This powerpoint is based on research and trials compiled in 2013 by Suzanne Simard, Jean Heineman, Jean Mather and Don Sachs via the BC Forest Innovations Investment group. It recommends curtailing the widespread planting of lodgepole pine (pinus contorta) throughout the BC interior, especially in the Interior Cedar Hemlock (ICH) and Englemann Spruce Subalpine Fir (ESSF) biogeoclimatic zones. The study also recommends that climate change is likely to exacerbate the effects of pests and disease on lodgepole pine.

1. The Trouble With PineThe Trouble With Pine
Suzanne Simard, Jean Heineman, Jean Mather andSuzanne Simard, Jean Heineman, Jean Mather and
Don SachsDon Sachs
July, 2010July, 2010
1

2. ReferencesReferences
• Heineman, J.L., Sachs, D.L., Mather, W.J., Simard, S.W. (2010).
Investigating the influence of climatic, site, location, and treatment
factors on damage to young lodgepole pine in southern British Columbia.
Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 40: 1109-1127.
• Mather, W.J., Simard, S.W., Heineman, J.L., Sachs, D.L. (2010). Decline of
planted lodgepole pine in the southern interior of British Columbia.
Forestry Chronicle, in press.
• Simard, S.W., Mather, W.J., Heineman, J.L., Sachs, D.L. (2010). Too much
of a good thing? Planted lodgepole pine is declining in British Columbia.
Silviculture Magazine, in press.
2

3. Our love affair with lodgepole pineOur love affair with lodgepole pine
3

4. Why do we love lodgepole pine?Why do we love lodgepole pine?
Good survival
Rapid early height growth
Wide ecological amplitude
Nursery stock easily and cheaply produced
Quickly reaches free-growing
4

5. The free growing- height growth trap
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
years
topheightinmetres
Fd
Pl
Pw
Si
EP 904
Alan Vyse
5

6. EP
1153
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
years
topheightinmetres
Cw
Ep
Fd
Lw
Pl
Pw
Py
Si
Alan Vyse
6

7. Managed shifts in ICH stand typesManaged shifts in ICH stand types
•Reduced mixed
classes by 40%
overall
•Created two pure
classes: Pli and Fdi
7

8. Dothistroma needle blight
(Mycosphaerella pini)
Woodsetal.2006
Mountain pine beetle
(Dendroctonus ponderosae)
Aukemaetal.2008
Today’sToday’s posterposter pests of lodgepole pinepests of lodgepole pine
www.for.gov.bc.ca
…less flamboyant cousins
8

9. Commandra blister rust (Cronartium comandrae)Western gall rust (Endocronartium harknesii)
9

10. Stalactiform blister rust (C. coleosporioides) Atropellis canker (Atropellis piniphila)
10

11. Pine needle cast (Lopherdermella concolor) Terminal weevil (Pissodes terminalis)
11

12. Sequoia pitch moth (Synanthedon sequioae) Warren’s root collar weevil (Hylobius warrenii)
12

13. Study ObjectivesStudy Objectives
1. What is the condition of post-free-growing lodgepole
pine and what is causing damage?
2. Do declared stands continue to meet free-growing
standards past the juvenile stage?
3. How much natural ingress is there?
4. Is the risk of damage by specific agents associated with
climatic, location, site or silviculture treatment factors?
5. Are these problems likely to increase with climate
change?
6. What are some things we can do about it?
13

14. Sampling MethodSampling Method
• 66 lodgepole pine-leading sites were randomly
selected from RESULTS database in SIFR in 2007
(adjusted sample size from 100 to fit FSP budget)
• Population was planted to Pl in 1977-1997; declared
FG before 2007 (5-13 yrs); >15 ha
• In 2007 and 2008, nine 50 m2
plots were sampled per
site, 100 m apart, random start (adjusted sample size
from 30 per site to fit FSP budget)
• Slope, aspect, slope position, SMR
• Total, well spaced and free-growing densities by
species (using most recent FG standards available)
• Height class of all trees; DBH of WS trees
• Symptomatic presence of damage (disease, insects,
animal, abiotic) (most recent FG standards available)
• More intensive exam of individual trees than usual FG
survey
• Climate variables per site using ClimateBC
• Silviculture treatment history per site from RESULTS
Williams Lake
Revelstoke
Prince George
Vancouver
Kamloops
-117 °-122 °-127 °-132 °
-112 °-117 °-122 °-127 °-132 °-137 °
62°59°54°49°
62°59°54°49°
-112°
14

15. Data AnalysisData Analysis
• Summary statistics
• Logistic regressions run to determine if risk of stocking
or damage was associated with climate, location, site or
treatment factors
p(Y) = exp(β0 + β1x1+ β2x2+ …+ βkxk)/1 + exp(β0 + β1x1+ β2x2+ ….
…+ βkxk)
• Odds ratio: the multiplicative factor by which risk of
damage changes when the independent variable
increases by one unit
15

