Maintaining Coarse Woody Debris in Post-Harvest Settings:Economic and Ecological Implications of Marking Non-Merchantable Logs

After Bucking and Before Yarding

PROJECT PLAN

VFR-CWD-00-01

27 June 2000

Prepared by:Gerry Davis, Research Forest Ecologist, Vancouver Forest Region, BCMOF

Eric Phillips, Senior Researcher, Western Division, Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada (FERIC)Barb Cawley, Azmeth Forest Consultants Ltd.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................................. 11.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT .................................................................................................................... 21.3 PROJECT TEAM ............................................................................................................................................................ 3

2 PROJECT DESIGN ...................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 PROJECT COMPONENTS, AND OBJECTIVES................................................................................................................... 52.2 OVERVIEW................................................................................................................................................................... 62.3 SELECTION OF THE STUDY SITES (BLOCKS)................................................................................................................. 62.4 ECONOMIC STUDY....................................................................................................................................................... 92.5 ECOLOGICAL STUDY.................................................................................................................................................... 9

2.5.1 Methods ............................................................................................................................................................. 92.5.2 Analyses........................................................................................................................................................... 16

3 2000/2001 PROJECT SCHEDULE............................................................................................................................ 20

4 DELIVERABLES........................................................................................................................................................ 20

5 LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................................................... 22

APPENDICESAppendix I. Overview of Proposed Second Project (Draft)

Appendix II. Overview of Utilization Standards

Appendix III. Power estimates based on Data from the CWHwh1

Appendix IV. Detailed list of cruise measurements

Appendix V. Detailed list of CWD measurements

Appendix VII. System for tracking tasks

FIGURES

FIGURE 1. A DIAGRAM OF HOW WOOD WILL FLOW FROM STUDY BLOCKS

FIGURE 2. A DIAGRAM OF ECOLOGICAL NESTED PLOT

FIGURE 3. OVERVIEW OF THE 2000/2001 PROJECT SCHEDULE

TABLES

TABLE 1A. PROJECT TEAM: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR 2000/2001TABLE 1B. SOME ISSUES REQUIRING SPECIAL ATTENTION DURING THE STUDYTABLE 2. OVERVIEW OF CRUISE MEASUREMENTSTABLE 3. DEFINITIONS OF TREE CLASSES TABLE 4. OVERVIEW OF CWD MEASUREMENTS TABLE 5. OVERVIEW OF STUMP MEASUREMENTS TABLE 6. ATTRIBUTES OF INTEREST TABLE 7. ANOVA TABLE FOR REPLICATED STUDY

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis Project Plan, while prepared by specific members of the Project Team, represents a collaborative effort bythe entire Team. The Plan schedules are subject to change due to factors such as block, staff and funding avail-ability.

The Project Team is comprised of representatives from the Vancouver Forest Region of the British ColumbiaMinistry of Forests (Don Heppner, Forest Entomologist; Gerry Davis, Research Ecologist); the British ColumbiaMinistry of Environment, Lands and Parks (Doug Morrison, Habitat Protection); Weyerhaeuser BC CoastalGroup(Bill Beese, Forest Ecologist; Glen Dunsworth, Forest Renewal and Biodiversity Program Leader); FERIC(Eric Phillips, Senior Researcher, Silvicultural Operations), and Azmeth Forest Consultants (Barb Cawley, EdRedlin, and Jeff Labelle).

The Project Team acknowledges assistance from Amanda Nemec of International Statistical & Research in pro-viding statistical support and in preparing the data analysis section.

Eric Phillips’ insight regarding design and operational considerations is greatly appreciated, as are his contribu-tions to the Project Plan. The Project Team gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Kathi Hagan in the editingthis Project Plan. Finally the working group would like to thank the following reviewers for their insightfulcomments: J. Parminter, A. MacKinnon, P. Ott, A. Arsenault, T. Stevens, B. Markstrom, D. Collins, P. Marshall,G. Dunsworth, B. Beese, and D. Morrison.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BackgroundDowned dead wood, or coarse woody debris (CWD), is an important structural component of forest and streamecosystems, and is linked to both biodiversity and ecosystem processes (Harmon et al. 1996). While CWD man-agement in British Columbia is a legislative requirement under the Forest Practices Code, little quantitative dataon this resource have been gathered, from either managed or unmanaged BC forests. The lack of data, combinedwith the constraints of the 1996 impact estimates made by the Chief Forester for stand-level biodiversity, i.e.,CWD management will have no effect on operating costs or timber supply, has resulted in limited direction forfield practitioners on the management of CWD in BC As outlined in the recently released A Short-Term Strategyfor Coarse Woody Debris Management in British Columbia’s Forests (2000), one of the main opportunities toimprove CWD retention within the context of the BC Ministry of Forests’ (BCMOF) utilization standards1 isthrough reduction of accumulated waste wood at the time of harvest.

Recognizing the need to give field practitioners better direction about managing CWD, the Vancouver ForestRegion established a regional CWD Working Group in November 1999. The Working Group is comprised ofrepresentatives from the Vancouver Forest Region of the BCMOF, Weyerhaeuser, and the Vancouver IslandRegion of the BCMOE. Representation will be extended to Small Business Forest Enterprise Program (SBFEP)and other major Licensees in the summer of 2000.

From 2000 to 2003, the Working Group will:

1. Explore, within the framework of the current utilization standards, cost-effective options to retain CWD onsite at the time of harvest.

2. Explore potential sources of CWD which can be made available over a rotation.

3. Examine the need for CWD management guidelines, and develop CWD management guidelines where thereis a need and where there are sufficient supporting data.

From 2000 to 2003, the CWD Working Group proposes to undertake two projects to address the above threepoints. The results from both projects will provide the background data required to discuss preparation of guide-lines for managing CWD.

This document is the plan for the first project, which comprises a pilot study to be undertaken in 2000/01 and theremainder of the project to be completed over the following two years. An overview of the second project isprovided in Appendix I; a separate project plan will be developed for this project in the summer of 2000.

1 As of January 1999, the BCMOF utilization standards for allowable non-billable waste and residue changed from 0 m3/ha to 35 m3/ha (sawlogs) for oldgrowth, and 0 m3/ha to 10 m3/ha (sawlogs) for second growth (refer to Appendix II for more details).

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

2

1.2 General Description of the ProjectCurrent harvesting practices, particularly in decadent stands, can result in large accumulations of non-merchantable wood either at the roadside or dry land sort. This reflects a combination of factors from the fellingand bucking practices to the cost reduction incentives under the utilization policy. Other contributing factors mayinclude visibility during yarding such that the merchantability of the log is not apparent until after the log isyarded to roadside, or in other cases fuel abatement and/or plantable spot requirements. However, these latterissues are perhaps less influential than the former.

Standard felling practice requires fallers to fell trees at 0.3 m, unless there are safety issues. Stems are typicallybucked to company specified log lengths which are generally between 8 to 15m with some variation dependingupon final product objectives. The maximum log length allowed is a function of the trucking phase. In handfalling, the fallers are expected to buck the felled tree into multiples of company specified log lengths and de-limb 3 sides of the stem unless it is unsafe to do so. Most often the butt and second cuts are separate logs, withthe tops left to go to the sort as one piece. In some instances multiple logs are left joined together to maximizeyarding efficiency.

As a general rule fallers do not “long butt” if the butt rot is close to 50% sound merchantable. The faller willmeasure a pulp log and a saw log before bucking to put the final bucking decision in the hands of a certifiedgrader. At the landing the chaser removes the remaining limbs, bucks broken log ends and bucks the occasionalover-length logs. Usually the chaser does not have a scaling ticket and will not make merchantability decisions.Most companies would rather yard and truck some non-merchantable material rather than risk the penalty ofhaving to re-yard a setting. The flip side of the coin however is that waste accumulations can result in increasedyarding, sorting, and waste disposal costs.

Recently, two practices have been used successfully in Weyerhaeuser’s helicopter-logging operations to reduceyarding/hauling costs and dryland sort accumulations2:

• On-site bucking to create higher value logs (CHVL). In this approach low value wood e.g., Z grade, isbucked and left in the setting.

• Marking to leave grade Z and Y logs on site (marking occurs after falling and bucking, but prior to yarding)(MTL). A cruiser or scaler paints non-merchantable wood after falling but prior to yarding. In cable systems,if visibility is limited, it is necessary for the bull-bucker to identify these logs to the yarding operator.

Based on Weyerhaeuser’s results, it is believed that CHVL and MTL practices may provide economic and eco-logical benefits under other harvesting systems and in certain ecosystems. Therefore, this project will investigatethe economic and ecological implications of maintaining CWD in the harvest setting through the use of CHVLand MTL.

The project will focus on cable-harvesting operations in late-seral forests in the Vancouver Forest Region in wetto moist CWH subzone variants, i.e., Natural Disturbance Type 1 (NDT1) variants such as vm1, vm2, and mm(BGB 1995). It is anticipated that these forest/ecosystem types have the greatest volume of low-value material3

(i.e., Y and Z grades) due to advanced stand age and level of decadence. Cable harvesting is the dominant sys-tem in these types of stands.4

2 Ed Proteau, Weyerhaeuser, West Island Woodlands, Franklin Operations; personal communication, March 2000.3 Low value refers to: 1) Y and Z grade logs from the standing/fallen live and dead stems, and 2) pre-harvest CWD (excluding fallen stems). Under theinterim utilization policy, the low-value wood will include an additional 10-35m3/ha of X grade or better sawlogs.4 Whether these practices will be cost effective in late-seral forests in the drier subzones (e.g., NDT2) or second-growth stands (whether harvested by cableor ground-based operations) is less clear. It is anticipated that opportunities to retain non-merchantable wood at the time of harvest will be less due to theyounger stand ages and lower stand decadence. Refer to Appendix I.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

3

1.3 Project Team5

As of March 2000, the Project Team consists of the following representatives: Bill Beese and Glen Dunsworth ofWeyerhaeuser, BC Coastal Group; Doug Morrison of the BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Van-couver Island Regional Office; Eric Phillips, Brian Bulley, and Craig Evans of the Forest Engineering ResearchInstitute of Canada (FERIC); Don Heppner and Gerry Davis of the BC Ministry of Forests, Vancouver ForestRegion. A project co-ordinator will be hired in April 2000. The Project Team will change over the next year asother Licensees become involved in the project.

The success of the Project depends on close co-operation of the representatives on the Project Team. Table 1 (aand b) highlights the roles and responsibilities of team members. As indicated, the project co-ordinator will beresponsible for the overall general management of the project and will report weekly or monthly to the ProjectTeam.

The Project Team will communicate through the following methods:

• Project Team meetings, as required.

• Emails and telephone conferences, as required.

• Weekly (during field sampling) and monthly reports from the project co-ordinator.

• Quarterly reports circulated to BCMOF and Licensee management, prepared by the project co-ordinator.

5 The Vancouver Forest Region invited Weyerhaeuser to participate in the CWD Working Group in the summer of 1999. This initial contact reflected thefact that Weyerhaeuser was already monitoring CWD under its Forest Project. Further,Weyerhaeuser’s Forest Management Strategy identified generalstrategies for managing CWD in each of the three types of zones. It was felt that Weyerhaeuser’s operational experience would complement the Regional(BCMOF and BCMOE) operational and ecological expertise. This initial Working Group would start discussions rolling on the topic of CWD, with otherLicensees being invited shortly thereafter. In the fall of 1999, an invitation was extended to FERIC because of its wealth of experience in operational costevaluations.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

4

Table 1a. Project Team: roles and responsibilities for 2000/2001.VFR/MOF – Project Manager(s) MOE WEYERHAEUSER FERIC PROJECT CO-ORDINATOR

General • Participate in team meetings and reviews.• Participate in field visit and discussion of

operational issues.• Provide technical support.• Provide Management(s) with updates.• Request deferral of salvage sale until post-harvest measures are complete.• Provide funding and contract administrationfor: Project Co-ordinator; training and mark-ing; pre-post field sampling; partial fundingfor the 2000/01 FERIC study; data analyses;report preparation; publication• Extend invitation to SBFEP and other majorLicensees regarding participation in CWDWorking Group.

• Participate in teammeetings and reviews.• Provide technicalsupport.• Participate in fieldvisit and discussion ofoperational issues.

• Participate in team meetings andreviews.• Participate in field visit anddiscussion of operational issues.• Provide technical support.• Facilitate discussions on thisproject with the Divisional Man-agers.• Cover normal harvesting costsand share incremental harvestingcosts, e.g., faller time for training.• On-site visit by trainer for fall-ers.

• Participate in meetings and reviewsas required.• Submit formal request to continuethe project in 2001/2002.

• Chair the team meetings.• Call meetings, set meeting agendas,compile minutes, and track action items.• Complete detailed working plan for2000/2001 block.• Co-ordinate invitation and communi-cation with SBFEP and other majorlicensees on behalf of the WorkingGroup.• Complete site selection for Year 2.

