Type 4 Strategy Update Winter SISCO What’s done and what have we learned…. 1 February 25, 2014 Winter SISCO - Kamloops. BC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Are Free-Growing Stands Meeting Expectations? Alex Woods, Regional Pathologist, NIFR, MOFR Wendy Bergerud, Senior Biometrician, Research Branch, MOFR Funded.
Advertisements

HIGHER VALUE OF WOOD PRODUCTS Indonesia- ACIAR Consultation on Forestry Jakarta 22 February 2007 By: Dr. Doddy S. Sukadri - CESERF ACIAR- Indonesia Consultation.
Section 2 Land Based Investment Al Powelson & Kelly Osbourne Richmond: 9/28/20111.
Timber Management Elements of Forestry Kenneth Williams
Wood Supply and Wildlife Habitat Modelling Lesson 8 Presentation 2.
Silviculture and Its Relationship to Timber Supply TSR 101 Patrick Bryant Coastal Silviculture Committee Nanaimo - February 27, 2014.
Economics of Forest Resources Ashir Mehta Source : Field, Barry (2001) : Natural Resource Economics : An Introduction, Chapter 12, McGraw Hill.
Optimal Rotation Optimal Rotation.
4. Project Investment Decision-Making
Planning under Uncertainty
1 Merritt TSA Type II Silviculture Analysis Merritt, B.C. April 5th, 2007.
Investing in Forest Fertilization: tools, measures, analyses By Ralph Winter Forest Practices Branch July 25, 2005.
Economics of Forest Management Decision Making in Today’s World Cheryl Talbert Director of Forestry Weyerhaeuser Company Western Timberlands.
Considering Tax-Supported Debt May 10, 2004 Presentation to City Council Roger Rosychuk Corporate Services Department.
What is the LBIS? Provides strategic guidance for land based investments and aligns the targets and outputs for eligible activities with government’s.
Mitigating timber supply impacts through strategic Forest Fertilization Ralph Winter Forest Practices Branch
Land Based Investment Strategy and Opportunities John McClarnon & Al Powelson Richmond: 9/28/20111.
ITSLs - The Time is Now!. ITSLs - What are they? An FFT/BCTS collaboration Innovative Timber Sale Licenses (ITSLs) and/or lump sum Timber Sales are the.
BCTS/FFT Reforestation Collaboration – March 2012 Thompson Okanagan Region Case study By Mike Madill, FFT FLNRO Thompson Okanagan Region And John Hopper.
5 Year Silviculture Plan Development Process Presented by Kevin Telfer R.P.Bio., R.P.F. Stewardship Forester Coast Region.
Economic Aspects of Information Systems Updated 2015 MIS 2000 Information Systems for Management Instructor: Bob Travica.
Commercial Management Options for Hybrid Poplar Buffers Carolyn J. Henri, Ph.D. Jon Johnson, Ph.D. James P. Dobrowolski, Ph.D.
Optimal Rotation. Biological vs. Economic Criteria  What age should we harvest timber?  Could pick the age to yield a certain size  Or could pick an.
Fertilization Workshops February 08 and 15, 2012 Monty Locke, Al Powelson, and Regional Contacts FLNRO Land Based Investment Planning 2012/13.
Overview of Financial Analysis
Centre for Non-Timber Resources Royal Roads University Victoria, BC Cost Benefit Analysis of Wildland Urban Interface Operations.
Silviculture Opportunities and strategies ä Ralph Winter ä Forest Practices Branch BC Forest Service March 22, 2010.
FIN 40153: Advanced Corporate Finance CAPITAL BUDGETING (BASED ON RWJ CHAPTERS 6)
March 27, Richmond BC BC Timber Sales’ role in FFT Delivery - Use of Innovative Timber Sales Licences - Update for the FFT 2014 Planning and Delivery.
1 MPB Mitigation Silviculture Treatments To mitigate timber supply problems in management units affected by catastrophic mountain pine beetle Presentation.
Stefan Zeglen, Forest Pathologist, West Coast Region Jim Brown, Senior Analyst, Forest Analysis and Inventory Branch CSC Winter Workshop, Nanaimo, BCFebruary.
Thoughts from Type 4 Silviculture Investment Strategies for Morice, PG and 100MH TSAs Jeff McWilliams, RPF B.A. Blackwell & Assoc. Ltd Presented at: 2014.
