|
A warming climate plus decades of mismanagement by various provincial
governments threaten to wipe British Columbia’s vast conifer forests off the
map.
The destructive force chewing at alarming speed through BC’s majestic
stands of lodgepole pine, spruce and Douglas fir, is around the size of a
grain of rice. We are talking about the lowly beetle, specifically, the
mountain pine beetle and its equally voracious cousins, the spruce beetle,
the Douglas-fir beetle, along with another aphid-like tree predator known as
the Balsam Woolly Adelgid.
Seemingly powerless on their own, these small bugs breed and feed by the
billions. Pine beetles attack groves of old-growth trees, leaving a trail of
destruction in their paths. The dead or dying rust-colored pines can be
felled for pulp or low-quality lumber if caught in time, before the rot make
the wood punky and useless. The dead trees dry and rot ‘on the stump’, providing
excellent tinder for forest fires, which are becoming an annual event in
British Columbia. Last summer was BC’s worst-ever forest fire season.
Previously, the fires would damage a lot of the trees but not kill them.
Nowadays, many of the fires burn so hot they destroy the seeds of the
burnt-up evergreen trees, scuttling any chance of regeneration.
The costs of the mountain pine beetle, spruce beetle and other
infestations are not only environmental, in the loss of timber, carbon sinks
and green spaces, but economic. Too many trees killed by mountain pine and
spruce beetles have diminished BC’s wood supply, leading to mill closures and
job losses across the province.
In this article we’re going deep into British Columbia’s back country,
fending off an imaginary swarm of flies and skeeters, to tell the story of
what happened to BC’s evergreen forests.
Mountain pine beetle
It all started with the mountain pine beetle. The outbreak that began in
the early 1990s has affected nearly a third of the 60 million ha
of forested land in the province. The BC government estimates that of the 2.3
billion cubic meters of merchantable lodgepole pine, the beetles have
destroyed 726 million cubic meters, over a 17.5-million-hectare area.
Efforts to control beetle outbreaks have had very limited success. As of
2017 the mountain pine beetle had migrated well beyond its historic range,
into northern BC and eastward into the north-central boreal forests of
Alberta.
Science, combined with anecdotal reports from residents, make
it pretty well certain that the beetle infestation has resulted
from warmer temperatures in the BC Interior, especially during winter
months.
Healthy pine trees have a natural defense against insects, a toxic resin.
But as more beetles converge on a tree, its defenses become overwhelmed. The
pine beetle population was kept under control by relatively cool summers and
bitterly cold winters. That all changed with the warming of the planet.
Temperatures in north-central British Columbia used to plunge to -45
degrees C in winter, without the wind chill. Nowadays a cold winter day is
-30. For mountain pine beetles, it’s the equivalent of spending the winter in
Maui. Entire colonies of the murderous bugs are allowed
to flourish.
A BC
government webpage on climate change reveals some interesting facts.
Over the last century (1900-2013) the province has warmed an average of 1.4C.
But while southern BC has warmed 0.8C over the last 113 years, in the
northern regions, the rate is 1.6 to 2.0C, twice the average global warming
of 0.85C.
Moreover, most of that century-long warming trend took place in winter,
when the average temperature increase across the province was 2.2C. The
farther north you go, the more it has warmed, from 1.5C in southern BC to a
toasty 3.8C warmer in the northern-most region of the province.
The way mountain pine beetles attack and infect trees is like something
out of a David Cronenberg horror film. Who better to explain it than Mr.
Canadian Science himself, Dr. David Suzuki:
How can something so seemingly insignificant cause so much damage? The
mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) is a naturally occurring
insect that starts its attack when a female uses its senses to find a pine
tree (usually lodgepole) that is at least 80 years old. On finding a mature
tree, she bores into it while releasing a pheromone that attracts male
beetles. When the sex-crazed males arrive, they in turn secrete pheromones
that attract more females. The tree mounts a response by secreting a toxic
resin that beats back a few beetles. But the beetles have another trick up
their sleeves – or in their mouths. They carry spores of a blue-stained
fungus, which are released as they bore into the tree. The fungus puts a stop
to the spread of resin and allows the beetles to keep tunnelling.
The symbiotic relationship between the beetles and fungus doesn’t end
there. The beetles lay eggs under the tree’s bark, and when the larvae hatch,
they feed on the blue fungus until they are mature enough to leave the now
dead tree, carrying the fungus in their mouths.
Amazing how Mother Nature equipped mountain beetles with such deadly
weapons. Combine that naturally-evolved ability with an even
greater survivability through warmer winters, and it becomes evident the pine
trees never had a chance.
Foxes guarding the hen house
How to topple a forest when it’s nearly down? Put the government onto it.
