Reforestation policy has constrained options for managing risks on public forests
Victor J. Lieffers, Bradley D. Pinno, Jennifer L. Beverly, Barb R. Thomas, Charles A. Nock
Abstract
Strict forest renewal policies in western Canada focus on replicating the stand type that was cut and projecting the growth of young stands forward using simple models based upon past growing conditions. These policies arose from European principles of sustained yield and now limit options for adaptive management at the time of investment in forest renewal of public lands. We assert that such simple and restrictive policies, combined with long-term yield predictions, give a false sense of sustainability in times of increased drought, fires, and insect and disease attacks that accompany climate change. We must undertake comprehensive changes in forest policy that incorporate disturbance in our forest management planning. This is a large task! Options include (i) zoning public forests to vary intensities of management and minimize risk; (ii) changing stand- and forest-level models to increase the diversity of forests regenerated; (iii) widening the sphere of scientific experts that can influence forest policy and risk management; and (iv) reallocating expenditures on forest renewal, protection, and management to minimize negative impacts of disturbance. Such a comprehensive overhaul of forest management will be necessary as the current assumptions of forest sustainability come under further scrutiny by the public and investors.