I thought I'd start off with some candid discussion to see what's on your mind regarding the current state of BC's forest health program. From my vantage point here in Victoria, I see that we have been sucessful at maintaining funding for delivery of core activities through LBIS. However, a more basic problem is the loss of expertise at the field level in districts and regions. Regions are having a tough time hanging onto FH specialists vacancies and district FH is now one of the gazillion duties of the stewardship staff. We have had a struggle trying to get DM's to maintain interest in FH when the mountain pine beetle program money disappeared as there isn't anything deemed "critical" to replace it with in their minds. With SDM being introduced as a FREP protocol, we suddenly received the long-overdue interest in young stand pest issues but, like all FREP activities, DM's have to decide where to place his/her limited staff time and the interest in supporting SDM may wane if more pressing issues need their attention and staff time. So, with all this in mind, how do we all work towards improving or maintaing the profile of forest health?
Currently, we at HQ are focussing our attention on making the TSA FH Strategies a working document rather than just one that "sits on the shelf and collects dust". We want it to a) recommend stocking standards to the DM for accommodating key reforestation pests in preparation for his/her review of FSP renewals; and 2) to replace the EBBMA as the sole source of information on BMU strategies which would be referenced by licensees, revenue and tenure to access blanket salvage permits and comparitive cruise rates where a true "emergency" requires them. Along with the annual update of NRLs, the document would serve to inform the forest management community with the latest and greatest information on the TSA's forest health issues. Do you see this happening in your district?
Any questions, comments or suggestions?
I think you have posted a great discussion point. It concerns me that at the district level bark beetles are all that get the attention of funds and the DM. SDM is a great way to get back to assessing the young stands that are our future timber supply, however I do not think that every district is getting to participate due to workload etc. so how are we addressing this issue? FH is going even further to the bottom of the DM concerns as we are now this much larger ministry with higher priorities in other sectors that are going to take away from our already limited resources. I do not think we can compete with backlogged water licenses, mines permitting, notice of work etc. I agree that the FH strategy should be a working document, but I am not sure how we would ever get to writing stocking standards at the district level when there are all these other work pressures. Could this not be addressed at the region or branch level?
ReplyDelete