 8,000,000 6,000,000 Series 1 Start of Series 2 4,000,000 Series 3 next Maine outbreak 2,000,000 0
Maine’s SBW Preparation & Response Strategy
SBW Preparation & Response Plan Approach • Develop risk assessment for Maine (wood supply impact analysis began by CFRU in 2010) • Focus on those that will be directly affected (large landowners / mills) • Role of public institutions: State government (MFS) – Legislated forest protection mandate • University of Maine (research, education, and outreach mandate) • • Workout landowner and state roles and responsibilities • Develop joint industry (MFPC), state (MFS), and university (CFRU) preparation and response recommendations • Recognized that plan will need to be revised and augmented with feedback from others that will be impacted or have strong interest in issue: Family forest owners • Municipalities • Recreation and tourism groups • Environmental groups • Interested members of public •
Maine SBW Task Force Task Force Leaders: • University of Maine Bob Wagner, CFRU Director • • Maine Forest Service Doug Denico, Director • • Maine Forest Products Council Patrick Strauch, Executive Director •
Maine SBW Task Force Objectives: • Develop Risk Assessment • Develop Preparation & Response Recommendations for: forest managers/landowners, forest products • industry, state government, wildlife biologists, and forest researchers • Solicit feedback from others that will be impacted or have strong interest in SBW • Raise awareness about coming outbreak
SBW Task Teams
SBW Task Teams
SBW Task Teams
>65 Expert Contributors! SBW Task Task Team Contributors Team Wood Supply & Chris Hennigar (UNB), Erin Simons (UMaine), Kasey Legaard Economic Impacts (UMaine), Ken Laustsen (MFS), William McWilliams (FIA), Aaron Weiskittel (UMaine), Ernest Bowling (Sewall Co.), Peter Triandafillou (Huber), Ian Prior (7-Islands), Todd Gabe (UMaine), Rob Lilieholm (UMaine), Lloyd Irland (The Irland Group) Monitoring & Louis Morneau (MFFP QC), Blake Brunsdon (Irving), Brian Protection Sturtevant (UMN), Mike Devine (MFS), Gary Fish (MBPC), Lebelle Hicks (MBPC), Gordon Mott (USFS, retired), Bud Brown (Consulting Entomologist), Charlene Donahue (MFS) Forest Management Kip Nichols (7 Islands), Tom Charles (BPL), Kenny Ferguson Strategies (Huber), Gordon Mott, (USFS, retired), Dave Wilson (Katahdin Forest Management) Policy, Regulatory, & Joel Swanton (FRA), Mark Doty (Plum Creek), Jim Contino Funding Strategies (Verso), Doug Denico (MFS), Don Mansius (MFS), Peter Triandafillou (Huber), Don Tardie (Consultant), Marcia McKeague (Katahdin), Bill Ferdinand (Plum Creek), John Cashwell (Consultant), Michele MacLean (MFPC), Tom Doak (SWOAM) Don Mansius (MFS), Blake Brunsdon (Irving), Chuck Gadzik (LandVest) Wildlife Habitat Ryan Robicheau (MDIFW), Walter Jakubas (MDIFW), Phillip Issues deMaynadier (MDIFW), Joe Wiley (MDIFW), Erin Simons (UMaine), Ray Ary (Plum Creek), John Gilbert (JD Irving), Henning Stabins (Plum Creek), Jennifer Vashon (MDIFW), Andrew Cutko (MNAP), Merry Gallagher (MDIFW) Public Roberta Scruggs (MFPC), Kevin Doran (MFS), Sherry Huber Communications & (Maine Tree) Outreach Research Needs Bill Livingston (UMaine), Michel Huot (MFFP QC), Dave MacClean (UNB), Vince Nealis (CFS), Dave Struble (MFS), Andrew Willette (JDI), Lloyd Irland (Irland Group), Brian Sturtevant (UMN)
SBW Task Force Timeline Task Force Formed (Summer 2013) • • Task Teams formed (September 2013) Task Team work (October 2013 – May 2014) • • Task teams complete draft report sections (June 1, 2014) • 1 st DRAFT completed (August 1, 2014) • 1 st DRAFT review by Task Team members completed (October 15, 2014) Publicly reviewable DRAFT completed (November 9, 2014) • • Public review period begins with Keeping Maine’s Forest (November 18, 2014) • Feedback solicitation from SWOAM, municipalities, recreation and tourism groups, others (Nov 2014 – Feb 2015) Final report completed (April 2015) •
Publicly Reviewable DRAFT Report Complete!
Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment 5.8 million acres of spruce-fir stands at risk of some level of defoliation, leading to reduced tree growth and mortality over wide areas. Balsam fir concentrations (as depicted Distribution of Spruce-Fir Forest Type on map) by average volume (ft 3 /acre) in Maine counties, 2008 (Source: by county in Maine, 2008. (Source: McCaskill et al. 2011). McCaskill et al. 2011)
Risk Assessment Water/no data Low Non-host for est Susceptibility Mixed with red/black spruce Mixed with fir/white spruce Red/black spruce Young fir/white spruce Matu re fir/white spruce High Susceptibility Map of approximately 10 million acres of northern Maine showing areas of forestland classified based on susceptibility to defoliation by SBW. (Source: Legaard et al. 2013)
Potential Spruce-fir Yield Reductions • Two studies completed: Hennigar et al. 2013 – CFRU • Legaard et al. 2013 – NSRC • • Both studies conclude: 15% to 30% maximum annual reduction in • spruce-fir volume or biomass for moderate to severe SBW outbreak Slow (40-year) recovery of spruce-fir following • peak impact of outbreak Impact similar (both severity and rate of • recovery) regardless of when outbreak occurs over next few decades
Good News! Hennigar et al. (2013) concluded that nearly all spruce-fir volume losses can be prevented by: • Adaptive harvesting Reducing area of high-risk stands (i.e., • those with high balsam fir and white spruce composition) ahead of outbreak • Foliage protection B.t. applications to high risk and valuable stands • Only 20% of area of affected area needs to be • treated • Salvage logging Dead and dying trees •
Projected Cumulative Spruce-fir Volume Reductions Under Various Management Scenarios Poten al Cumula ve Wood Supply Impact on Balsam Fir and Spruce rela ve to 2006-10 Harvest Levels 4.0 Spruce-fir volume reduc on (million cords) 2.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 -2.0 -1.3 -1.5 -2.6 -3.1 -4.0 -3.7 -6.0 -6.4 -8.0 -7.4 Same as 1970s-80s outbreak -10.0 50% of 1970s-80s outbreak -12.0 -12.7 -14.0 -16.0 No Management With Adap ve With Adap ve With Adap ve With Adap ve Harvest Planning Harvest Planning + Harvest Planning + Harvest Planning + only 20% Bt Protec on 20% Bt Protec on + 20% Bt Protec on + Par al Salvage Salvage From Hennigar et al. 2013
Projected Maximum Annual Spruce- fir Volume Reduction Under Various Mitigation Scenarios Poten al Maximum Annual Wood Supply Impact on Balsam Fir and Spruce rela ve to 2006-10 Harvest Levels 100 Spruce-fir volume reduc on (thousand cords) 0 0 0 -100 -90 -101 -166 -200 -181 -202 -247 -300 Same as 1970s-80s outbreak -333 50% of 1970s-80s outbreak -400 -500 -494 -600 No Management With Adap ve With Adap ve With Adap ve With Adap ve Harvest Planning Harvest Planning + Harvest Planning + Harvest Planning + only 20% Bt Protec on 20% Bt Protec on + 20% Bt Protec on + Par al Salvage Salvage From Hennigar et al. 2013
Economic Impact - Projected Maximum Annual Spruce-fir Loss Estimated Total Forest Direct Economic Estimated Total Estimated TOTAL SBW Outbreak Management Impact to Forest Indirect Economic Economic Impact Scenario Response Scenario Products Industry Impact to Maine to Maine Same as 1970s- Worst Case – 80s outbreak on -$505 million -$290 million -$795 million No Management current forest Approximately Worst Case – 50% of 1970s- No Management -$252 million -$145 million -$397 million 80s outbreak on current forest ASSUMPTIONS: No substitutions made for lost spruce-fir volume during • outbreak No change in market price of spruce-fir wood with • increased supply during outbreak No real price change in spruce-fir stumpage over time •
Recommend
More recommend