2000/2001ProjectSpecific

• Fast track amendments for SP, CP, etc. toaccommodate project (PM).• Finalize division of blocks in consultationwith group.• Responsible for following field work (TM):

- Training and marking contractor.- Pre-post field sampling.- QA for ecological field data.- Provide FERIC with costs of markingand training.

• Complete through contract data analysesand report preparation (published as VFRTechnical Report June 2001).• Ensure on time/on budget (PM).• Ensure process documented (PM).• ID critical issues + define methods tomonitor success/progress (TM+PM).• Risk management strategy (PM).

• Discuss with Divisional Manag-ers the need to train fallers.• Arrange for deferral of salvagesale until post-harvest measuresare complete.• Co-operation with FERIC inproviding merchantable and non-merchantable log volumes sortedat dryland sortyard; machine oper-ating hours.

• Responsible for the following fieldwork:

- Machine operating hours (shift-level data collection) in co-operation with company andyarding crew.- Operating logistics (detailedtiming); merchantable and non-merchantable log volumes sortedat dryland sortyard in cooperationwith the company (scaling rec-ords).- Trucking costs (from previouswork, updated to year 2000 costs).- Non-merchantable log disposalcost at dryland sortyard (from pre-vious work, updated to year 2000costs).

• Draft FERIC report (March31,2001); Advantage report (summerfall 2001).• Rough edited video footage (March31,2001).• Industry Demo Day (if appropri-ate).

• Track changes to harvesting schedule.• Co-ordinate final site selection, teamfield visit.• Provide weekly reports during fieldseason, otherwise monthly.• Co-ordinate field activities and com-munication of issues to the team mem-bers.• Co-ordinate document reviews.• Update schedule.

Contributions $150K + staff time staff time $20K; staff time + time to trainfallers

$35K (member contribution) + $6K(attend meetings)

D. Heppner, Project Manager (PM)G. Davis, Technical Manager(TM)

Doug Morrison Bill Beese, Glen Dunsworth Eric Phillips, Brian Bulley, CraigEvans, and Ernst Stjernberg

unknown

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

5

Table 1b. Some issues requiring special attention during the study.Date

2000/01

Responsibility Task/Item

April MOF/PM Monitor changes to Licensee harvesting schedule.

April MOF/WEY Amend SP, Logging Plans, etc. ,where required.

April MOF/WEY Discuss with Divisional staff the importance of training fallers to maximize log value; identify anylogistical problems and solve.

April MOF/WEY/FERIC Discuss with Divisional staff the importance of reviewing the study objectives with operators; identifyany logistical problems and solve.

April MOF/WEY Request a deferral on salvage within the block until post-harvest sampling is complete

May-June MOF/PM Review pre- and post-harvest data on Day1, 12 and 24 to ensure data quality.

June-July FERIC Ensure each truckload for each sub-block is “ticketed” prior to leaving cutblock.

June-July FERIC Ensure “ticketed” truckloads are scaled separately at the dryland sort.

June-July FERIC Ensure scale sheets are collected for each “ticketed” truckload and that wood is separated by each sub-block.

2 PROJECT DESIGN

2.1 Project Components, and ObjectivesThis project is comprised of two components:

1. Economic study. Under the direction of the Working Group, the Forest Engineering Research Insti-tute of Canada (FERIC) will examine the economic aspects of using CHVL and MTL to maintain CWDin the harvest setting.

The objectives of the economic study are:

• Monitor and compare the logistics of conventional yarding, and yarding where non-merchantablewood is marked to leave (MTL) and where logs are bucked to maximize log value (CHVL).

• Estimate the costs of loading, transporting, sorting and disposal of non-merchantable logs.

2. Ecological study. Under the direction of the Working Group, a Project Team will examine the CWDattributes resulting from CHVL and MTL.

The general objectives of the ecological study are:

• Quantify differences in the cutblock total CWD volume and CWD attributes (i.e., large dimensionalpieces) between conventional yarding and yarding where non-merchantable wood is marked.

• Compare the attributes of potential pre-harvest sources of CWD (i.e., live and dead stem low-valuewood, and existing CWD) to the attributes of post-harvest CWD in cutblock, roadside, and reservestrata (see section 3.0 for details).

• Quantify CWD volume and piece density removed through post-harvest salvage.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

6

The more detailed questions to be addressed by the study are as follow:

• what is the maximum volume of non-merchantable wood which can hypothetically be left in the cut-block (timber (Y+Z logs),+CWD);

• how much of this potential non-merchantable wood can operationally be left in the cut-block;• how much of the original CWD is retained in the cut-block post-harvest;• what are the grades and dimensions of non-merchantable wood left in the cut-block compared to the

roadside;• how do CWD dimensions change following harvest;• what proportion of the original total live + dead coarse wood (stems (standing/fallen), CWD, stumps)

volume is retained post-harvest in the cut-block, roadside and reserves;• what proportion of the original total dead coarse wood volume is retained post-harvest in the cut-

block, roadside and reserves;• how does the ratio of the pre-harvest total live versus total dead wood volume compare to that re-

ported in the literature (Harmon and Sexton 1996).

2.2 OverviewFigure 1 presents a visual overview of the entire project.

Four blocks will be monitored in total. One block will be monitored in the 2000/2001 pilot study andthree additional blocks will be monitored over 2001/2003.6 Two blocks will be selected in the wet, theother two in the moist subzone variant. Similar broad moisture regimes and timber types will be selectedwithin each subzone variant. As shown in Figure 1, each cutblock will be split into two sub-blocks.7 Theboundary between the two sub-blocks will provide for representation of site series, harvesting system(s),reserves, and timber type. The two yarding practices will be randomly assigned to sub-blocks. Both sub-blocks will be harvested to current utilization standards.

Sub-block A will be harvested following standard procedures. Sub-Block B will involve two additionalsteps: 1) a scaler will train fallers to create high-value logs, i.e., low-value wood will be bucked fromhigh-value logs prior to yarding (CHVL)8, and 2) a scaler will mark all Y and Z grade logs to be left onsite (MTL).9 Sub-block A will be harvested first.10

The study will be restricted to late-seral forests in wet to moist subzone variants, i.e., vm1, vm2, mm1and mm2 in the Vancouver Forest Region. These forests are expected to offer the greatest opportunity forthe retention of low-value wood under practices such as CHVL and MTL.

2.3 Selection of the Study Sites (Blocks)Two subzone variants will be selected for study, either the CWHvm1, or vm2, and the CWHmm1, ormm2. Preference will be given to sites with a high proportion of circum mesic site series. As mentionedearlier late-seral stands in the above subzone variants are expected to offer the greatest opportunity toretain low-value wood under practices such as CHVL and MTL given the high level of decadence. For aparticular stand age class, factors such as timber type and site series (which, in part, determines site in-dex), will influence both the total deadwood attributes, as well as the amount of nonmerchantable woodleft post-harvest. For example, Cw and Fd are longer lived than species such as Hw and Pl. As a resultCw and Fd can attain larger diameters. Further because of their wood properties they also decay

6 If the ecological and economic advantages/disadvantages are obvious from the results of the first two blocks (i.e., pilot and first of three 2001-2003 blocks) then the Project Team will evaluate whether it’s necessary to include additional blocks in the study.7 To reduce between-block variability, the block will be split rather than undertake the study over two blocks.8 Fallers may have already received training as part of operations. In this case, the comparisons will be limited to MTL.9 For the initial blocks a cruiser will be hired to mark grade Y and Z logs, rather than train the operational crew. This will provide an estimate ofthe maximum CWD volume that can be left on site. Future studies will compare the effectiveness of MTL with crew training.10 Harvesting the conventional sub-block will eliminate bias from experience gained through the MTL treatment. (add further explanation)

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

7

Figure 1. A diagram of how wood will flow from study blocks, and wtored and documented. Items marked in red are linked to the economblue are linked to the ecological study.

LANDFILL

YARDING WITHMARK-TO-LEAVE

Sub-block B

A B

A B

BOUNDARY BETWEEN HARVESTMETHOD BOUNDARY

3

TRACKED BY FERIC STUDY TRACKED BY CWD RETENTIO

TIMETIME

Sub-block A

HAUL ROAD

DRYLANDSORT

HAULINGm3

WASTE WOODHAULING

m3 & $/m3

YARDING$/m3

YARDING$/m3

m3

m

PRE & POST-HARVESTm3

PRE & POST-HARVEST

m3

CONVEN-TIONAL-YARDING

hich variables will be moni-ic study and items marked in

N STUDY

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

8

more slowly than many other species. These factors can result in higher dead wood (standing/fallen) onsite than perhaps stands without these species. In addition, decadent Cw often shatter resulting in higherwaste and breakage post-harvest.

On the coast, stands are seldom only one timber type or one site series. The study sites will therefore bestratified by timber type and site series (or broad moisture group). The areas associated with broad tim-ber types and moisture grouping will be documented for each block. This will permit approximatelyequal representation of timber types and moisture groups in each of the two sub-blocks (harvestingtypes), or weighting of estimates by stratum area (if equal representation proves impractical).

To assist with selection of appropriate study sites, a list of blocks scheduled for harvest between 2000-2003 will be compiled from Licensees within the Vancouver Forest Region, based on:

• Discussions with field foresters

• Review of the Licensee’s Forest Development Plans (FDP)

• Examination of available Silviculture Prescriptions

• Examination of logging plan maps (e.g., to determine if engineering is complete, or initial engi-neering is complete).

The short list of candidate sites will be created based, in part, on the following factors:

• Biogeoclimatic Ecological Classification (BEC) —vm1 and vm2, mm1 and mm2 CWH subzonevariant

• Number of site series — a maximum of three, preferably one

• Age class — late-seral

• Date scheduled for harvest — 2000 (pilot)

• Net hectares — must be greater than 20

• Harvest system(s) — a maximum of two, preferably one

• Access — road only no boat access

The candidate sites will be further scrutinised in regards to:

• Timber type homogeneity

• Silviculture system clearcut or clearcut with reserves (max. 20% variable retention)

• Representation of site series, i.e., moisture and nutrient regime

• Logistics of partitioning block into two sub-blocks

The final 5-10 potential sites will be visited and reviewed in the field.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

9

2.4 Economic StudyThe economic study will document, in each of the four study blocks (2000 to 2003), costs associatedwith yarding, transporting, and disposing of wood associated with conventional falling and yarding prac-tices (Sub-block A, Fig. 1) and where trees are bucked to maximize log value and non-merchantable logsare marked to leave immediately after falling (Sub-block B, Fig. 1).

Yarding will be monitored on two levels—on a shift-by-shift basis and through detailed monitoring.

The shift-by-shift (shift-level) monitoring uses either machine activity recorders (Servis recorders) orcompany time cards to monitor total scheduled machine hours (SMH) and productive machine hours(PMH). The merchantable volume from each sub-block will be obtained from the company’s “stick”scale records at the dryland sortyard. A different timber mark will be designated for each sub-block toallow tracking of volumes through the dryland sortyard. The hourly machine cost will be calculated us-ing FERIC’s machine costing model, with operator wages at IWA rates. Productivity will be calculatedin m3/SMH and m3/PMH.

The cost of marking for the second sub-block will be calculated utilizing the time card records for themarker, at IWA rates with current fringe benefits.

Logs and truckloads will be monitored periodically both at the roadside and at the dryland sort to ensureseparation of sub-block wood (see Figure 1). The volume of merchantable and non-merchantable woodtrucked to and sorted at the dryland sortyard will be obtained from the company scaling records. Thetrucking cost of non-merchantable logs will be calculated utilizing FERIC’s costing model for highwayor off-highway trucks (Oakley and Marshall 1989; Blair 1999). The disposal costs of cull logs at thedryland sortyard will be calculated using costs from a disposal trial at China Creek sortyard (Forrester1996). In addition, an attempt will be made to keep the waste material from the two sub-blocks separateto allow further analysis of the material.

The logistics of yarding will be documented by detailed monitoring (Taylor-split timing) of the yardingcycle with stop-watches and /or hand-held data recorders to determine differences between sub-blocks inhookup time, delay time, and aborted cycles. Detailed monitoring information will be summarized andcompared between blocks. The yarding phase will also be documented photographically and with video.

2.5 Ecological StudyThe ecological study will document total live and dead coarse wood volume (standing and fallen stems,“other” CWD, stumps) and piece attributes in the cutblock and reserve (e.g., wildlife tree patches (WTP),riparian reserve zone (RRZ)) areas of each sub-block, both pre-harvest and post-harvest. Post-harvestCWD inventories will also be undertaken in accumulations, i.e., roadside, piles. To provide an estimateof CWD volume removed through salvage, all plots will be revisited following the completion of the sal-vage sale.

