Sustainable Forest Management Plan For Fort Nelson Defined Forest Area Third Edition May 9, 2018 First Edition: December 9, 2004 First Edition Revised: March 31, 2005 Second Edition Z809-08, April 1, 2011 Second Edition Revised: February 21, 2012 Second Edition Revised: March 23, 2012 Second Edition Revised: May 23, 2012 Second Edition Revised: October 19, 2012 Second Edition Revised: March 14, 2013 Second Edition Revised: February 4, 2014 Second Edition Revised July 16, 2014 Third Edition Z809-16 May 9, 2018 Page 1 of 192 This SFMP prepared on behalf of the participants by: BCTS Canadian Forest Products Ltd. Jason Smith, RPF Darrell Regimbald, RPF Woodlands Supervisor Planning Coordinator Peace-Liard Business Area North Operations “Sustainable forest management is the balanced, concurrent sustainability of forestry-related ecological, social and economic values for a defined area over a defined time frame.” Page 2 of 192 Executive Summary Between July 2003 and March 2005 forest tenure holders ("licensees") operating in the Fort Nelson Defined Forest Area (DFA), Canadian Forest Products Ltd. – Peace Liard Woodlands, Liard Business Unit (Canfor) and British Columbia Timber Sales – Peace Liard Business Area (BCTS), worked with members of the public, local stakeholders, Ministry of Forests and Range, Integrated Land Management Bureau, Ministry of the Environment, and First Nation representatives to develop a Sustainable Forest Management Plan (SFM Plan) for the Fort Nelson DFA. This SFM Plan has since been updated (October 2008) to address changes in forest condition, public, stakeholder, and First Nations input and local community values. A further update in 2011 has taken place in order to change the plan from the old “SFM Framework” format to suit the wording and requirements of the CSA Z809-08 standard, and then again in 2017 to meet the requirements of CSAZ809-16. The CSA standards set performance objectives and targets over a DFA to reflect local and regional interests. Consistent with most certifications, the CSA standards expect compliance with existing forest policies, laws and regulations. This edition of the SFM Plan includes updated references to the applicable laws and regulations, as well as an updated suite of Elements, Core Elements and targets that address the current environmental, economic and social conditions within the Fort Nelson DFA. This Plan is based on the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Sustainable Forest Management Requirements and Guidance (CSA Z809-16), which is one of the most common forest certification systems in use in British Columbia. This SFM Plan localizes the implementation and monitoring of the elements. The initial development and subsequent changes to the SFM Plan have been achieved through the ongoing input and support of the Fort Nelson SFM Public Advisory Group (PAG), also known as the Public Response for Integrated Sustainable Management (PRISM). Members of the PAG represented a broad cross-section of local interests including, but not limited to, recreation, tourism, education, trapping, farming, forestry, conservation, water, community, and First Nations. The SFM Plan is a dynamic and evolving document that is to be reviewed and revised on a regular basis (approximately every 5 years) with the input from the PAG (PRISM). Canfor and BCTS are committed to the achievement of the targets set out in the SFM Plan. On an annual basis the PAG reviews and provides input with respect to individual annual reports prepared by both Canfor and BCTS in reference to the achievement of performance measures established in the SFM plan. This monitoring process provides Canfor and BCTS, the public, and First Nations with an opportunity to bring forward new information and to provide input concerning new or changing public, stakeholder, and First Nations values and interests that can be incorporated into future updates of the SFM Plan, both at the DFA and TSA level. As this SFM Plan represents a switch from the SFM Framework developed for Slocan to the nomenclature of the CSA standard itself, it may be difficult to recognize the changes made through the update. To aid in this respect the following table represents a summary of the re- alignment of the old Criteria and Measures to the new Criteria, Elements and Indicators. The second table indicates deleted Measures and the reasons for their deletion. Page 3 of 192 Table 1: Summary of changes to CRITERIA from the 2004 SFMP to the 2011 SFMP 2004 Criteria CSA Z809-16 Criteria C1 Biological richness and its associated values are sustained in the defined C1 Biological Diversity forest area (DFA) C 2. The productive capability of forest ecosystems within the Timber C2 Ecosystem Condition Harvesting Land Base (THLB) are sustained