Stand Eligibility for Fertilization Jeff McWilliams, RPF B.A. Blackwell and Associates Ltd. Presented at: Coast Fertilization Program Meeting Richmond,
Forest Planning and Practices Regulation Amendments to Protect Secondary Structure Joint Presentation of: Joint Presentation of: Federation of BC WoodlotAssociationsFederation.
Types of IP Models All-integer linear programs Mixed integer linear programs (MILP) Binary integer linear programs, mixed or all integer: some or all of.
Challenges and Opportunities in Using Wood to Pay for Fuels Treatments Guy Robertson USDA Forest Service.
MARCH 7, 2013 CLASS 10. ACE, ECONOMIC IMPACTS, AND FOREST DEPENDENCY.
System Engineering & Economy Analysis Lecturer Maha Muhaisen College of Applied Engineering& Urban Planning.
1 Timber Supply Impacts of Mountain Pine Beetle (MPB) in British Columbia, Canada Western Forest Economists May 8 th, 2007.
Debt Strategy Presentation to City Council May 10, 2004 Click to edit Master title style.
MPB Supply Side Implications Brad Stennes Canadian Forest Service Industry, Trade & Economics Victoria, BC.
Adaptation to CC in African Forests UNDP Accra. Forest Model Climate Outcome Emission Scenario Timber Response Carbon Response Economic Outcome Ecosystem.
Alder Supply + Red Alder Plantation Growth and Yield RAP ORGANON Glenn Ahrens Oregon State University Extension Forester.
Sept 18, 19 Richmond, BC FFT Fall Business Meeting Integrating Type 4 Silviculture Strategies into FFT Planning What the type 4’s are telling.
Section VI: Landscape-level effects of Herbicide Reduction - Preliminary Results - Kandyd Szuba, Domtar Inc. on behalf of the VMAP team.
Growth and Yield Lecture 6 (04/17/2015). Overview   Review of stand characteristics that affect growth   Basic Stand Growth Terminology Yield curve;
Then… ….and Now. 2 Old growth Second growth Stand age vs. percent of juvenile wood When trees grow rapidly so that they are of harvestable size when.
Kalum TSA Mid-Term Timber Supply Issue. Land classification Reduction area (ha) Result (ha) Gross TSA area 2,300,464 Large parks 460,845 Tree Farm Licences.
Harry Kope Resource Practices Branch. 2 It’s a point-in-time assessment It’s a ‘mid-rotation’ (ages 20 to 40) survey that collects data on pest.
Key BC Silviculture Statistics ä Forest Practices Branch BC Forest Service September 8, 2009.
Effects of Intensive Fertilization on the Growth of Interior Spruce Presentation to: Interior Fertilization Working Group February 5/13 (revised March.
Thoughts on “early” harvesting on the Coast and in the Interior Jeff McWilliams, RPF B.A. Blackwell & Assoc. Ltd Presented at: 2014 CSC Conference Nanaimo,
Southern Interior Forest Region Soils Plant Ecology Hydrology Geomorphology Silvicultural Systems Wildlife Ecology Forest Science Program Research, Consultation,
Looking for the Plateau in Douglas-fir Annual Volume Increment
Stand Development. Site Capability The ability of a forest to grow is related directly to physical site factors. Favourable physical factors create better.
Forest Health Southern Interior Region KootenaysKamloopsCariboo Lorraine MacLauchlanForest Entomologist - Kamloops Leo RankinForest Entomologist – Williams.
Stakeholder meeting Floresteca Amsterdam, February 2016.
Incremental Silviculture Strategy for BC Larry Pedersen Chief Forester Ministry of Forests.
Mountain Pine Beetle Salvage Harvesting and Reforestation in British Columbia Brian Peter and Bryan Bogdanski Industry, Trade & Economics Program Pacific.
Stocking Standard Content and Why it Matters
Mitigating Projected Timber Supply Declines
Mixedwood Management: Considerations
Timber Supply Analysis Discussion Paper October 28, 2016
Prince George Timber Supply Area Timber Supply Review (PG TSA TSR V)
Management Of Dry-belt Douglas-fir
Then… ….and Now.
Young Stand Monitoring
Land Based Investment Program
Harvesting Early Good or Bad?
Agricultural Marketing
Presentation transcript:

Type 4 Strategy Update Winter SISCO What’s done and what have we learned…. 1 February 25, 2014 Winter SISCO - Kamloops. BC

Update Complete or Near Complete: Quesnel Williams Lake Lakes Okanagan Morice 100 Mile Prince George Just Started Kamloops On Radar for 2014 Invermere, Cranbrook, Strathcona, Arrow 2 August 16, 2013 Web Meeting For More Info: HFP/silstrat/index.htm

What Have We Learned: Ideas Fall into Three Broad Themes 1.Technical Analysis / Solutions 2.Planning Process 3.Information Gaps See abstract for details – lets dig into just one of them here: Fertilization vs Rehabilitation Treatments – which one? August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 3

Quesnel and Williams Lake TSAs Prioritize Rehab Treatments in short term because Fert Treatments can wait (but do both). Preferred Strategy Expenditures (Williams Lake) August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 4

Why Rehab over Fert? Rehab has potential to provide merchantable volume for mills at the time of treatment AND increase the effective landbase in the long term. Example – a dead Pl stand with 35m3/ha of green spruce scattered throughout is currently uneconomic and not expected to amount to much in next 80 years. If rehabbed now (FLTC or ITSL) it provides 35 m3/ha of merch volume into the timber supply + capture the sites potential with a new managed stand. Costs to treat are offset by realized merch volume. August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 5

Why is Fert Lower Priority? Limited number of currently suitable stands. Risk of loss reduced and ROI increased when fert done closer to harvest. Still plenty of time to treat stands prior when they will be harvested (midterm). Example – in fires t August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 6

Fertilization vs Rehabilitation Fertilization +15m3/ha in 10 yrs Cost is $450/ha Rehabilitation Re-establish stands rendered uneconomic by MPB related mortality – with + ~30m3/ha now? +100m3/ha in 60 yrs Cost is $ /ha August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 7

Base Case Review 8 August 16, 2013 Web Meeting Short term: 3.2 M Midterm: 1.8 M Long term: 3.6 M Midterm: Yrs % Pl in Yrs 1-5 Lowest Point of Available Growing Stock is in Years

Base Case Review 9 August 16, 2013 Web Meeting Salvage in first two periods. Small but important role for IDF. Transition to managed stands starts in 20 yrs. Heavily reliant by 40 yrs.

Base Case Review 10 August 16, 2013 Web Meeting Most >60% dead stands salvaged – leaving lesser impacted stands for Midterm Youngest stand profile (smallest timber) harvested between yrs

Base Case Review 11 August 16, 2013 Web Meeting Average harvest volume in short term is 100m3/ha and then improves. Average harvest age is ~90 years in the long term but gets a low as 68 in year 50. Harvest area is very high during salvage period (30,000 ha/yr) but reaches a long term average of 15,000 ha/yr.

BASE CASE SENSITIVITIES Harvest Flows Min Harvest Volumes Shelf Life Min Harvest Ages August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 12

Alternative Base Case Harvest Flows August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 13 Alternative approaches to short term harvesting can yield different outcomes in the midterm. Avoiding the harvest of stands that remain viable in the midterm – improves the midterm but foregoes the economic value of the pine lost.

Sensitivity: Revised Min Harvest Criteria August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 14 Short (+12%) Mid (+21%) Rise (+13%) Long (+5%) Short (-4%) Mid (-9%) Rise (-1%) Long (-6%) Base Case: 80 m³/ha for salvage, 110 m³/ha for second growth

Sensitivity: Revised Shelf-Life August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 15

Sensitivity: Revised Shelf-Life August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 16 Short (+15%) Mid (~) Rise (+23%) Long (+5%)

Sensitivity: Longer MHAs (Quesnel Ex) August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 17

Sensitivity: Longer MHAs August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 18

Sensitivity: Deciduous Currently very little utilization of deciduous material Estimate opportunity Deemed lower priority August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 19

Sensitivity: Limit the Harvest of Small Pine Harvesting small pine becomes less economic with longer haul distances Deemed lower priority – not completed August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 20

Key Points: Base Case and Sensitivities WL TSA is heading towards a low in available volume after the 4 th decade (29.3 MM m³) Harvest forecasts are very sensitive to: Salvage effort and stand types salvaged Shelf-life Minimum harvest criteria (MHA) August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 21

SILVICULTURE STRATEGIES August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 22

Strategy: Fertilization August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 23 Incremental volumes achieved after 10 yrs (single or multiple treatments) 12m³/ha 15m³/ha 15m³/ha (Mulitple Sx fertilization done every 5 yrs, with larger gains) Area Treated Over Time

Strategy: Fertilization August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 24 Budget maximized after 15 years The model harvests all stands that are treated and does not treat stands that are not harvested. Half of volume harvested in midterm is comes from natural stands. Multiple Sx fertilization is prioritized (most cost efficient).

Strategy: Fertilization August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 25 Short (~) Mid (0-10%) (little to no ACE effect occurs) Rise (+5%) Long (+8%)

Strategy: PCT and Fertilize August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 26 Relatively little area eligible (6,800 ha) Lower priority than to fertilize existing stands with appropriate density – higher cost and gain is similar. Low priority – dropped

Strategy: Spacing Dry-Belt Fd (Thinning young thickets in NonUWR stands  10% volume increase at harvest August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 27 Area Treated $’s Spent

Strategy: Spacing Dry-Belt Fd August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 28 Short (~) Mid (+3%) Rise (+1%) Long (not investigated) Delayed response as have to wait 30 yrs after treatment to harvest.