2.5.1 Methods2.5.1.1 Definitions- Stems: live and dead stems which are ≥3 m in height with a dbh ≥10 cm (OB); fallen stems must

have roots attached and dbh within the cruise plot boundary (see Cruise Measurements)- Stumps: natural or cut stem with roots attached which are ≥ 0.3-2.99 m in height with a top diameter

≥10 cm (IB)- CWD: natural or cut dead downed wood with a butt diameter ≥10 cm (IB); overlap with fallen dead

stems is recorded.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

10

2.5.1.2 Block Layout1) In the event that more than one timber type and site series are included in the block, the following

additional steps will be taken: areas of timber type and site series mapped2) site series of each plot documented3) if necessary (and funding is available), additional plots will be placed in the timber type/site series

with the highest expected variability (see Cruise Measurements).

The above information will permit estimated attributes to be weighted by the timber type/site-series ar-eas.

2.5.1.3 Cruise MeasurementsIn each sub-block, cruise measurements will be collected in two strata:

1. Pre-harvest proposed cutblock

2. Pre-harvest reserves (Table 2).

Prior to harvest, cruise plots will be established in the proposed cutblock and reserve areas of each sub-block. The cruise plots will be established (in both areas) on a systematic grid at a minimum density of 1plot/ha11. If the area of the reserve is less than three hectares (i.e., 1 plot/ha is equivalent to fewer than 3plots) then a minimum of three plots will be established in the reserve.

Sample sizes are based in part on variance estimates (Appendix III) from a project undertaken in late-seral stands in the Coastal Western Hemlock wet hypermaritime subzone variant (CWHwh1) on theQueen Charlotte Islands (QCI). The QCI study used 1 plot/ 2 ha, and while the fixed-area cruise plotswere similar to the plots in this study, the CWD plots were restricted to radius of 11.28m. As shown inAppendix III, the estimated variability is high. This may reflect a variety of factors, including stand age,timber type, and moisture regime. Doubling the plot density and CWD plot size is expected to improvethe precision of the parameter estimates for the present study, although the exact magnitude of the gain isunknown. As data are collected during the pilot study, better variance estimates will be available to con-firm the adequacy of the sample sizes. If necessary (and funding is available), an additional 2-4 plots/hamay be added to the design and allocated to those timber-type/site-series strata with greatest variability.

In the event that individual trees (e.g., dispersed wildlife trees) are left standing post-harvest to meet sil-viculture requirements, the total number of such stems (i.e., across the entire block) will be recorded byspecies. A random sample of 50% of the trees will be selected from each species group. However if thetotal number of trees is small, the entire population will be measured. On the other hand, if the variabil-ity in height and diameter (to be estimated in the field) differs markedly among species, sample sizes willbe optimized to minimize the variance of the overall estimated mean height (and diameter). Full meas-urements (i.e., Appendix IV) will be recorded for all sample trees.

Reserve plots will be revisited following harvest to ensure plots are located within the reserves and todocument any changes (e.g., due to removal or blowdown). Tree number, and volume and grade of por-tion of stem in and outside the reserve, will be recorded. Any blowdown at the block or reserve bounda-ries will also be recorded ( i.e., volume and grade of wood falling within the cutblock stratum). This ap-proach will provide an allocation of wood volume and grade to the plot.

The cruise plot consists of two nested sub-plots with radii equal to 11.28m and 17.82m (Figure 2). The11.28-m radius subplot (400 m2) includes measures on all standing and fallen stems ≥10 cm dbh, whilethe 17.84-m subplot (1000 m2) includes measures on all stems ≥50 cm dbh. Plot centers will be staked,pinned, and referenced to at least two trees within the plot radius (by bearing and distance from plotcenter). Plot boundaries will be outlined on the ground with tree-marking paint. Reference trees will bemarked below 20 cm on stump

11 For the first block, an additional four plots may be measured in both sub-blocks to provide a better estimate of variability to improve samplesize estimates.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

Tables 3 and 4 provide a brief outline of measurements to be collected. A detailed list of measurementsis provided in Appendix IV. Other than the choice of fixed-radius plots, field measurements generallyfollow the Vegetation Resources Inventory Ground Sampling Procedures Manual (VRI 1999). Treesalong the boundary of any plot12 will be included in the tally if 50% or more of the tree at dbh is insidethe plot boundary.

Three plots will be randomly chosen for site index and age measurements. During the cruise, two topheight trees, two random dominant/co-dominant trees and two random intermediate trees will be selectedfrom the two dominant species. These trees will be blazed below 0.3m and a stem map drawn to permitidentification of stumps post harvest. Disks will be collected post-harvest for ring counts.

Fig

12 A will

11

ure 2. A diagram of ecological nested plots.

stem is included in a plot tally if it has attached roots and its dbh (1.3 m from high side) is within the plot boundary. Stems without rootsbe recorded as CWD.

17.85m (0.1ha) - Cruise, CWD & Stumps

11.28m (0.04ha) - Cruise, CWD & Stumps

3.99m (0.005ha) - CWD & Stumps only

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

12

Table 2. Summary of pre-/post-harvest strata.Pre-harvest Post-harvest

Cutblock1 Cruise 11.28/17.85CWD 3.99/11.28/17.85 3.99/11.28/17.858

Reserve Cruise 11.28/17.85 checkCWD 3.99/11.28/17.85 check

Roadside CWD1 referred to as dispersed post-harvest

Table 3. Overview of cruise measurementsa.

Plot

radius

(m)

Plot area

(m2)

Min.

dbh

(cm)

Min.

height

(m)

Live

and/or

dead

Standing

and/or

fallen Species Height

(m)

dbh

(cm)

Wildlife

tree codes

Tree

class (see

Table 4)

Net

factor/

call grade

Broken

top

diameter

(cm)

Tree loss

indicators

11.28 400 ≥10 ≥3b L&D X X X X X X X X X

17.84 1000 ≥50 ≥3 L&D X X X X X X X X X

aSee Appendix IV for more details.b Stems <3m are tallied as stumps

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

13

Table 4. General definitions of tree classes.General tree class and definition Cruise tree classs and definition (MOF 1999)

A Live Stem - live, standing trees 1 – living trees with no external pathological indicators

2 – living trees with one or more of eight pathological indicators

5 – a veteran is defined as a mature living tree (121 years or older for all species except deciduous greter

than 40 years or Cottonwood and Aspen in FIX K&L greater than 80 years) in a main stand which has

been classified as immature (less than 121 years).

6 – living trees that have only one or two live limbs (compile with TC4)

8 – an immature is defined as an immature tree (less than 121 years) within a mature stand

B Dead Potential Standing - dead, standing trees with greater than 50%

sound wood

3 – dead standing or down timber which is estimated to contain at least 50% of its original gross volume

in sound-wood content

7 – a combination of Veteran (TC 5) and Dead Potential (TC 3)

9 – a combination of Immature (TC 8) and Dead Potential (TC 3)

C Dead Potential Fallen - live or dead, fallen trees with greater than

50% sound wood

3 as above

6 as above

7 as above

9 as above

D Dead Useless Standing - dead, standing trees with less than 50%

sound wood

4 - dead standing trees that have less than 50% of their original gross volume in firm-wood content or

otherwise fails to meet the criteria of a dead potential tree.

E Dead Useless Fallen - dead, fallen trees with less than 50%

sound wood

Both tree class codes will be used

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

14

Table 5. Overview of CWD measurements.

Plot radius(m)

Area(m2)

Min. top diame-ter

(cm)

Min. vol. (m3)

Residue &waste

Top/buttdiam. (cm)

Length (m) Gross/NetVolume

Grade EcologicalCodes

3.99 50 10 <0.024 X X X X X X

11.28 400 10 ≥0.024 X X X X X X

17.84 1000 10 ≥0.024>30 cm top diam.

X X X X X X

a All diameters are inside bark; width and height to be collected on all pieces of decay codes 3,4,5

Table 6. Overview of stump measurements.

Plotradius Area

(m2)Height

(m)

Min.top

diameter(cm)

Min.volume

(m3)

Topdiameter

(cm) a

Buttdiameter

(cm) aHeight

(m)

Gross/Net

Volume(m3)

GradeEcological

codes

3.99 50 <3 10 <0.024 X X X X X X11.28 400 <3 10 ≥0.024 X X X X X X

17.84 1000 <3 10 ≥0.024>30 cm top

diameter

X X X X X X

a Stumps require two diameters (inside bark): a top diameter and a diameter at 0.3 m at high side of ground.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

15

2.5.1.4 Coarse Woody Debris MeasurementsIn each sub-block (and timber type and moisture group), four strata will be measured for CWD:

1) Pre-harvest proposed cutblock

2) Pre-harvest reserves

3) Post-harvest cutblock, i.e., dispersed

4) Post-harvest roadside and/or pile accumulations (Table 2).

The pre-harvest proposed cutblock, pre-harvest reserve, and post-harvest cutblock will be sampled by establish-ing plots at the same locations as the nested cruise plots (i.e., 1/ha). Depending on the redistribution of CWDresulting from harvesting operations (e.g., heavy debris accumulations at landing site where machine is operat-ing; drop area for non-merchantable logs within cutblock stratum), the post-harvest cutblock plots may need tobe stratified according to the degree of accumulation and additional plots added to the new strata ( i.e., to ensurea minimum of 3 plots/stratum).

Downed wood of salvage value in the cruise plots will be identified based on the post-harvest cutblock surveys.Each plot will be revisited on completion of the salvage sale to document any removals.

Three, rather than two, fixed area nested sub-plots13 will be used to measure downed wood in the pre-harvestcutblock, pre-harvest reserve, and post-harvest cutblock strata. The three plot radii are 3.99 m (50m2), 11.28 m(400 m2)14, and 17.84 m (1000 m2) (Figure 2). The two larger diameter plots coincide with the nested cruiseplots. Volume and attributes of pieces and/or stumps with a volume <0.024 m3 (entire piece) and a 10 cm top inthe plot will be recorded to a top diameter of 10 cm [(5 rads) (1 rad = 2 cm)]; pieces and/or stumps with a vol-ume ≥0.024 m3 will be measured in the 11.28-m radius plot to a 10 cm top; and pieces ≥ 0.024 m3 and a top di-ameter >30 cm (large dimensional pieces) in the plot will be recorded in the 17.84-m radius plot to a 30 cm top.Attributes both within and outside each plot e.g., length will be recorded. The use of a minimum volume anddiameter will increase the sampling effort for the larger dimensional pieces. A CWD piece 3 m in length with aminimum 10.0-cm top diameter fits the Manual’s definition of a residue and waste log (for second growth).15

For the post-harvest roadside stratum, CWD measurements will be collected in a 3.99-m radius plot to a mini-mum top diameter of 10 cm. This is the standard plot size for residue and waste at roadside or in piles. In addi-tion, height, width and length of each pile will be recorded.

Plot boundaries will be painted on the ground prior to field sampling. Standard measurements outlined in theProvincial Logging Residue and Waste Measurement Procedures Manual (BCMOF 1994) will be collected onall pieces. Additional piece measurements include ecological codes (decay, bark, hardness, and orientation),

13 The advantages/disadvantages of using Line Intersect Sampling (LIS) versus fixed area plots were weighed prior to choosing fixed area plots. The mainadvantages of LIS are: 1) ease of tracking pieces 2) better coverage of block 3) may be more cost effective depending upon measurements collected. Incases where measurements beyond the line are recorded the cost savings are unclear. A nested fixed area plot was chosen to measure downed wood for thefollowing reasons:• the study objectives require integration with operational post-harvest residue and waste surveys (which are fixed area)• a sample which includes all live and dead wood on the same plot will likely be easier to analyze (one can look at changes in paired plots for total dead

wood)• using the same plot sizes for stems and downed wood permits a direct accounting of the portion of the downed wood that is defined in the cruise as

fallen dead stems• LIS was not thought to be cost effective because: 1) a separate fixed area plot would need to be established post-harvest to measure stumps (stump

attributes are required for residue and waste and for a complete inventory of dead wood) ; 2) to provide a estimate of variance similar to the fixed areaplot, it was felt that density of transect points would need to be greater than the cruise plot density, or that the length of the line transect would need tobe longer than the cruise plot 17.84m radius, (fixed area plots provide a complete inventory, and LIS provides a subsample of the pieces for a par-ticular radius plot i.e., 17.84 m radius plot versus a 17.84 m line transect (whether one or two lines (L shape)). In either case the cruise and LIS "plot"areas would only be loosely tied to each other; 3) additional measures beyond the standard LIS attributes were required to tie the results to operationse.g., needed butt and top diameter rather than average diameter (provided by standard LIS), grade, classification of avoidable/unavoidable.

14 An 11.28-m radius plot is the standard residue and waste plot size. The larger plot (17.84 m) will improve parameter estimates for larger sized pieces.15 A CWD piece 10 cm at top and butt and 3 m in length is equal to 0.024 m3, assuming minimum taper.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

16

length, and dimensions for sections of pieces outside the plot. Appendix IV provides a more detailed de-scription of piece measurements.

Width and height will be recorded for pieces with non-round diameters (all pieces with a decay code of3, 4, or 5). Broken pieces <0.5 m apart will be measured as one piece if they are positioned in the samedirection. They will be coded as reconstructed. Grade, % sound, and decay codes will be assessed sepa-rately for the log portions in and outside the plot. Percent bark and hardness will be assessed on the por-tion of the piece within the plot. For hollow logs, the outside and inside dimensions of the log will berecorded i.e., top and butt diameters.