While the pine-beetle epidemic started in the 1990s, it wasn’t until 2001, a
decade later, that the province increased its annual allowable cut (AAC), in
what would turn out to be a failed attempt to halt the beetle’s
progress.
As the climate began noticeably changing, the problem worsened. The warm
winters failed to kill the beetles, and due to active fire suppression,
mature lodgepole pines, the ideal habitat for mountain pine beetles,
proliferated.
Wildfires are a frequent natural occurrence in BC’s forests. They help to
renew ecosystems, by heating the wood so hot that the trees release their
seeds from cones that are protected by a seal of pitch, or in other species,
a thick layer of bark.
Before 1905 the provincial Forest Service allowed fires to occur
naturally. Only when they threatened communities or important
structures were they actioned. After 1905, annual fire suppression
programs interfered with this natural wildfire cycle. According
to the BC government, before 1905 fires burned an average of 500,000
hectares, or 1.2 million acres, each year. In recent decades fires only burn
an average of 65,000 ha.
That may seem like a good thing, but for stamping out hungry insects, the
more forest that burns, the better.
Instead the province’s approach was to implement an aggressive
salvage-logging strategy. The objective was to stop the beetle’s spread, then
harvest as much dead wood as possible before it either rotted to the point of
being worthless, or burned.
The strategy failed. Mass logging clear-cuts across the province did
little to stop the infestation from spreading, and in fact it created a host
of new problems.
This part requires some political history. Back in 1995, the NDP
government of Mike Harcourt introduced the Forest Practices Code which
contained a number of rules related to the harvest of forest
products. Industry balked at the red tape, so after the BC Liberals under
Gordon Campbell were elected in 2001, the province started ramping up the
annual allowable cut (AAC) to let companies try and fall the millions of
hectares of beetle-kill wood and salvage what they could.
The Liberals replaced the Forest Practices Code with the “results-based”
Forest and Range Practices Act. The legislation limited clear-cuts to 60
hectares in the Interior, but there was no limit for clear-cutting forests
infested with pine beetles.
In some parts of the province, like Prince George and Quesnel, the AAC
shot up by 80%.
The result was to throw sustainable forestry out the window,
and leave it up to industry to enforce the watered-down rules.
According
to a 2012 story in the Vancouver Sun by the paper’s best
environmental reporter, Larry Pynn, among the negative environmental
impacts of large-scale salvage logging aimed at eradicating the mountain pine
beetle, were:
- Pressuring biodiversity by damaging native plants
and funguses, and chasing sway smaller predators like fishers
and marten.
- Increasing the risk of flooding and erosion.
- Increasing hunting pressure on both humans and animals
due to a proliferation of logging roads.
- Adding to greenhouse gas emissions by removing living trees
that act as a carbon sink, and letting dead trees rot and emit
CO2.
- Timber companies took with them not only dead pines but
other tree species of harvestable value, most importantly spruce and
fir.
The province knew about the “significant negative effects” of salvage
logging in 2004, Pynn wrote, when Martin Eng, manager of
special investigations for the Forest Practices Board, a government watchdog,
produced a technical report.
Acting on Eng’s advice, BC’s chief forester Jim Snetsinger
recommended to professional foresters that more trees be retained for
wildlife - between 10% for cut-blocks smaller than 50 hectares, to 25% for
cut-blocks greater than 1,000 ha.
How did they do? A 2009 report also written by Eng found that,
on average, timber companies were retaining large-enough islands of trees
within the cut-blocks for wildlife, according
to Pynn’s article.
But he also found no one was minding the big picture, addressing the
collective impact of all those contiguous cut-blocks:
Some of the cut-blocks were recent pine beetle logging, but others
dated back three decades to a time before the 1995 Forest Practices Code,
when clearcuts did not contain wildlife patches.
Put it all together and you have a significantly altered landscape,
multiple patches of logging that were authorized without consideration of the
greater overall impact.
More than half of the harvest since 1978 is now in patches larger than
250 hectares and more than one-third in patches larger than 1,000 hectares,
the board found.
Incredibly, at least seven harvested patches, amalgams exceeding
10,000 hectares - 25 times the size of Stanley Park - have emerged, the
report found.
Eng warned in his 2009 report that the opportunity to reverse the
situation "may be lost without quick action."
Fiber shortage
As mentioned at the top, the fall-out from the pine beetle epidemic has
not only been environmental, but economic. The problem boils down to too many
sawmills in BC, and not enough timber to feed them all.
Among the casualties are three mills operated by Canfor, including the
forestry giant’s Vavenby operation near Clearwater, a small
town northeast of Vancouver whose tiny economy, like many in BC, depends
on logging and sawmill jobs.