Strategy: Rehabilitation Reforest MPB impacted stands that are non-merch (<80m 3 /ha) August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 29 Area Treated $’s Spent Extensive opportunity, full budget spent (~1,500 ha/yr).

Strategy: Rehabilitation August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 30 Short (~) Mid (+8%) - volume at time of treatment + some THLB back in Rise (+13%) – Non merch stands brought back into production Long (+13%) – Non merch stands brought back into production

Strategy: Partial Cut in Constrained Areas Harvest of 1/3 volume in constrained areas, no impact to non timber values August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 31 Area Treated $’s Spent

Strategy: Partial Cut in Constrained Areas August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 32 Short (~) Mid (+14) Rise (no attempt to improve) Long (no attempt to improve) Significant improvement in midterm due to accessing stands that would otherwise not be available.

Strategy: Enhanced Basic Reforestation Improved well-spaced densities, fewer gaps (  OAF1), more planting / class A seed August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 33 Area Treated $’s Spent Budget max reached in several periods, about 70% of stands logged in midterm get enhanced reforestation.

Strategy: Enhanced Basic Reforestation August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 34 Short (~) Mid (+5%) Rise (+2%) Long (+12%) First stands are ready in years as min harvest volumes are reached sooner. Mid and long term benefit from enhanced yields. Little to no ACE effect.

Optimized Mix – $3 Million/yr Budget August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 35 Area Treated $’s Spent Budget max reached every year Rehab and Enhanced Basic are dominant initially (first 5 yrs) Fertilization ramps up over time (almost all eligible stands treated before harvest) Majority of the budget spent on Rehab in all time periods Partial cutting is key to improving early midterm. Spacing of drybelt Fd is a focus in early periods.

Optimized Mix – $3 Million/yr Budget August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 36 Short (~) Mid (+22%) Rise (+2%) Long (+11%) Midterm increased as priority over longterm.

Optimized Mix – $5 Million/yr Budget August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 37 Budget max reached every year (5 Million) Treatment decisions very similar to 3 million budget. Heavy spending on rehab Ramp up of fertilization Steady spending on enhanced reforestation Partial cutting to help the front end of the midterm. Most thinning of Drybelt fir in early periods Area Treated $’s Spent

Strategy: Composite $5M/yr August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 38 Short (~) Mid (+28%) Rise (+10%) Long (+17%) Midterm increased as priority over longterm.

ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 39

Stand-Level Economics - Assumptions August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 40 2% discount rate Net economic benefit of $25/m 3 on the additional volume realized (net benefit to crown from additional cubic meter harvested and moving through the economy).

Stand-Level Economics - Results August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 41 Multi Spruce Fert (3-5) most attractive fert option. Rehab, Partial Cut, and Enhanced Basic have positive return at 2%.

Forest-Level Economics August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 42 $3M Budget NPV = $122 M $5M Budget NPV = $182 M

Forest-Level Economics August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 43

Key Points: Silviculture Strategies Rehab appears to be the largest opportunity and warrants significant investment. It buys wood in the short term from stands that will never be eligible, plus adds to the long term harvest by putting them into production. Partial harvesting in constrained areas is the only strategy to help fill in the front of the midterm. It borrows volume from later in the forecast (i.e., no extra volume) Fertilization is important but not as time sensitive as other treatments. There are several decades before any of these stands will be harvested so time exists to treat them. Both Composite Scenarios (3M and 5M budgets) are similar in treatment selections/proportions and have positive NPV at the forest level (2% discount rate). August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 44

PREFERRED STRATEGY Based on the finding shown here and general knowledge of the TSA and its options – what is the preferred strategy for the next 5-10 yrs? August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 45

Optimize $5 M Budget? August 16, Web Meeting

Next Steps and Timing Modelling and Analysis Report Distribute for review - end of August Silviculture Strategy Report Distribute for review – end of August Tactical Plan Deferred August 16, Web Meeting

48 August 16, 2013 Web Meeting

Harvest Flow Differences August 16, 2013 Web Meeting 49 Base Case Change relative to Base Case (m³/yr) ScenarioShort-TermMid-TermRise to Long-TermLong-Term Fertilization of Sx, Pl, Fd 2,0000% 42,0002% 138,0005% 297,0008% Spacing dry-belt Fd (4,000)0% 50,0003% 15,0001% -0% Rehabilitation (3,000)0% 147,0008% 353,00013% 463,00013% Enhanced Basic Reforestation (4,000)0% 83,0005% 69,0002% 433,00012% Partial cut in constrained areas (4,000) 241,00014% (8,000)0% (2,000)0% Combined Silviculture ($3 M/yr) (4,000)0% 140,0008% 202,0007% 595,00017% Combined Silviculture ($5 M/yr) (4,000)0% 237,00013% 290,00010% 865,00024%