The roadside stratum is defined as 15 m on either side of the road and will be sampled both pre- andpost-harvest. Rectangular plots 15 m x 6.7 m (100 m2) will be established in the roadside strata. Allpieces will be recorded in the first 50m2 plot with pieces ≥0.024m3 recorded in the remaining plot area.A minimum of 15 plots will be established in each sub-block. The pre-harvest measures are necessary totrack wood originating from the right-of-way. Where possible the roadside debris will be sampled priorto piling. In the event that debris is piled at roadside, a minimum of 15% of the piles will be sampled.Piles will be stratified into small and large where required. If necessary two to four large piles will bedismantled and surveyed. The volume estimate will be compared between the two methods: visual versusinventory. The location of the roadside and pile plots will follow the procedures outlined in the Provin-cial Logging Residue and Waste Measurement Procedures Manual (BCMOF 1994).

2.5.1.5 Site Index and Tree AgePrior to harvest, five of the total cruise plots will be randomly selected for site index measurements. A0.01 m2 plot will be established in the center of each cruise plot. In each 0.1 m2 plot one site index treeof the leading and secondary species will be selected. Selection will be based on the Vegetation Re-source Inventory Manual Section 4.8 - Recording age/height tree data.

On three of these five plots, two dominant or co-dominant trees of the leading and secondary species, inaddition to two intermediate trees of the leading species, will be selected for ages. Trees will be selectedirrespective of defects.

For both the SI and random trees, each will be triangulated to the plot center. A map of each stem willalso be drawn for each plot. Disks will be collected for determining age following harvest. In the case ofthe SI trees, disks will only be collected if the suitability criteria are met.

2.5.1.6 AuditsIndependent surveyors will audit up to 10% of the pre-harvest and post-harvest cruise and CWD. Audi-tors will be on site during the first, third, and last weeks of sampling.

2.5.2 AnalysesThe primary purposes of the data analysis are to estimate the parameters listed in Table 7 for each of thetwo harvesting methods (i.e., conventional and CHVL/MTL) and to test the following hypotheses:

1) the pre-harvest total, and total dead wood volumes and component volumes, i.e., Z and Y grade arenot significantly different between the two sub-blocks;

2) the post-harvest CHVL/MTL total and large downed wood volumes (and densities) are higher thanthe corresponding totals (densities) for conventional harvested sub-block;

3) the post-harvest CHVL/MTL roadside accumulation total and large downed wood volumes (anddensities) are lower than the corresponding totals (densities) for the conventional harvested sub-block;

4) There is no difference between the (average) structural attributes of pre-harvest cut-blocks and thoseof the corresponding reserves.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

17

2.5.2.1 Summary StatisticsThe observed cumulative diameter distribution, � ( )F x , will be calculated for the pre-harvest live trees andCWD pieces. It provides an estimate of the proportion of stems and CWD pieces (per hectare) that havediameters less than or equal to an arbitrary diameter x. A cumulative length distribution will also be cal-culated for the pre-harvest CWD pieces. Estimated percentiles will be obtained by determining values ofx that correspond to the upper 20, 10, 5, 2, and 1% of the diameter and length distributions. Diametersand lengths corresponding to the upper 10% will be classified as large.

Volumes of individual trees and pieces of CWD will be calculated using standard cruise (Kozak 1988)and residue and waste formulas (e.g., frustrum of a parabolid), totalled for each sample plot, and dividedby the plot area to obtain an estimate of (timber or CWD) volume per unit area (m3/ha) (for each gradeand for all grades combined ). The density of CWD pieces (no. pieces/ha) will be calculated in the samemanner (i.e., total number of pieces in plot/plot area). If a piece of CWD extends beyond the plot bound-ary then only that portion contained in the plot will be included (e.g., if 45% of the volume lies within theplot then 0.45 × volume will be included in the volume total and a count of 0.45 will be added to the totalnumber of pieces). Plot totals will be obtained for each attribute of interest (Table 7). Zeroes (0 m3/ha or0 pieces/ha) will be recorded for all plots that do not contain trees or CWD with the applicable attributes.

Basic statistics — sample mean, standard deviation (standard error), minimum, maximum, coefficient ofvariation (CV), and sample size (number of plots) — will be compiled for all attributes of interest andsummarized by timber type, moisture group (site series), harvesting method, and subzone variant and, inthe case of the post-harvest CWD, by stratum (cutblock CWD16, roadside accumulations, and reserves).

Log value information, obtained from COFI’s published average log prices for the Vancouver Market forthe most current 6 months, will be used to calculate to log values ($/ha) by grade based on pre-harvesttimber net factor call grades. Value statistics will be compiled by tree class and log grade.

16 After harvesting, the two sub-blocks will be inspected to determine whether the distribution of CWD is relatively uniform throughout thestratum representing “dispersed CWD.” If harvesting creates areas of heterogeneity that can be clearly delineated (deposition of rejected logs)then the stratum will be sub-divided into additional strata, and the sample sizes and summary statistics will be adjusted accordingly.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

18

Table 7. Attributes of interest.Attribute Unit of measure

Comparisons between sub-blocksPre-harvest Total live+dead volume (Timber Definition1 – (TD)) m3/haPre-harvest Total Dead Volume (TD) m3/haPre-harvest Total Dead Cruise Volume ((TD) m3/haPre-harvest Total “other” CWD volume (TD) m3/haPre-harvest Timber Y grade logs (TD) m3/haPre-harvest Timber Y grade logs (TD) no./haPre-harvest Timber Z grade logs (TD) (fresh/old) m3/haPre-harvest Value Y grade logs (TD) $/haPre-harvest Total CWD (Ecological Definition (ED)) m3/haPre-harvest Total CWD (ED) no./haPre-harvest Large Dimensional Pieces* (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) m3/haPre-harvest Large Dimensional Pieces (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) no./ha

Cutblock Total CWD (ED) m3/haCutblock Total CWD (ED) no./haCutblock Total Y grade (ED) m3/haCutblock Total Y grade (ED) no./haCutblock Total Z grade (fresh/old) (ED) m3/haCutblock Total Z grade (fresh/old) (ED) no./haCutblock Total Large Dimensional Pieces (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) m3/haCutblock Total Large Dimensional Pieces (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) no./haCutblock Large Dimensional Y Grade Pieces (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) no./haCutblock Large Dimensional Y grade Pieces (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) m3/ha

Roadside Total CWD (ED) m3/haRoadside Total CWD (ED) no./haRoadside Total Y grade (ED) m3/haRoadside Total Y grade (ED) no./haRoadside Total Z grade (ED) (fresh/old) m3/haRoadside Total Z grade (ED) (fresh/old) no./haRoadside Total Large Dimensional Pieces (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) m3/haRoadside Total Large Dimensional Pieces (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) no./haRoadside Large Dimensional Y grade Pieces ED) upper 10% for length & diameter) m3/haRoadside Large Dimensional Y grade pieces (ED) (upper 10% for length & diameter) no./ha

1 Data presentation depends on the objective. The timber definition of dead wood includes fallen cruise trees in the cruise compilation. All otherdead downed wood is referred to as “other” CWD. The ecological definition of dead wood stratifies dead wood into standing and CWD (includ-ing dead fallen stems).

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

19

Attribute Unit ofmeasure

Pre- versus post-harvest comparisonsPre-/Post-harvest Total Live+Dead Volume (ED) (strata (cutblock,roadside,researves) x type

(standing, CWD)m3/ha

Pre-/Post-harvest Total Dead Volume (ED) (strata (cutblock,roadside,researves) x type (standing,CWD)

m3/ha

Pre-/Post-harvest Total Y grade logs (TD)2 m3/haPre-/Post-harvest Total Y grade logs (TD) no./haPre-/Post-harvest Total Z grade logs (TD) 2 m3/haPre-/Post-harvest Total Z grade logs (TD) no./haPre-/Post-harvest Large Dimensional CWD Pieces (ED) m3/haPre-/Post-harvest Large Dimensional CWD Pieces (ED) no./ha

Comparisons for entire blockPre-harvest /Reserve Total Live+Dead (standing, downed) Volume (TD) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Total Dead (standing, downed) Volume (TD) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Total Dead Standing and Fallen Stems (TD) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Total “other” CWD (TD) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Timber Y grade logs (TD) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Timber Z grade logs (TD) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Value Y grade logs (TD) $/haPre-harvest /Reserve Total CWD (ED) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Total CWD (ED) no./haPre-harvest /Reserve Large Dimensional Pieces (ED) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Large Dimensional Pieces (ED) no./haPre-harvest /Reserve Large diameter live stems (upper 10% DBH)3 m3/haPre-/Post-harvest Large diameter live stems (upper 10% DBH) m3/haPre-/Post-harvest Large diameter live stems (upper 10% DBH) no./haPre-harvest /Reserve Large diameter dead stems (upper 10% DBH) m3/haPre-harvest /Reserve Large diameter dead stems (upper 10% DBH) no./ha2 Includes Y and Z grade logs in standing and fallen stems and in “other” CWD where present.3 Upper 10% of the cumulative distribution.

2.5.2.2 Tests of HypothesesThe pilot study results will initially be analyzed separately to provide preliminary information toassess the merits and difficulties of the project.

Pilot Study (1 block with 2 sub-blocks). Pre- and post-harvest comparisons will be based on univariatet-tests (i.e., each attribute of interest tested separately) with a suitable adjustment for multiple compari-sons (to allow for simultaneous assessment of more than one attribute). Three kinds of comparisons willbe made: (i) comparison of the two sub-blocks (conventional versus CHVL/MTL) before harvest (two-sided t-test); (ii) post-harvest comparison of the two sub-blocks (by CWD stratum) (one-sided t-test –only significant increases in the CHVL/MTL sub-block are of practical importance); and (iii) compari-son of pre-harvest (overall) and post-harvest reserve values by sub-block (one-sided t-test only signifi-cant decreases in the CHVL/MTL sub-block are of practical importance). If pre-harvest differences be-tween the two sub-blocks are detected then the change after harvesting (i.e., after – before) will be com-pared for the two treatment sub-blocks (by CWD stratum).

Owing to the lack of replication of the two yarding practices (in more than one block), the proposedanalyses cannot distinguish between effects due to the yarding practice and differences inherent to thesub-blocks. However, if there are no significant pre-harvest differences then significant post-harvest dif-ferences are likely to be indicative of a yarding effect (i.e., similar differences might be expected in otherblocks in the same subzone variant and age class as the pilot block). All variables will be tested for out-liers and non-normality. Data transformations or non-parameteric tests will be applied as needed (PilotStudy and Replicated Study).

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

20

Replicated Study (2 BECs with 2 blocks/BEC and 2 treatments/block). Univariate analysis of vari-ance (ANOVA) will be used to assess the effects of BEC (i.e., subzone variants CWHvm1/vm2 orCWHmm1, where sites in the same BEC have similar moisture/nutrient regimes) and method of yarding(conventional or CHVL/MTL) on pre- and post-harvest volumes (timber, CWD) and CWD counts. Pre-harvest and post-harvest data will be analysed separately for each attribute of interest (p-values will beadjusted to allow for multiple comparisons) and for each post-harvest CWD stratum (or difference be-tween strata). The sources of variation, degrees of freedom, and error terms for testing the (fixed) maineffects of BEC and yarding method, and for determining their interactive effect, are summarized below(Table 8) for the simplest case, where all plots within a block have the same timber type and site series.The effects associated with BEC and yarding method (E, T, E × T) are fixed; the block and plot effects[i.e., B(E), T × B(E), and P(B× E × T)] are assumed to be random. The ANOVA (Table 8) will be modi-fied (by adding factors that define the strata or by replacing individual plots with a weighted sub-blockaverage) to account for stratification by timber type or site series (details will be worked out when thestratification is finalized).

TABLE 8. ANOVA table for Replicated Studyassuming that there are 2 subzone variants (BEC)*,2 blocks/BEC, 2 yarding methods/block,and 15 plots/ sub-block.

Source of variation df Error BEC: E 1 B × H Block(BEC): B(E) 2 Yarding method: H 1 H × B(E) E × H 1 H × B(E) H × B(E) 2

Plot: P(E × B × H) 112

BEC denotes the subzone varaints, CWHvm1 (or vm2) and CWHmm1 (with blocks chosen to include componentsof a Cw timber type and circum mesic site series ).Yarding method refers to CHVL/MTL and conventional yarding

3 2000/2001 PROJECT SCHEDULEThe final project schedule depends largely on the harvesting schedule. Figure 2 presents a tentative proj-ect schedule based on harvesting starting no sooner than June 1, 2000.

An example of the project tracking system is provided in Appendix VII.

4 DELIVERABLESAs outlined in Figure 3, deliverables include:

• A formal report on the economic component of the study, prepared and published by FERIC as partof its Advantage report series.