16. Study ObjectivesStudy Objectives
1. What is the condition of post-free-growing lodgepole
pine and what is causing damage?
2. Do declared stands continue to meet free-growing
standards past the juvenile stage?
3. How much natural ingress is there?
4. Is the risk of damage by specific agents associated with
climatic, location, site or silviculture treatment factors?
5. Are these problems likely to increase with climate
change?
6. What are some things we can do about it?
16

17. 55% of lodgepole pine stems
suffered damage on 100% of sites.
Damage was the principle reason for
not meeting free-growing standards,
followed by not meeting minimum
spacing requirement
Minimum height and competitive
status were not important
17

18. Proportion of trees with serious damageProportion of trees with serious damage
%oftrees
18

19. Damage causes (14 agents)Damage causes (14 agents)
Total damaged stems per hectare
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
ESSF ICH IDF MS SBPS SBS
BEC zone
Stems/ha
Stem diseases Root diseases Foliage diseases Mistletoe
Insects Abiotic Animal Competition
Stem diseases:
Western gall rust (20.8%)
Stalactiform blister rust (1.3%)
Comandra blister rust (1.5%)
Atropellis canker (0.8%)
Root diseases:
Armillaria (0.4%)
Tomentosus (0.2%)
Foliage diseases:
Pine needle cast (2.0%)
Dothistroma (1.8%)
Insects:
Sequoia pitch moth(3.0%)
MPB (1.9%)
Warren’s RCW (0.2%)
Pine terminal weevil (4.0%)
Snow and Ice (3.0%)
19

20. FREP Report #19
TSR2 assumptions (initial density of 1600 sph and normal OAFs)
and a site index of 19.5m (from SIBEC)
Merchantable volume prediction for 20 and 50% mortality (TIPSY)
Hard pine stem rusts observed in Northern Interior of BC
20

21. Study ObjectivesStudy Objectives
1. What is the condition of post-free-growing lodgepole
pine and what is causing damage?
2. Do declared stands continue to meet free-growing
standards past the juvenile stage?
3. How much natural ingress is there?
4. Is the risk of damage by specific agents associated with
climatic, location, site or silviculture treatment factors?
5. Are these problems likely to increase with climate
change?
6. What are some things we can do about it?
21

22. 0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000 Total
WS
FG
Total
WS
FG
Total
WS
FG
Total
WS
FG
Total
WS
FG
Total
WS
FG
ESSF ICH IDF MS SBPS SBS
Stemsperhectare
Pl Bl Se/Sx Fd Cw Pw Lw Hw
Target FG
Minimum FG
Stocking by Biogeoclimatic ZoneStocking by Biogeoclimatic Zone
22

23. Proportion of sites meeting minimum WSSProportion of sites meeting minimum WSS
and minimum FGand minimum FG
%ofsites
23

24. Proportion of sites no longer FGProportion of sites no longer FG
and at very high risk of lost productivityand at very high risk of lost productivity
%ofsites
24

25. Study ObjectivesStudy Objectives
1. What is the condition of post-free-growing lodgepole
pine and what is causing damage?
2. Do declared stands continue to meet free-growing
standards past the juvenile stage?
3. How much natural ingress is there?
4. Is the risk of damage by specific agents associated with
climatic, location, site or silviculture treatment factors?
5. Are these problems likely to increase with climate
change?
6. What are some things we can do about it?
25

26. Odds ratioOdds ratio
• Odds of damage occurring
• Odds ratio is the multiplier by which risk of
damage changes when the risk factor changes
by one unit
• Odds ratio<1 means risk is decreasing
• Odds ratio>1 means risk is increasing
• Logarithmic (odds ratio raised to power ‘x’,
where ‘x’ is the risk factor, such as temp.)
26

27. Risk of damage generally increases with latitudeRisk of damage generally increases with latitude
•odds ratio is 5 in the
model predicting western
gall rust from latitude; if go
4 degrees north, you
increase the risk by 5x5x5x5
(625) times
Location
Williams Lake
Revelstoke
Prince George
Vancouver
Kamloops
-117 °-122 °-127 °-132 °
-112 °-117 °-122 °-127 °-132 °-137 °
62°59°54°49°
62°59°54°49°
-112°
27

28. Risk of damage generally increases with longitudeRisk of damage generally increases with longitude
•odds ratio is 2 in the
model predicting Armillaria
root disease from
longitude; if go 4 degrees
east, you increase the risk
by 2x2x2x2 (16) times
Location
Williams Lake
Revelstoke
Prince George
Vancouver
Kamloops
-117 °-122 °-127 °-132 °
-112 °-117 °-122 °-127 °-132 °-137 °
62°59°54°49°
62°59°54°49°
-112°
28