In May Tolko Industries announced the permanent closure of its Quest Wood
sawmill in Quesnel, and a reduction from two shifts to one at its Kelowna
sawmill. The following month it was Norbord’s turn to herald plans to curtail
production indefinitely at 100 Mile House.
Global
News quotes a spokesman for Norbord saying the Cariboo
region has been under mounting wood supply pressure for the past decade as a
result of the mountain pine beetle epidemic, along with some big fires
in the area in the summers of 2017 and 2018, that took a lot of timber.
BC government officials are predicting the timber supply will be reduced
20% from about 70 million cubic meters a year to 58 million by 2025.
Adding to the fires and the mountain pine beetle, are high prices for logs
and a slowdown in the US housing industry which has crimped demand.
Lumber seller Teal-Jones Group will lay off and reduce the shifts of
dozens of contract loggers on Vancouver Island, along with employees at its
mill in Surrey, the Financial
Post reported in June.
An element of uncertainty has also been tossed into the mix, through new
legislation. Bill 22 obliges companies to demonstrate a “public interest”
before they can sell or transfer their tree farm licenses on Crown land, to
other companies.
A lot of smaller firms that don’t have forest tenures are hoping that Bill
22 frees up some fiber controlled by major companies, so they can run more
wood through their mills, but now that is only possible if the large
tenure-holders can show that doing so will be in the public interest - a
vague requirement.
Spruce beetle
One would think there’s plenty of beetle-kill wood around that could
address the timber shortage, but apparently much of that supply has been
harvested. It’s gone, and likely, won’t regenerate.
Now a new pest is emerging as a major problem in the low, tree-lined
valleys of north-central British Columbia: the spruce beetle.
CBC
reports aerial surveys have revealed some 340,000 hectares of forest
have been impacted. That’s 45 times pre-outbreak levels of 7,653 ha in 2013,
and a continuation of a spruce beetle infestation that broke records in
2017.
The current outbreak is centered around Mackenzie, about 200 km north of
Prince George.
The spruce beetle’s life cycle is somewhat different from its pine beetle
relative. Like the pine beetle, the spruce beetle is thriving with warmer
winters, but while the pine beetle likes to bury into old-growth pines, the
spruce beetle normally only feeds on fallen or weak trees. According to
CBC, only during serious and prolonged infestations, do they become
capable of killing healthy trees.
However the fact that the infestation is spreading north, toward the
Yukon, west into the Smithers area and east towards the BC-Alberta border, is
cause for concern.
A regional forest entomologist interviewed by CBC called the outbreak
“larger and more severe than we have seen in the past.” Jeanne Robert
explained that the priority is to work with local government and forestry
companies, to target the harvest of trees affected by the beetle.
The Bowron model
It’s not clear whether that means clear-cutting vast stands of spruce
trees in the same format as the planned eradication of the mountain pine
beetle. However anecdotal reports from local loggers indicate a lot of spruce
beetle-kill wood is being hauled out from the bush around Summit Lake, the
Continental Divide.
Time is of the essence for loggers working with spruce beetle kill timber.
While trees killed by mountain pine beetles are still viable 10 to 15 years
after death, spruce trees only have about a three to five-year shelf life
before their fiber become useless even for making pulp.
The province’s plan to clear-cut beetle-kill forests wasn’t wrong; it was
badly implemented, and put into motion far too late, 10 years after BC
foresters recognized pine beetles were an epidemic.
We know that clear-cutting done right can be a solution to this problem -
exemplified by what was done in the Upper Bowron Valley.
Discolored spruce trees were first noticed by the Forest Service as far
back as 1979. A major blowdown in 1974, combined with a series of warm
winters, created the perfect conditions for the spruce beetle to thrive on
the dead wood. About 175,000 hectares in Bowron Lakes Provincial
Park were estimated to be affected.
Like the current spruce beetle infestation, the plan was to target the
living timber under beetle attack. Timber licensees in the
Upper Bowron were joined by licensees in adjacent areas in order to
boost the combined AAC.
The coordinated harvesting operations removed an incredible 15 million
cubic meters between 1981 and 1987 - enough timber to build 900,000
1,200-square foot homes!
The operation did come with a price; the clear-cut valley was so large it
could be seen from space. However so could the tree plantations, two decades
later. A case
study of the project notes that, of the 175,000-ha outbreak area,
45,000 ha were replanted, totaling 62.5 million trees. The plantations are
70% interior spruce, 28% lodgepole pine and 2% Douglas-fir.
Douglas-fir bark beetle
The latter tree species is also being victimized by a pest. Loggers north
of Prince George right now are cutting bug-killed Douglas-fir trees. The bark
beetle has also infested over 90 hectares of forest outside of Nelson.