• A formal report on the ecological component of the study, prepared and published by the VancouverForest Region as part of its Technical Report series.

• A video, prepared by FERIC.

All deliverables will be finalized and published in the summer/fall of 2001.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

Figure 3. Overview of the 2000/2001 project schedule.

2000 2001TASKS Details Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar

21

MOF Contracts Secure funding for 2000/01Peer Review of Working PlanMOF Contracts for:

Project Co-ordinatorTraining/MTL

Ecological pre-/post-harvest field surveysAudit

Ecological study data analyses/report preparationFERIC field work

Final Site Selection Field review candidate sites/selectionMeeting with Division Staff

Detailed Working Plan Develop Detailed Working Plan

Ecological Pre-harvest Survey Field orientation/samplingAudit

Field data entry & summaryProgress Report on Pre-harvest Survey

HARVEST

FERIC Field Study Complete field monitoringProgress Updates

Ecological Post-harvest Survey SamplingAudit

Field data entry & summaryProgress Report on Post-harvest Survey

Salvage Assessment Field sampling

2001/2002 Site Selection Define objectivesContact SBFEP other major Licencees

Preliminary review of candidate sitesSite Selection Report

Data Analyses/Report Ecological StudyFERIC Study

Internal Review of Draft Reports VFR Technical ReportFERIC Advantage ReportVideo (unedited footage )

COMMUNICATION Progress Reports * *Weekly Reports * **** ** * **** *Quarterly Reports * * * *Team Meetings * * * * *

DELIVERABLES Reports * * ***

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

22

5 LITERATURE CITEDBC Ministry of Forests. 1999. Provincial Logging Residue and Waste Measurement Procedures Manual.

Victoria.

BC Ministry of Forests, and BC Ministry of Environment. Forest Practices Code of British Columbia,Biodiversity Guidebook, September 1995. Victoria, BC

BC Ministry of Forests. 1999. Provincial Cruising Manual. Victoria.

Blair, C. 1999. Log Transportation Cost Model. FERIC, Vancouver, BC. Field Note, Loading andTrucking, FN-67. 2 pp.

BC Short Term CWD Strategy 2000

Davis, Redlin, and Nemec. 2000. Pre- and post-harvest attributes of coarse woody debris in unmanagedlate- and mid-seral forests: Four case studies in the submontane variant of the Coastal WesternHemlock Wet Hypermaritime biogeoclimatic subzone. Vancourver Forest Region Forest ResearchTechnical Report NO. 6 (In preparation).

Dovetail Consulting Inc. 1999. Summary of MB First Year Critique Workshop. Campbell River, BC.

Forrester, P.D., 1996. Fibre Recovery from Log Sortyard Residues on Coastal British Columbia. WesternDivision, FERIC. Vancouver, BC. Technical Note TN-249. 16pp.

Harmon, M.E.; J.F. Franklin; F.J. Swanson; P. Sollins; S.V. Gregory; J.D. Lattin; N.H. Anderson; S.P.Cline; N.G. Aumen; J.R. Sedell; G.W. Lienkaemper; K. Cromack Jr.; and K.W. Cummins. 1986.“Ecology of Coarse Woody Debris in Temperate Ecosystems” in Adv. In Ecol. Res. 15: 133-302.

Hopwood, D. 1991. Principles and Practices of New Forestry—A Guide for British Columbians.BCMOF. Victoria, BC. Land Management Report 71. 95 pp.

Kozak, A. 1988. A variable-exponent taper equation. Can.J.For.Res. 18: 1363-1368.

Maser, C. and J. Trappe. 1984. “The Fallen Tree—A Source of Diversity”, pp. 335-339 in New Forestsfor a Changing World, Proc. Soc. of Amer. For. Natl. Conf., Oct. 1983. Portland, Oregon.

Maser, C.; J. Trappe; and C.Y. Li. 1984. “Large Woody Debris and Long-Term Forest Productivity”, inProceedings, Pacific Northwest Bioenergy Systems: Policies and Applications. US Dept. of En-ergy and Pacific Northwest & Alaska Bioenergy Program. Portland, Oregon. 6 pp.

Oakley, P. and N.G. Marshall. 1989. Optimal Sizing of Off-Highway Logging Trucks. Western Division,FERIC. Vancouver, BC. Technical Report TR-96. 20pp.

VRI. 1999. Vegetation Resources Inventory Ground Sampling Procedures Manual, B.C. Ministry of For-ests, Resources Inventory Branch, Victoria, B.C.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

23

Appendix I. Overview of Proposed Second Project (Draft)

IntroductionThe BCMOF utilization policy of the day has a direct bearing on the volume and attributes of CWD leftafter harvesting.

In 1989, zero-waste utilization standards were adopted which permitted the retention of an unlimitedvolume of Y grade wood (avoidable optional) without monetary billing. However, all avoidable X gradeor better wood (i.e., logs, high stumps, bucking waste, and breakage) was billed.

In January 1999, the zero-waste utilization standards were amended to reflect depressed market condi-tions and increased harvesting costs associated with the Forest Practices Code. Under the interim bench-mark policy, 10 and 35 m3/ha of X grade or better avoidable wood (i.e., logs, high stumps, buckingwaste, and breakage) can be left on site, in second- and old-growth stands respectively, without mone-tary penalties. This is in addition to the previous unlimited volume of avoidable optional Y grade wood.Under both policies unavoidable wood is not billed, although the combined avoidable and unavoidablewaste volumes are charged to the cut control. Avoidable wood waste volumes exceeding 15 and 35 m3/ha(sawlogs of X grade or better) for second- and old-growth stands respectively may need to be re-loggedat the discretion of the District Manager.

Under the interim benchmark policy there are five main sources of CWD that are left in the dispersedstratum17 at the time of harvest:

1. Avoidable wood18 (logs, high stumps, bucking waste19 and breakage): X grade and better

2. avoidable optional 20wood: Y grade

3. unavoidable wood21 (logs, high stumps, and bucking waste and breakage): Y grade and better

4. firmwood reject: Z grade22 log

5. pre-harvest non-merchantable CWD (excluding firmwood reject logs and better grade wood).

Of these, only the avoidable wood is billable, excluding the above-mentioned exemption of 10-35 m3/ha.(This exception wood is generally restricted to X or U grade of small diameter.) The Y (avoidable op-tional and unavoidable) and firmwood reject logs (Z grade) and the pre-harvest non-merchantable CWDthus represent the bulk of the potential wood that can be left in the setting without monetary billing. In-creasing CWD retention in the dispersed stratum therefore depends on maximizing the retention of theselow-value log grades (Davis, Redlin, and Nemec 2000).

As outlined in the preceding Project Plan, the first project will evaluate the economic and ecologicalbenefits of MTL in selected old-growth forests in the wet and moist subzone variants (NDT1) of theVancouver Forest Region. It is expected that these types of forests will provide the greatest opportunityto leave low-value wood, i.e., grades Y and Z, due to advanced stand age, i.e., >200 years. Because oftheir age, these forests tend to have high total dead wood volumes and decadence, which translates intolarge-sized, low-value wood. Whether MTL will be cost effective in late-seral forests in the driersubzones (e.g., NDT2) or second-growth stands (whether harvested using cable or ground-based opera-tions) is less clear. It is anticipated that opportunities to retain low-value wood i.e., grades Y and Z, at the

17 Dispersed stratum refers to the cutblock excluding reserves and roadside and pile strata.18 Avoidable residue or waste volumes left on the ground that: a) could have been removed safely, b) were not physically obstructed, and c) werenot inaccessible.19 Bucking waste is defined as any piece less than 3 m in length that has been cut at the large end, or at both ends. It has been cut through im-proper or careless bucking practices; Breakage is defined as any piece meeting the minimum diameter of the cutting authority that is shorter than3 m in length and broken at the large end or at both ends. Normal breakage is not usually recorded.20 Optional wood: Y grade wood that is not billed, but which is charged against the cut control. This wood can be left on site depending on mar-ket conditions.21 Unavoidable residue or waste: that component of the residue or waste that is physically obstructed or cannot be removed for safety or envi-ronmental reasons.22 Z grade logs are not typically recorded in residue and waste surveys, although they are recognizable and defined in the Provincial LoggingResidue and Waste Measurement Procedures Manual (refer to Appendix II this report).

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

24

time of harvest will be less due to the younger stand ages. Because these forest types are typicallyyounger (i.e., ≅ 70-200 years) the total dead wood volumes will be lower and the timber less decadentcompared to the NDT1 forests. This will translate into lower volumes of Y and Z grade logs in thestanding/fallen timber, and therefore potentially less volume left in the dispersed stratum to meet CWDobjectives. For this reason a second project will be initiated in 2001 to:

1. Assess where additional MTL trials should be undertaken and to identify potential subzone vari-ant/age class groupings where harvesting residue will likely be low even with MTL.

2. Provide pre-/post-harvest coarse wood (live and dead) data to evaluate the need for CWD guidelinesand to identify potential low-cost sources of CWD throughout the rotation.

2.0 MethodsObjective 1Timber cruise data from major Licensees that include net factor call grades will be compiled for totaltree (live and dead) and grade volumes (by diameter and length classes). Typically this data includes:Live, Dead Potential (standing/fallen) and Dead Useless (standing), but will not include Dead UselessFallen. Summary statistics—mean, SE, CV, Min, Max—will be calculated on a subzone variant, ageclass (old, mature,young), timber type, site series or moisture grouping (if available), basis by tree classand grade. MTL trials will be recommended only where there is substantial volume of Y and Z gradelogs in the standing and fallen timber. This approach will identify potential problem areas where alter-natives other than MTL are required.

Objective 2Sites that will be harvested between 2001and 2003 will be identified and classified according to Table I-1 with the assistance of Licensees, and then field reviewed for homogeneity (e.g., site series, timbertype). As shown in Table I-1 ecosystems have been broken down into three broad subzone-variantclasses, which are subdivided into 1 or 2 timber type groups, and three age classes. Circum mesic siteswill be targeted, however it is anticipated that each block will include a small wetter or drier component.The intent is to identify four blocks within each group. All blocks will be summer or fall harvested. Pre-harvest measures of live and dead standing and fallen stems, CWD, and stump attributes (as per Appen-dices III and IV) will be collected on all blocks; post-harvest measurements would be collected on one totwo blocks per grouping depending on funding availability. Blocks selected for the MTL trials will con-tribute to this matrix. This will be undertaken in conjunction with a compilation of total dead wood at-tributes based on local research and operational e.g., VRI data.

The information compiled to meet objective 2, combined with the other data collected through the MTLtrials and Objective 1, will provide preliminary data to discuss opportunities for managing CWD and toidentify additional data needs.

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

25

Table I-1 Sampling matrix (number of blocks to be sampled in each class) for second proj-ect.

Timber TypeLate-seral(no. sites)

Mature secondgrowth

(no. sites)

Young secondgrowth (pre-harvest only)

(no. sites)

Wet Subzone Variant (e.g., CWHvm1a) b 2 6 6 6

Moist Subzone Variant (e.g., CWH mm1a) 1 3 3 3

Dry Subzone Variant (e.g., CWH xma) 1 3 3 3a overlap with MTL trials.b zonal by subzone or site series by absolute SMR

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

26

Appendix II. Overview of Utilization Standards

Table II-1. Utilization policies applicable to Coastal BC since the late 1980s.Date Policy General rules1989 Zero Waste Licensees can leave unlimited amounts of grade Y and Z grade material

(all species). This wood is not billed; Y grade material is charged to thecut control. Licensees billed and charged for all logsa and bucking wasteleft on site of X grade or better.b

1/99 - present Benchmark Licensees can leave unlimited amounts of grade Y (all species). This mate-rial is not billed but is charged to the cut control.Additionally licensees can leave up to 35 m3/ha for old growth (or 10 m3/hafor second growth) of all grades (all species). This material is not billed butis charged to the cut control.

a Logs are ≥3 m in length with merchantable diameter limits.b Grade 5 is measured, but not billed or charged. Grade 5 is not auditable.