29. Risk of damage from western gall rustRisk of damage from western gall rust
increases with warmer summersincreases with warmer summers
•odds ratio is 11 in the
model predicting western
gall rust from MWMT; if
summer temperature
increases by 2o
C, you
increase the risk by 11x11
times (121) times
Climate 29

30. Risk of all damage increases with warmerRisk of all damage increases with warmer
winterswinters
•odds ratio is 2 in the
model predicting western
gall rust from MCMT; if
winter temperature
increases by 2o
C, you
increase the risk by 2x2
times (4) times (441 times
for MPB)
Climate 30

31. Risk of damage often greater on wetter sitesRisk of damage often greater on wetter sites
Site
0.1
1
10
Arm
illaria
W
arren's
R
C
w
eevil
Snow
and
ice
Dw
arf m
istletoe
Sequoia
pitch
m
oth
Pine
needle
cast
W
estern
gall rust
M
ountain
pine
beetle
Odds-ratio(logscale)
(a)
Soil moisture
wetter
31

32. Risk of damage often increases withRisk of damage often increases with
spacing, pruning and brushingspacing, pruning and brushing
Silviculture treatment 32

33. Study ObjectivesStudy Objectives
1. What is the condition of free-growing pine and what is
causing damage?
2. Do declared stands continue to meet free-growing
standards past the juvenile stage?
3. How much natural ingress is there?
4. Is the risk of damage by specific agents associated with
climatic, location, site or silviculture treatment factors?
5. Are these problems likely to increase with climate
change?
6. What are some things we can do about it?
33

34. Spittlehouse 2008
Yes!
34

35. Spittlehouse 2008
35

36. • frequency distributions of survival probability
• Interior Douglas Fir zone (dry, mild)
• moderate soil drainage
• CGCM2-A2x
Lodgepole pine seedling survival: drought & spring frost
(Nitschke & Campbell , in prep)
36

37. Study ObjectivesStudy Objectives
1. What is the condition of post-free-growing lodgepole
pine and what is causing damage?
2. Do declared stands continue to meet free-growing
standards past the juvenile stage?
3. How much natural ingress is there?
4. Is the risk of damage by specific agents associated with
climatic, location, site or silviculture treatment factors?
5. Are these problems likely to increase with climate
change?
6. What are some things we can do about it?
37

38. Call to actionCall to action
• Our study suggests that risk of damage to lodgepole pine will increase with climate
change.
• In response to this, we suggest curtailing planting of lodgepole pine in single species
plantations, especially in ICH and wetter ESSF
• Given the minimal damage found on natural regeneration, we suggest that it be favored
in silviculture practices
• We suggest revision to the free-growing regulations to increase structural diversity and
acceptability of natural regeneration, including
– reconsidering minimum height, minimum spacing, and competitive status requirements
– Increasing the breadth of acceptable species, including broadleaves
• We suggest reducing the risk of damage by planting and maintaining species mixtures;
these should be smart mixtures based on species vulnerabilities
• With climate change, we suggest avoiding unnecessary silviculture practices that simplify
stands or stress trees, such as brushing, spacing or pruning, particularly where damaging
agents are currently present
• We suggest that adopting effective mitigation and adaptation strategies to climate
change will require monitoring of stand development post-FG across the landscape
• We suggest conducting more studies such as this because they are powerful tools for
detecting problems that allow adjustment of practices before problems potentially
amplify with climate change
38

39. SummarySummary
1) Almost one-third of declared stands are no longer free-growing after 5-13
years, with 70% of lodgepole pine plantations failing in the ICH zone.
2) Natural regeneration is common, but usually not counted as FG because it
is too short, too clumpy or not of an acceptable species.
3) Damage, particularly from western gall rust, underlies plantation failures.
The other agents have lower damage incidence but there are plenty of
localized areas with severe damage and our results indicate that the
extent of this damage will increase with warming.
4) Stocking is sufficiently reduced that yield is predicted to decline in most
zones.
5) Risk of damage increases with increasing lat/long, warming summers and
winters, increasing precipitation, increasing (and decreasing) soil
moisture, and certain silviculture practices.
6) These problems will likely increase with climate change.
7) Need to take a conservationist approach to management. Maintaining
ecosystem complexity is key to mitigation and adaptation.
8) We need research, monitoring and adaptive management.
39

40. AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements
• Lorraine Maclauchlan
• Michelle Cleary
• Alex Woods
• Sharon Cadieux
• Wendy Bergerud
• Mei Cheng
• Alan Vyse
• Jeff McWilliams
• Elizabeth Campbell
40

41. Thank-you!Thank-you!
41