Considerations for Rehabilitation of Naturally Disturbed Forests (MPB); Part 1 Watershed Hydrology

Abstract

This extension note is the first of a two-part series involving watershed management considerations for stand rehabilitation activities following large-scale natural disturbances. The note is designed to provide practitioners involved in reforestation of naturally disturbed stands under the Ministry of Forests and Range’s Current Reforestation investment category of the Land-based Investment Program (LBIP) with information to increase the likelihood of a positive effect of stand rehabilitation activities on water and water related resources. Part 1 of this series explores watershed-level considerations when planning stand rehabilitation activities while Part 2 provides a more detailed summary of the effects of different stand-level treatment options on the rate of hydrologic recovery (using stand-level Equivalent Clearcut Area (ECA) as an index) under a range of pre-treatment forest conditions ( i.e. site index, pine mortality and existing understory regeneration).

Natural Disturbance and Post-Disturbance Management Effects on Selected Watershed Values

“…While the data may not be available in all locations to fully implement this model, the conceptual framework allows management and operations staff to make informed decisions about salvage harvesting (Huggard 2011). This analysis could take the form of a formal risk analysis to assist in making decisions on where and how much salvage harvesting is appropriate (Grainger and Bates 2010;Milne and Lewis 2011). Qualified watershed professionals (hydrologists, geomorphologists) should be consulted to ensure decisions are made with the best available information.…”

“…Management practices at the local scale should be integrated with larger scales through coordination between tenure and/or license holders at the watershed or landscape scale (e.g., Forest Practices Board 2009). For example, at the watershed scale, there may be opportunities to design a management approach in such a way that snowmelt is desynchronized, which will lead to smaller increases in peakflows (Winkler et al 2008;Milne & Lewis 2011).…”

“…Watershed risk analysis methods (Grainger and Bates 2010) and assessments carried out in the southern interior (Milne and Lewis 2011).…”

Considerations for Rehabilitating Naturally Disturbed Stands: Part 2. Stand Level Treatments and Hydrological Equivalent Clearcut Area

“…In this note, operational guidance (see sidebar) for reducing risk to hydrological values relies on equivalent clearcut area, a simplified management tool that should not be confused with a full hydrological assessment. An accompanying extension note reviews the watershedlevel context for these stand management decisions (see Milne and Lewis 2011, page 55 in this issue).…”