Table II-2. Residue and waste, merchantable size limits.Late seral Second growth

Residue and waste Diameter 15 cm (8R) @ >0.3 m from high side 10 cm (5R) @ >0.3 m from high side

Residue and waste Length ≥3 m for logs

≥0.1m for bucking waste

≥3 m for logs

≥0.1m for bucking waste

Table III-3 Utilization policies: minimum billable volumes.Policy Stand Age Zero Waste as of Benchmark as of 1/99

Billed WoodVolume

Old growth Dispersed: 0 m3/ha (avoidable stumps,bucking waste, logs)

Dispersed: 35 m3/ha (avoidable stumps, buckingwaste, logs)

Second growth Dispersed: 0 m3/ha (avoidable stumps,bucking waste, logs)

Dispersed: 10 m3/ha (avoidable stumps, buckingwaste, logs)

Relog Old growth Dispersed: 20 m3/ha (X grade andbetter logs)Accumulations: 100 m3 (X grade andbetter logs)

Dispersed: 35 m3/ha (X grade and better logs)

Accumulations: 100 m3 (X grade and better logs)

Second growth Dispersed: 10 m3/ha (X grade andbetter logs)Accumulations: 50 m3 (X grade andbetter logs)

Dispersed: 15 m3/ha (X grade and better logs)

Accumulations: 50 m3 (X grade and better logs)

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

27

Table II-4. Definitions of Coastal Y and Z grades.Grade Definition (as per Provincial Logging Residue and Waste Measurement Procedures Manual,

BCMOF 1994)Z – Firmwood reject A log where:

• heart rot or hole runs the whole length of the log being scaled, and the residual collar of thefirmwood constitutes <50% of the gross scaled volume of the log, or,

• there is sap rot, charred wood, or catface, and the residual firmwood is <10 cm (5R) indiameter at the butt end; or,

• slabs or parts of slabs are less than 10 cm (5R) in thickness; or,

• there is rot and the net length estimated by the scaler is <1.2 m; and,

• the net length includes the part of the log that is < 10 cm (5R) in diameter.

Y – Live Y Logs and slabs cut from trees that were live or recently dead, and that are lower in grade thansawlog but better than firmwood reject.

Y – Dead/Dry Y(Grade 5)

Logs and slabs graded as lumber reject and cut from trees that were dead and dry when har-vested.To be classified as dead/dry the log must have one or more of the following characteristics:

• deteriorated cambium

• loose or shedding bark

• sap rot (encircling log end)

• wood borers

• blue stain (encircling log end)

• deep checks (not weather checks)

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

28

Appendix III. Power estimates based on Data from the CWHwh1E.G. For a sample size of n=20 there is a 66.9% chance that a 20% difference between means will be detected for pre-harvest total volume.

Power (%) = Probability difference betweenmeans is detected with t-test (alpha = 0.1)

Difference between means (% of mean)Variable Mean Std. err. No. plots 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 75 100Pre-harvest 1596 123 5 11.0 14.0 18.9 25.5 33.5 42.5 61.5 78.0 97.5 99.9Total (m3/ha) 6 11.2 14.9 20.9 29.0 38.6 49.1 69.7 85.4 99.2 100.0

7 11.5 15.9 23.0 32.4 43.5 55.1 76.3 90.4 99.7 100.08 11.7 16.8 25.0 35.8 48.0 60.5 81.7 93.8 99.9 100.09 12.0 17.8 27.0 39.0 52.3 65.4 85.9 96.0 100.0 100.0

10 12.2 18.7 29.0 42.1 56.3 69.7 89.2 97.5 100.0 100.011 12.4 19.6 30.9 45.0 60.0 73.6 91.8 98.4 100.0 100.012 12.7 20.5 32.8 47.9 63.4 77.0 93.8 99.0 100.0 100.013 12.9 21.4 34.7 50.6 66.6 80.1 95.3 99.4 100.0 100.014 13.1 22.3 36.5 53.3 69.6 82.7 96.5 99.6 100.0 100.015 13.4 23.2 38.3 55.8 72.3 85.1 97.3 99.8 100.0 100.016 13.6 24.1 40.0 58.2 74.9 87.1 98.0 99.9 100.0 100.017 13.9 25.0 41.8 60.6 77.2 88.9 98.5 99.9 100.0 100.018 14.1 25.9 43.4 62.8 79.3 90.5 98.9 99.9 100.0 100.019 14.3 26.8 45.1 64.9 81.3 91.8 99.2 100.0 100.0 100.020 14.6 27.6 46.7 66.9 83.1 93.0 99.4 100.0 100.0 100.021 14.8 28.5 48.3 68.8 84.7 94.0 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.022 15.0 29.4 49.9 70.6 86.2 94.9 99.7 100.0 100.0 100.023 15.3 30.2 51.4 72.3 87.5 95.6 99.8 100.0 100.0 100.024 15.5 31.1 52.8 74.0 88.8 96.3 99.8 100.0 100.0 100.025 15.7 31.9 54.3 75.5 89.9 96.8 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0

Pre-harvest 884 112 5 10.4 11.5 13.3 15.9 19.1 23.0 32.3 43.3 71.3 90.1Dead (m3/ha) 6 10.5 11.8 14.1 17.3 21.2 26.0 37.3 50.0 79.3 94.9

7 10.5 12.2 14.9 18.7 23.4 28.9 41.9 56.1 85.3 97.48 10.6 12.5 15.7 20.0 25.4 31.8 46.3 61.5 89.6 98.79 10.7 12.9 16.5 21.4 27.5 34.5 50.5 66.4 92.7 99.4

10 10.8 13.2 17.3 22.7 29.5 37.3 54.4 70.8 95.0 99.711 10.9 13.6 18.0 24.0 31.4 39.9 58.0 74.6 96.5 99.812 11.0 13.9 18.8 25.4 33.4 42.4 61.4 78.0 97.6 99.913 11.1 14.3 19.6 26.7 35.3 44.9 64.6 81.0 98.4 100.014 11.2 14.6 20.3 28.0 37.1 47.3 67.6 83.6 98.9 100.015 11.3 15.0 21.1 29.2 39.0 49.6 70.3 85.9 99.3 100.016 11.3 15.3 21.8 30.5 40.8 51.8 72.9 87.9 99.5 100.017 11.4 15.7 22.6 31.8 42.5 54.0 75.2 89.7 99.7 100.018 11.5 16.0 23.3 33.0 44.2 56.1 77.4 91.2 99.8 100.019 11.6 16.4 24.1 34.2 45.9 58.1 79.4 92.4 99.9 100.020 11.7 16.7 24.8 35.4 47.6 60.0 81.2 93.6 99.9 100.021 11.8 17.1 25.6 36.6 49.2 61.9 82.9 94.5 99.9 100.022 11.9 17.4 26.3 37.8 50.7 63.7 84.5 95.3 100.0 100.023 12.0 17.7 27.0 39.0 52.3 65.4 85.9 96.1 100.0 100.024 12.0 18.1 27.7 40.1 53.8 67.1 87.2 96.7 100.0 100.025 12.1 18.4 28.5 41.2 55.2 68.7 88.4 97.2 100.0 100.0

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

29

Power (%) = Probability difference betweenmeans is detected with t-test (alpha = 0.1)

Difference between means (% of mean)Variable Mean Std. err. No. plots 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 75 100

Pre-harvest 482 72 5 10.3 11.1 12.4 14.2 16.6 19.4 26.4 34.9 59.0 80.2dead timber 6 10.3 11.3 13.0 15.3 18.2 21.6 30.2 40.3 67.2 87.2

(m3/ha) 7 10.4 11.6 13.5 16.3 19.7 23.8 33.8 45.3 73.9 91.98 10.5 11.8 14.1 17.3 21.2 26.0 37.3 50.0 79.4 94.99 10.5 12.1 14.7 18.2 22.7 28.1 40.6 54.4 83.8 96.9

10 10.6 12.3 15.2 19.2 24.2 30.1 43.8 58.5 87.3 98.111 10.7 12.6 15.8 20.2 25.7 32.2 46.9 62.3 90.1 98.812 10.7 12.8 16.4 21.2 27.2 34.2 49.9 65.8 92.4 99.313 10.8 13.1 16.9 22.1 28.6 36.1 52.7 69.0 94.1 99.614 10.8 13.3 17.5 23.1 30.1 38.0 55.5 72.0 95.5 99.715 10.9 13.6 18.0 24.1 31.5 39.9 58.1 74.7 96.5 99.916 11.0 13.9 18.6 25.0 32.9 41.7 60.5 77.2 97.4 99.917 11.0 14.1 19.1 25.9 34.2 43.5 62.9 79.4 98.0 99.918 11.1 14.4 19.7 26.9 35.6 45.3 65.1 81.5 98.5 100.019 11.2 14.6 20.2 27.8 36.9 47.0 67.2 83.4 98.9 100.020 11.2 14.9 20.8 28.7 38.2 48.7 69.2 85.1 99.1 100.021 11.3 15.1 21.3 29.6 39.5 50.3 71.1 86.6 99.3 100.022 11.3 15.3 21.9 30.5 40.8 51.9 72.9 88.0 99.5 100.023 11.4 15.6 22.4 31.4 42.1 53.5 74.7 89.3 99.6 100.024 11.5 15.8 22.9 32.3 43.3 55.0 76.3 90.4 99.7 100.025 11.5 16.1 23.5 33.2 44.6 56.5 77.8 91.4 99.8 100.0

Pre-harvest 336 56 5 10.2 10.9 11.9 13.4 15.3 17.6 23.3 30.3 51.4 72.3other CWD 6 10.3 11.1 12.4 14.2 16.6 19.4 26.4 34.9 59.1 80.3

(m3/ha) 7 10.3 11.3 12.8 15.0 17.8 21.2 29.4 39.2 65.7 86.18 10.4 11.5 13.3 15.8 19.1 22.9 32.3 43.3 71.4 90.39 10.4 11.7 13.8 16.6 20.3 24.7 35.2 47.2 76.2 93.3

10 10.5 11.9 14.2 17.4 21.5 26.4 37.9 50.9 80.3 95.411 10.5 12.1 14.7 18.2 22.7 28.1 40.6 54.4 83.8 96.912 10.6 12.3 15.1 19.0 23.9 29.7 43.2 57.7 86.7 97.913 10.6 12.5 15.6 19.8 25.1 31.3 45.7 60.8 89.1 98.614 10.7 12.7 16.0 20.6 26.3 33.0 48.1 63.7 91.1 99.015 10.7 12.9 16.5 21.4 27.5 34.5 50.5 66.5 92.8 99.416 10.8 13.1 16.9 22.1 28.6 36.1 52.8 69.0 94.1 99.617 10.8 13.3 17.4 22.9 29.8 37.7 54.9 71.4 95.3 99.718 10.9 13.5 17.8 23.7 30.9 39.2 57.1 73.6 96.2 99.819 10.9 13.7 18.3 24.4 32.0 40.7 59.1 75.7 96.9 99.920 11.0 13.9 18.7 25.2 33.1 42.1 61.0 77.7 97.5 99.921 11.0 14.1 19.1 26.0 34.2 43.6 62.9 79.5 98.0 99.922 11.1 14.3 19.6 26.7 35.3 45.0 64.7 81.1 98.4 100.023 11.1 14.5 20.0 27.5 36.4 46.4 66.4 82.7 98.7 100.024 11.2 14.7 20.5 28.2 37.5 47.7 68.1 84.1 99.0 100.025 11.2 14.9 20.9 28.9 38.5 49.1 69.7 85.4 99.2 100.0

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

30

Power (%) = Probability difference betweenmeans is detected with t-test (alpha = 0.1)

Difference between means (% of mean)Variable Mean Std. err. No. plots 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 75 100

Pre-harvest 388 66 5 10.2 10.8 11.8 13.3 15.1 17.3 22.8 29.6 50.1 70.7Z (m3/ha) 6 10.3 11.0 12.3 14.1 16.3 19.0 25.8 34.0 57.6 78.8

7 10.3 11.2 12.7 14.8 17.5 20.7 28.7 38.1 64.2 84.88 10.4 11.4 13.2 15.6 18.7 22.4 31.5 42.1 69.9 89.29 10.4 11.6 13.6 16.4 19.9 24.1 34.2 46.0 74.7 92.4

10 10.5 11.8 14.0 17.2 21.1 25.7 36.9 49.6 78.9 94.711 10.5 12.0 14.5 17.9 22.2 27.4 39.5 53.0 82.5 96.312 10.6 12.2 14.9 18.7 23.4 29.0 42.0 56.2 85.5 97.513 10.6 12.4 15.4 19.4 24.5 30.5 44.5 59.3 88.0 98.314 10.6 12.6 15.8 20.2 25.7 32.1 46.9 62.2 90.1 98.815 10.7 12.8 16.2 20.9 26.8 33.6 49.2 64.9 91.9 99.216 10.7 13.0 16.6 21.7 27.9 35.2 51.4 67.5 93.3 99.517 10.8 13.2 17.1 22.4 29.0 36.7 53.5 69.9 94.6 99.618 10.8 13.4 17.5 23.2 30.1 38.1 55.6 72.1 95.6 99.819 10.9 13.6 17.9 23.9 31.2 39.6 57.6 74.2 96.4 99.820 10.9 13.7 18.4 24.6 32.3 41.0 59.5 76.2 97.1 99.921 11.0 13.9 18.8 25.3 33.4 42.4 61.4 78.0 97.6 99.922 11.0 14.1 19.2 26.1 34.4 43.8 63.2 79.7 98.1 100.023 11.1 14.3 19.6 26.8 35.5 45.1 64.9 81.3 98.4 100.024 11.1 14.5 20.0 27.5 36.5 46.5 66.6 82.8 98.7 100.025 11.2 14.7 20.5 28.2 37.5 47.8 68.1 84.1 99.0 100.0