“We have some really heavily fir-dominated forests [in the Kootenays], especially
on our south and west aspects. We’re going to see some pretty devastating
effects,” the Nelson
Star newspaper quoted Gerald Cordeiro, a forest development manager
who first alerted city council to the infestation in October 2017.
A 2018 provincial government report found 78,741 ha were infested by the
bark-boring insect. Trees killed by Douglas-fir beetles must be salvaged
within just one to two years to remain viable.
Balsam Woolly Adelgid infestation
The last critter we’re going to talk about in this report is the Balsam
Woolly Adelgid. The aphid-like pest was first introduced to North America
around 1900. Infestations have occurred on balsam fir in New England and
Fraser fir in the Appalachian region of the United States, for example.
The adelgid was spotted in the 1990s on Vancouver Island. It somehow
migrated to the Coastal mountains and loggers are starting to notice it in
north-central BC.
Appearing on bark as white, wooly masses about 1mm long, the
adelgid only attacks fir species. A BC
government report on them states they can kill a tree after several
years of heavy feeding, during which time they inject toxic saliva into their
hosts. The microscopic bug has an interesting life cycle:
The adelgid has two to four generations per year. The wingless female
can produce in excess of 200 amber colored eggs. The eggs are laid under
masses of "cottony tufts" on the underside of branches and on the
trunk. Crawlers are visible with the aid of a hand lens beginning around bud
break. This stage is the most susceptible to chemical control. There are no
males, hence females give rise to more females.
Conclusion
Let’s face it, bugs are cool, except when they’re feasting on your tree
farm license or private timber lot. As a province, we now have about 30 years
of experience in dealing with these pests which, in BC at least, comprises
the mountain pine beetle, the spruce beetle, the Douglas-fir beetle, and the
Balsam Woolly Adelgid.
Forest practices dictate there is a right way and a wrong way to deal with
an infestation. The wrong way is to delay putting into action a plan to
aggressively cut trees attacked by these beetles and an aphid. Three decades
on, we’re still fighting the mountain pine beetle. If government officials
had listened to the scientists giving them advice, perhaps they would have
got on it a lot sooner.
But we have a chance to correct this faulty approach with the other three
pests that, when combined with the mountain pine beetle and forest fires, are
devastating our conifer forests. The Upper Bowron Valley serves as
a template to follow. Clear-cutting can work, if done properly, and with
extensive follow-up silviculture.
We need to get it right. Climate change isn’t going away, the winters are
getting warmer and our forests, as a consequence, more buggy. Forest
fires are here to stay too. Insect eradication is the one variable we have
control over, and a lot of science to fall back on.
Look out beetles, we’re coming for ya.
subscribe
to my free newsletter
Legal Notice / Disclaimer
Please read the entire Disclaimer carefully before you use this website
or read the newsletter. If you do not agree to all the AOTH/Richard
Mills Disclaimer, do not access/read this website/newsletter/article, or
any of its pages. By reading/using this AOTH/Richard Mills
website/newsletter/article, and whether or not you actually read
this Disclaimer, you are deemed to have accepted it.
Any AOTH/Richard Mills document is not, and should not be, construed as an
offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to purchase or subscribe for
any investment.
AOTH/Richard Mills has based this document on information obtained from
sources he believes to be reliable but which has not been independently
verified. AOTH/Richard Mills makes no guarantee, representation or warranty
and accepts no responsibility or liability as to its accuracy or completeness.
Expressions of opinion are those of AOTH/Richard Mills only and are subject
to change without notice. AOTH/Richard Mills assumes no warranty, liability
or guarantee for the current relevance, correctness or completeness of any
information provided within this Report and will not be held liable for the
consequence of reliance upon any opinion or statement contained herein or any
omission. Furthermore, AOTH/Richard Mills assumes no liability for any direct
or indirect loss or damage or, in particular, for lost profit, which you may
incur as a result of the use and existence of the information provided within
this AOTH/Richard Mills Report.
AOTH/Richard Mills is not a registered broker/financial advisor and does not
hold any licenses. These are solely personal thoughts and opinions about
finance and/or investments – no information posted on this site is to be
considered investment advice or a recommendation to do anything involving
finance or money aside from performing your own due diligence and consulting with
your personal registered broker/financial advisor. You agree that by reading
AOTH/Richard Mills articles, you are acting at your OWN RISK. In no event
should AOTH/Richard Mills liable for any direct or indirect trading losses
caused by any information contained in AOTH/Richard Mills articles.
Information in AOTH/Richard Mills articles is not an offer to sell or a
solicitation of an offer to buy any security. AOTH/Richard Mills is not
suggesting the transacting of any financial instruments but does suggest
consulting your own registered broker/financial advisor with regards to any
such transactions
|