and Productivity C 3. Forest ecosystem contributions to global ecological cycles are sustained C3 Soil and Water within the DFA C 4. The flow of economic benefits from forests through the forest industry is C4 Role in Global sustained Ecological Cycles C 5. The flow of marketed non-timber economic benefits from forests is C5 Economic and Social sustained Benefits C 6. Forest management contributes to a diversified local economy C6 Society’s Responsibility C 7. Decisions guiding forest management on the DFA are informed by and C7 Aboriginal Relations respond to a wide range of social and cultural values C 8. Forest management sustains or enhances the cultural (material and economic), health (physical and spiritual) and capacity benefits that First Nations derive from forest resources C 9. Forest management sustains ongoing opportunities for a range of quality of life benefits It is worth noting that while there are fewer Criteria for the CSA Z809 standard, the same concerns are covered. They are simply covered under a broader spectrum for each criterion. Of more interest to those comparing the 2004 plan to the 2010 plan will be the conversion of the measures to core and local indicators. In the last update to the 2004 plan, there were 60 measures, while under the new plan, there are 42 core and local measures. This is not to say that the scope of reporting was narrowed, merely that the data being measured are more focussed to reflect the desired end results. The changes are summarized in table 2. Page 4 of 192 Table 2: Summary of changes from 2004 Measures to 2011 Indicators1 CSA Z809-16 Core indicator or Local Indicator Measure replaced from the 2008 update of the 2004 plan 1.1.1 Ecosystem area by type 1-1.1 Ecosystem Representation 1.1.2 Forest area by type or species composition 1-2.1 Habitat elements 1.1.3 Forest area by seral stage or age class 1-1.2 Seral stage 1.1.4.1 Degree of within stand structural retention – WTP 1-2.1 Habitat elements percentage 1.1.4.2 Degree of within stand structural retention – Dispersed 1-2.1 Habitat elements Retention 1.1.4.3 Degree of within stand structural retention – Riparian 1-2.1 Habitat elements Management 1.1.5 Shrub Habitat 1-2.1 Habitat elements 1.2.1 Degree of habitat protection for focal species including 1-3.1 Vertebrate species populations species at risk 1-3.2 SAR management strategies 1-4.1 Operations in parks, reserves and PA’s 1-4.2 Special sites of biological significance 1-4.3 Management activities consistent with the Muskwa-Kechika management area 1-4.4 Management activities consistent with legal objectives 1.2.2 Degree of suitable habitat in the long term for selected 1-2.1 Habitat elements focal species including species at risk 1-3.1 Vertebrate species populations 1-4.1 Operations in parks, reserves and protected areas 1-4.2 Special sites of biological significance 1-4.3 Management activities consistent with the Muskwa-Kechika management area 1-4.4 Management activities consistent with legal objectives 1.2.3 Proportion of regeneration comprised of native species 1-6.1 Conifer seed use in accordance with regulation 1 Based on the work done by P.L. Carruthers, 2009 Page 5 of 192 CSA Z809-16 Core indicator or Local Indicator Measure replaced from the 2008 update of the 2004 plan 1-6.2 Aspen regeneration – Natural regeneration 1.3.1 Percentage of stands artificially regenerated that are free New Measure with no equivalent from of genetically modified organisms the older plans 1.4.1 Proportion of identified sites with implemented 1-4.1 Operations in parks, reserves and management strategies protected areas 1-4.2 Special site of biological significance 1-4.4 Management activities consistent with legal objectives 9-3.1 compliance with documented strategies 1.4.2 Protection of identified sacred and culturally important 8-2.1 Percentage of specific/confirmed sites culturally important sites identified by first nations 2.1.1.1 Reforestation success – Regen Delay 2-3.1 Regeneration delay 2-3.2 Compliance with regeneration standards 2.1.1.2 Reforestation success – Free Growing 2-3.3 Compliance with free growing 2.1.1.3 Percentage of silviculture obligation areas with 4-6.2 Management strategies for significant detected forest health agents which have treatment damaging events or agents plans 2.1.1.4 Evidence of efforts being made to manage known 4-6.1 Assessment of damaging events significant forest health damaging agents or agents 2.1.2 Proportion of regeneration comprised of native species See 1.2.3 2.1.3 Addition and deletions to the forest area 2-2.1 forest converted to non-forest use 2-2.3 Landslides 2.1.4 Percentage of long term sustainable harvest level that is 4-1.1 Harvested Volume actually harvested 4-1.2 Timber supply certainty 3.1.1 Level of Soil disturbance 2.-2.2