Pre-harvest 381 67 5 10.2 10.8 11.7 13.1 14.8 16.8 22.0 28.4 48.0 68.3CWD 6 10.2 11.0 12.1 13.8 15.9 18.5 24.8 32.5 55.3 76.5

(m3/ha) 7 10.3 11.1 12.6 14.5 17.0 20.1 27.5 36.5 61.7 82.78 10.3 11.3 13.0 15.3 18.2 21.7 30.2 40.3 67.3 87.49 10.4 11.5 13.4 16.0 19.3 23.2 32.8 44.0 72.3 90.9

10 10.4 11.7 13.8 16.7 20.4 24.8 35.3 47.5 76.5 93.511 10.5 11.9 14.2 17.4 21.5 26.3 37.8 50.8 80.2 95.312 10.5 12.1 14.6 18.1 22.6 27.8 40.2 53.9 83.4 96.713 10.6 12.2 15.0 18.8 23.6 29.3 42.6 56.9 86.0 97.714 10.6 12.4 15.4 19.5 24.7 30.8 44.8 59.8 88.3 98.415 10.7 12.6 15.8 20.2 25.8 32.2 47.1 62.4 90.3 98.916 10.7 12.8 16.2 20.9 26.8 33.7 49.2 65.0 91.9 99.217 10.7 13.0 16.6 21.6 27.9 35.1 51.3 67.4 93.3 99.518 10.8 13.1 17.0 22.3 28.9 36.5 53.3 69.6 94.4 99.619 10.8 13.3 17.4 23.0 29.9 37.9 55.2 71.7 95.4 99.720 10.9 13.5 17.8 23.7 31.0 39.2 57.1 73.7 96.2 99.821 10.9 13.7 18.2 24.4 32.0 40.6 59.0 75.6 96.9 99.922 11.0 13.9 18.6 25.1 33.0 41.9 60.7 77.4 97.4 99.923 11.0 14.1 19.0 25.8 34.0 43.2 62.4 79.0 97.9 99.924 11.1 14.2 19.4 26.4 34.9 44.5 64.1 80.5 98.3 100.025 11.1 14.4 19.8 27.1 35.9 45.7 65.6 82.0 98.6 100.0

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

31

Power (%) = Probability difference betweenmeans is detected with t-test (alpha = 0.1)

Difference between means (% of mean)Variable Mean Std. err. No. plots 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 75 100

Pre-harvest 1189 108 5 10.7 12.9 16.4 21.3 27.3 34.3 50.0 65.8 92.3 99.3CWD (#/ha) 6 10.9 13.6 17.9 23.9 31.2 39.6 57.5 74.1 96.3 99.8

7 11.1 14.2 19.5 26.5 35.0 44.5 64.1 80.5 98.2 100.08 11.2 14.9 20.9 29.0 38.6 49.2 69.8 85.5 99.2 100.09 11.4 15.6 22.4 31.5 42.1 53.5 74.6 89.2 99.6 100.0

10 11.6 16.3 23.9 33.9 45.5 57.5 78.8 92.1 99.8 100.011 11.8 17.0 25.3 36.2 48.7 61.3 82.4 94.2 99.9 100.012 11.9 17.6 26.7 38.5 51.7 64.8 85.4 95.8 100.0 100.013 12.1 18.3 28.2 40.8 54.6 68.0 87.9 97.0 100.0 100.014 12.3 19.0 29.6 43.0 57.4 71.0 90.0 97.8 100.0 100.015 12.4 19.6 30.9 45.1 60.0 73.7 91.8 98.4 100.0 100.016 12.6 20.3 32.3 47.1 62.5 76.2 93.3 98.9 100.0 100.017 12.8 20.9 33.6 49.2 64.9 78.5 94.5 99.2 100.0 100.018 12.9 21.6 35.0 51.1 67.2 80.6 95.5 99.4 100.0 100.019 13.1 22.2 36.3 53.0 69.3 82.5 96.3 99.6 100.0 100.020 13.3 22.9 37.6 54.8 71.3 84.2 97.0 99.7 100.0 100.021 13.5 23.5 38.9 56.6 73.2 85.8 97.6 99.8 100.0 100.022 13.6 24.2 40.1 58.3 75.0 87.2 98.1 99.9 100.0 100.023 13.8 24.8 41.4 60.0 76.7 88.5 98.4 99.9 100.0 100.024 14.0 25.4 42.6 61.6 78.2 89.7 98.7 99.9 100.0 100.025 14.1 26.1 43.8 63.2 79.7 90.8 99.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Dispersed 273 37 5 10.3 11.3 12.9 15.1 18.0 21.4 29.7 39.6 66.2 86.4CWD (m3/ha) 6 10.4 11.6 13.6 16.4 19.9 24.0 34.1 45.8 74.5 92.2

7 10.5 11.9 14.3 17.6 21.7 26.6 38.4 51.5 80.9 95.68 10.6 12.2 15.0 18.8 23.6 29.2 42.4 56.7 85.8 97.69 10.6 12.5 15.7 20.0 25.4 31.7 46.2 61.4 89.5 98.7

10 10.7 12.8 16.3 21.2 27.1 34.1 49.8 65.7 92.3 99.311 10.8 13.1 17.0 22.3 28.9 36.5 53.3 69.6 94.4 99.612 10.9 13.5 17.7 23.5 30.6 38.8 56.5 73.1 95.9 99.813 10.9 13.8 18.4 24.7 32.3 41.1 59.6 76.3 97.1 99.914 11.0 14.1 19.0 25.8 34.0 43.3 62.5 79.1 97.9 99.915 11.1 14.4 19.7 26.9 35.7 45.4 65.2 81.6 98.5 100.016 11.2 14.7 20.4 28.1 37.3 47.5 67.8 83.8 98.9 100.017 11.3 15.0 21.0 29.2 38.9 49.5 70.2 85.8 99.2 100.018 11.3 15.3 21.7 30.3 40.5 51.5 72.4 87.6 99.5 100.019 11.4 15.6 22.4 31.4 42.0 53.4 74.5 89.2 99.6 100.020 11.5 15.9 23.0 32.5 43.5 55.2 76.5 90.5 99.7 100.021 11.6 16.2 23.7 33.5 45.0 57.0 78.3 91.8 99.8 100.022 11.6 16.5 24.3 34.6 46.5 58.7 80.0 92.8 99.9 100.023 11.7 16.8 25.0 35.6 47.9 60.4 81.6 93.8 99.9 100.024 11.8 17.1 25.6 36.7 49.3 62.0 83.0 94.6 99.9 100.025 11.9 17.4 26.2 37.7 50.7 63.6 84.4 95.3 100.0 100.0

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

32

Power (%) = Probability difference betweenmeans is detected with t-test (alpha = 0.1)

Difference between means (% of mean)Variable Mean Std. err. No. plots 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 75 100

Dispersed 1821 179 5 10.6 12.5 15.5 19.7 24.9 31.0 45.1 60.0 88.3 98.3CWD (#/ha) 6 10.8 13.0 16.8 21.9 28.3 35.7 52.0 68.2 93.6 99.5

7 10.9 13.6 18.1 24.2 31.6 40.1 58.3 74.9 96.6 99.98 11.1 14.2 19.4 26.4 34.8 44.3 63.8 80.3 98.2 100.09 11.2 14.8 20.7 28.5 37.9 48.3 68.7 84.6 99.1 100.0

10 11.4 15.4 21.9 30.6 40.9 52.1 73.1 88.1 99.5 100.011 11.5 16.0 23.2 32.7 43.8 55.6 76.9 90.8 99.8 100.012 11.6 16.5 24.4 34.7 46.6 58.9 80.2 92.9 99.9 100.013 11.8 17.1 25.6 36.7 49.3 62.1 83.1 94.6 99.9 100.014 11.9 17.7 26.8 38.7 51.9 65.0 85.6 95.9 100.0 100.015 12.1 18.2 28.0 40.6 54.4 67.8 87.7 96.9 100.0 100.016 12.2 18.8 29.2 42.5 56.8 70.3 89.6 97.6 100.0 100.017 12.4 19.4 30.4 44.3 59.1 72.7 91.2 98.2 100.0 100.018 12.5 19.9 31.6 46.1 61.3 74.9 92.6 98.7 100.0 100.019 12.7 20.5 32.7 47.8 63.4 77.0 93.7 99.0 100.0 100.020 12.8 21.0 33.9 49.5 65.4 78.9 94.7 99.3 100.0 100.021 13.0 21.6 35.0 51.2 67.3 80.7 95.6 99.4 100.0 100.022 13.1 22.2 36.1 52.8 69.1 82.3 96.3 99.6 100.0 100.023 13.2 22.7 37.3 54.4 70.8 83.8 96.9 99.7 100.0 100.024 13.4 23.3 38.3 55.9 72.5 85.2 97.4 99.8 100.0 100.025 13.5 23.8 39.4 57.4 74.0 86.5 97.8 99.8 100.0 100.0

Roadside 371 88 5 10.1 10.4 11.0 11.7 12.6 13.8 16.7 20.3 32.4 47.2CWD (m3/ha) 6 10.1 10.5 11.2 12.1 13.3 14.7 18.3 22.8 37.3 54.5

7 10.2 10.6 11.4 12.5 13.9 15.6 19.8 25.2 42.0 60.98 10.2 10.7 11.6 12.9 14.5 16.5 21.4 27.5 46.4 66.59 10.2 10.8 11.9 13.3 15.1 17.4 22.9 29.8 50.6 71.4

10 10.2 10.9 12.1 13.7 15.8 18.3 24.4 32.0 54.5 75.711 10.3 11.0 12.3 14.1 16.4 19.1 25.9 34.2 58.1 79.412 10.3 11.1 12.5 14.5 17.0 20.0 27.4 36.4 61.5 82.613 10.3 11.2 12.8 14.9 17.6 20.9 28.9 38.5 64.7 85.314 10.3 11.3 13.0 15.3 18.2 21.7 30.3 40.5 67.7 87.715 10.4 11.4 13.2 15.7 18.8 22.6 31.8 42.5 70.4 89.716 10.4 11.5 13.4 16.1 19.4 23.4 33.2 44.5 73.0 91.417 10.4 11.6 13.7 16.5 20.0 24.3 34.6 46.4 75.3 92.818 10.4 11.7 13.9 16.9 20.6 25.1 35.9 48.3 77.5 94.019 10.5 11.8 14.1 17.3 21.2 26.0 37.3 50.1 79.5 95.020 10.5 11.9 14.3 17.7 21.8 26.8 38.6 51.9 81.3 95.921 10.5 12.0 14.6 18.0 22.4 27.6 39.9 53.6 83.0 96.622 10.5 12.1 14.8 18.4 23.0 28.5 41.2 55.2 84.6 97.223 10.6 12.2 15.0 18.8 23.6 29.3 42.5 56.9 86.0 97.724 10.6 12.3 15.2 19.2 24.2 30.1 43.8 58.4 87.3 98.125 10.6 12.4 15.4 19.6 24.8 30.9 45.0 60.0 88.5 98.4

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

33

Power (%) = Probability difference betweenmeans is detected with t-test (alpha = 0.1)

Difference between means (% of mean)Variable Mean Std. err. No. plots 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 75 100Roadside 2323 236 5 10.6 12.3 15.1 19.1 24.0 29.7 43.2 57.6 86.5 97.8CWD (#/ha) 6 10.7 12.9 16.4 21.2 27.2 34.2 49.9 65.7 92.2 99.3

7 10.9 13.4 17.6 23.3 30.3 38.4 55.9 72.4 95.6 99.88 11.0 13.9 18.8 25.4 33.4 42.4 61.4 78.0 97.6 99.99 11.1 14.5 20.0 27.4 36.3 46.2 66.3 82.5 98.7 100.0

10 11.3 15.0 21.2 29.4 39.2 49.9 70.6 86.2 99.3 100.011 11.4 15.6 22.3 31.4 42.0 53.3 74.5 89.1 99.6 100.012 11.5 16.1 23.5 33.3 44.6 56.6 77.9 91.5 99.8 100.013 11.7 16.6 24.7 35.2 47.2 59.7 80.9 93.3 99.9 100.014 11.8 17.2 25.8 37.0 49.7 62.5 83.5 94.8 99.9 100.015 12.0 17.7 27.0 38.9 52.2 65.3 85.8 96.0 100.0 100.016 12.1 18.3 28.1 40.6 54.5 67.8 87.8 96.9 100.0 100.017 12.2 18.8 29.2 42.4 56.7 70.2 89.5 97.6 100.0 100.018 12.4 19.3 30.3 44.1 58.9 72.5 91.0 98.2 100.0 100.019 12.5 19.8 31.4 45.8 60.9 74.6 92.3 98.6 100.0 100.020 12.6 20.4 32.5 47.4 62.9 76.5 93.5 98.9 100.0 100.021 12.8 20.9 33.6 49.0 64.8 78.3 94.4 99.2 100.0 100.022 12.9 21.4 34.6 50.6 66.6 80.0 95.3 99.4 100.0 100.023 13.0 21.9 35.7 52.1 68.3 81.6 96.0 99.5 100.0 100.024 13.2 22.4 36.7 53.6 70.0 83.1 96.6 99.6 100.0 100.025 13.3 23.0 37.7 55.1 71.6 84.4 97.1 99.7 100.0 100.0

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

34

Appendix IV. Detailed list of cruise measurementsRefer to Vegetation Resources Inventory Ground Sampling Procedures Manual (VRI 1999).

PLOT A graphically positioned point of measure with reference to a systematic grid layoutNESTED PLOT SZE Defined as m2 area of plot radiusTREE# Corresponding number assigned to a treeSPECIES Tree speciesL/D Live or DeadS/F Standing or FallenDBH Diameter at breast height (1.3 m from high side of ground)M/E Measured or EstimatedHEIGHT Distance from base of tree (high side of ground) to topM/E Measured or EstimatedCRNCL Dominant, Co-dominant, intermediate, suppressedHT. to Live crown Distance from base of tree (high side of ground) to where live crown startsGrade1 Call gradingLength1 Net factoringSound1Grade2 Call gradingLength2 Net factoringSound2Grade3 Call gradingLength3 Net factoringSound3Grade4 Call gradingLength4 Net factoringSound4Grade5 Call gradingLength5 Net factoringSound5Grade6 Call gradingLength6 Net factoringSound6WLTCODEAPP See Descriptions of Stages of decomposition for TreesWLTCODECROW As aboveWLTCODEBARK As aboveWLTCODEWood As aboveWLU Wildlife useBrokenTop Dia Diameter where top is broken offEstimated Height EstimatedTC Tree Class (A,B,C,D,E) and TC 1-9LIC1 Pathological Indicators+/' Pathological IndicatorsFrom Pathological Indicators+/' Pathological IndicatorsTo Pathological IndicatorsFreq Pathological Indicators

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

35

Appendix V. Detailed list of CWD measurementsRefer to Provincial Logging Residue and Waste Measurement Procedures Manual (BCMOF 1994).(Modifications italicized)Piece Type CWD or ResidueIs Residue Yes (Y) or No (N)Residue Type See strata names belowHarvest Method See strata names belowWaste Level See strata names belowPlot Size Accumulation: 3.99 m radius; Nested Cutblock : 17.84, 11.28, 3.99 m radius

Plot Number Number assigned to plot based on systematic gridPiece Number Number assigned to specific piece (201… CWD & 01….Residue); if both record piece twiceBorderline Piece that falls inside & outside plot boundarySpecies i.e., (Fir: FI, Hemlock: HE, Balsam: BA, Cedar: CE, Cypress: CY, Yew: YE, Spruce: SP, Lodge Pole

Pine: LO, White Pine: WH, Alder: AL, Maple: MA, Cherry: CH….) use R&W specsKind Logs, Bucking Waste, Breakage, StumpsWaste Class Avoidable or Unavoidable (entire piece?)

Top (W) IB diameter measurement (1 Rad = 2 cm); width on decay codes 3,4,5; top and butt IB diameter will berecorded at 0.3 m for stumps

Top (H) IB height of log for decay codes 3,4,5;Top End Code Cut, broken, natural, buried, pencil buckedTop Estimated Estimated (E); Measured (M)Length Linear extent of log within plot (m)Butt (W) IB diameter measurement (Rads: 1 Rad = 2 cm); width on decay codes 3,4,5; butt for stumps @ 0.3 m;IBButt (H) IB height of log for decay codes 3,4,5;Butt End Code Cut, broken, natural, buried, pencil buckedButt Estimated Estimated (E); Measured (M)

Grade Log grades as defined in the Scaling Regulation (>U, U,X,Y (Live or Dead),Z (Old or New,5 for entirelog as per R&W; on separate lines below variable log lengths to MOF log standards for section of logwithin the plot – record top, butt, length, deductions and grade for each log

DeductionsTop (W) Diameter measurementTop (H) Height measurement if rot/defect is not circularButt (W) Diameter measurementButt (H) Height measurement if rot/defect is not circularLength Length (m) within plotDeduction As per R&W

Comment1 See list of commentsComment2 See list of commentsOutside Length Linear extent from end to end (m) measured on borderline pieces falling outside of plot boundaryOutside Diameter (W) Diameter measurement of borderline piece outside of plot boundaryOutside Diameter (H)Outside Diameter End Code Cut, broken, natural, buried, pencil buckedOutside Diameter Estimated E/M

L/D/O Live: from live stem; Dead: from dead stem either standing or fallen with root; Old: original CWDEco Code See following description – entire pieceBark Code See following description – entire pieceHardness Code See following description – entire piece?Orientation Position of piece as it lays on the ground (Butt to top)

CT# Cruise tree # corresponding with CWD

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

36

List of CommentsBN = Bunch Knots BK = Breakage BU = Buried CA = CandelabraCF = Cat Face CL = Culvert Logs CR = Crook DP = Dead PotentialDU = Dead Useless FC = Frost Crack FK = Fork FL = Fluted ButtGL = G/L Stump HN = Heavy Knots HP = Heli Pad HS = Hold StumpLB = Long Butt LN = Large Knots MB = Machine Breakage OB = ObstructedRE = Reconstructed SA = Sapling SB = Shake Bolt SH = ShatterSL = Slab TR = Whole Tree US = Unsafe WF = Windfall

Stratum Names: In Pre-harvest FSH (Represents Nested Cutblock Plot of 17.84 m radius) FSL (Represents Nested Cutblock Plot of 11.28 m radius)

FSJ (Represents Nested Cutblock Plot of 3.99 m radius)

In Post-harvest SGX (Represents Nested Dispersed Plot of 17.84 m radius) SGH (Represents Dispersed Plot of 11.28 m radius)

SGL (Represents Dispersed Plot of 3.99 m radius)RGX(Represents Roadside Accumulation Plot of 3.99 m radius)PGX (Represents Piled Accumulation Plot of 3.99 m radius)LGX(Represents Landing Accumulation Plot of 3.99 m radius)

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

37

Appendix VI. CWD Ecological Codes

Decomposition ClassesClass1 Live or very recently dead, bark and twigs <3 cm intactClass 2 Dead with minimal decay, bark loose, and no twigs <3 cm intact

Class 3 Rotting but still round, little bark and few branches intactSubclass 3a >Y gradeSubclass 3b Y grade >50% soundSubclass 3c Y<50% sound, Z grade

Class 4 Advanced decay, shape collapsing, limited to no bark or branches intactClass 5 Final decay stage before becoming soil

Bark RemainingThe percent of the bark remaining on each piece. Ignore missing bark from recent damage.

Class 0 <10% of the bark remaining attached or near the piece

Class 1 10-19% of the bark remaining attached or near the piece

Class 2 20-29% of the bark remaining attached or near the piece

Class 3 30-39% of the bark remaining attached or near the pieceEtc..

Class 9 90-100% of the bark remaining attached or near the piece

Decay HardnessDecay hardness describes the average hardness of the majority of the decayed portion for each piece. Thedeductions recorded will quantify the amount of decay and describe the type and approximate location ofthe decay. The hardness class will describe the stage that decay is in. There are seven classes, describedas follows:

Class 0 No decay in the piece, no deductions madeClass 1 Stain only, no deductions madeClass 2 Minimal decay, too small to measure, no deductions madeClass 3 Decay in incipient stage, wood still hard but punkey and little strength remaining, deductions and decay type

recordedClass 4 Decay in advanced stage, blocky or soft, can be compressed or crumbled by hand but with some effort, no

strength remainingClass 5 Decay in final stage before becoming soil, soft and easily compressed or crumbled by handClass 6 HoleClass 7 Soil, i.e., no longer recognizable as decayed wood

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

38

OrientationOrientation gives the approximate compass bearing of the center axis for each piece. This data is requiredfor pieces in main dispersed plots only; it is not required for pieces in accumulation plots.

North NNNortheast NE

East EE

Southeast SE

Vertical (stumps/trees) VEUnknown XX

South SS

Southwest SWWest WW

Northwest NW

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

Appendix VII. System for tracking tasks

Project Name:CWD Pilot StudyVANCOUVER FOREST REGION Work Package

39

MINISTRY OF FORESTS Status Report

PROJECT #: ETC = Expected To Complete REPORT NO: 1TITLE: A study to determin cost & productivity Implications o EAC = Expected At Complete REPORT DATE:PROJ. LEADER: REPORT PERIOD:PARTNERS: WEYERHAEUSER, FERIC, MOF,MELOP FINANCIAL DATA

BUDGET ACTUALS ETC EAC VAR

START DATE: 1-Apr-00 PDAYS 30.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.75FINISH DATE: 31-Mar-00 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

START DATE FINISH DATETASKS

PLANNED PROJECTED ACTUAL PLANNED PROJECTED ACTUAL

Working Plan Working Plan Review 1-Apr-00 1-May-00 MOF Contracts

Project Manager 1 1-Apr-00 10-Apr-00Project Manager 2+3 15-May-00 30-May-00

Traning/MTL 15-Apr-00 1-May-00 Ecological Pre-harvest Surveys 1-Apr-00 15-Apr-00

Ecological Post-harvest Surveys 15-May-00 15-Jun-00Field Audit 1-Apr-00 15-Apr-00

Data Analyses/Report Prep for Ecological Study 15-Jun-00 15-Jul-00 FERIC 1-Apr-00 15-Apr-00

Final Site Selection Field Review Candidate Sites 1-Apr-00 15-Apr-00 Contact Division re: Selection/Salvage Sale Deferral 5-Apr-00 15-Apr-00

Detailed Working Plan Meeting 5-Apr-00 15-Apr-00Final

Ecological Study Pre-harvest field oreientation 15-Apr-00 30-Apr-00Pre-harvest field sampling 20-Apr-00 15-Jun-00

Audit 20-Apr-00 15-Jun-00Field data entry & summary 15-May-00 30-Jun-00

Progress Report 15-Jun-00 10-Jul-00Days in April

Post-harvest field sampling 15-Aug-00 15-Oct-00Audit 15-Aug-00 15-Oct-00

Field data entry & summary 1-Sep-00 30-Oct-00Progress Report 15-Oct-00 30-Oct-00

Data analyses 1-Jul-00 30-Nov-00Comple draft report 1-Sep-00 15-Jan-00

Complete internal review 1-Jan-00 1-Feb-00Send draft for external review 1-Feb-00 1-Mar-00

Revise draft report 1-Mar-00 1-May-00Print report 1-Jun-00 1-Jul-00

MeetingsSalvage Assessment Field sampling

Progress reportFERIC Study Visit site while MTL taking place 15-Jun-00 1-Jul-00

Photograph 15-Jun-00 1-Sep-00Review yarding,trucking and scaling with company 15-Jun-00 15-Jul-00

Monitor yarding, loading, trucking and dryland sort yard activities 1-Jul-00 1-Sep-00Document all activities with 35mm slides and SVHS video 1-Jul-00 1-Sep-00

Data analyses 1-Aug-00 31-Dec-00Complete draft report 1-Sep-00 31-Dec-00

Complete internal FERIC review 1-Jan-01 30-Mar-01Send draft for external review 1-Mar-01 28-Apr-01

Revise draft report 1-May-01 1-Jun-01Print report 1-Jul-01 1-Sep-01

Edit first-draft video 1-Apr-01 1-Jun-01Final editing 1-Jul-01 1-Sep-01

Final video 1-Oct-01 1-Nov-01Site Selection 2001/2002

Define objectives 1-Jul-00 1-Aug-00Contact SBFEP & other Licencees 1-Jul-00 1-Aug-00

Preliminary review of candidate sites 1-Aug-00 1-Oct-00Site selection report 1-Oct-00 1-Nov-00

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

FINISH DATEMILESTONES PLANNED PROJECTED ACTUAL Comments

40

Contracts 15-Jul-00Completion of Pre-harvest measurements 15-Jun-00 Complettion of FERIC field work 30-Oct-00 Completion of Post-harvest study 15-Sep-00 Completion of Site Selection for 2001/2002 1-Nov-00

DELIVERABLES PLANNED PROJECTED ACTUAL CommentsProgress Reports- Pre-harvest 10-Jul-00Progress Reports- Post-harvest 30-Oct-00FERIC Progress Report 1-Oct-00Site Selection Report 1-Nov-00Draft FERIC study 31-Mar-01Draft Ecolgical study 31-Mar-01Draft Video 31-Mar-01

Advantage report 15-Aug-01VFR Technical report 15-Aug-01Video 1-Nov-01

REVIEWS PLANNED PROJECTED ACTUAL CommentsFinal draft FERIC study 1-Jun-01Final draft Ecolgical study 1-Jun-01Draft Video 1-Jun-01

WORK ACCOMPLISHED THIS PERIOD

WORK PLANNED NEXT PERIOD

PROBLEMS THIS PERIOD/SOLUTIONS

PROBLEMS ANTICIPATED/SOLUTIONS

VFR-CWD-00-01 V8.0

41