The projects below have been conducted by Don Morgan over the last five years

Linking Scales

Table of Contents

• Methods
• Discussion

Methods

Because this project aims to develop methodology (for analysing landscapes), we followed no specific methods, but rather use a set of general approaches for each objective:

• Data management
• Characterising natural landscapes
• Predicting long term consequences
• Linking scales
• Including stakeholders

We developed and applied methods in a series of pilot projects. We employ standard GIS technology, computer code and landscape modelling languages, using non-proprietary software when possible and developing modules rather than large integrated applications. Several reports describe the methods developed and the results of testing in case studies; these reports are referred to in the results section. Here we provide and overview of the methods used in the various projects.

Our original systems design philosophy was to use non-proprietary software to facilitate the free distribution of all computer models. Initially we relied on proprietary information systems software such as the PAMAP and the ARC/INFO GIS. Currently, the BC MoF does its data management using the ArcINFO and Oracle and we are dependent upon it for basic data management. However, most of the project application development has been based on free systems.

Biodiversity planning occurs at the scale of the landscape unit, while disturbance information is available by BEC zone. We modelled disturbance over the Morice District to determine the range of disturbance impacts that may occur at the landscape unit scale. We characterised disturbance rate, patch size and connectivity for each landscape unit. This work was tested in the Morice Forest District.

We investigated spatial landscape processes over large areas such as the Iskut-Stikine LRMP at five million hectares and the Lakes at one million hectares. By focusing on what questions were being addressed by landscape models and what level of detail was required we developed techniques to abstract detailed inventories so that they could be used in these large planning areas.

We removed controlling spatial variables from a spatial landscape model to simulate timber supply analyses conducted by the non-spatial FSSIM model. Then we added spatial variables to predict future harvesting locations over time. This process allows us to be sure that our model matches the assumptions used to set annual allowable cuts. Then any impacts to harvesting come from spatial variables modelled as opposed to other model artefacts. This process also allows us to partition timber supply among landscape units. These methods have been developed as part of the Lakes, Columbia Mountains and Robson Valley case studies.

Discussion

In the past, modelling has failed to reach its potential as a decision-support tool in the forest management arena. Since the emergence of computer science, simulation modelling has defined a solid niche in many scientific fields, judging by the numerous published models. The application of models in forest management seems less successful—the calculation of timber-supply being the only consistent application of modelling. Yet the complexity and large spatial and temporal scales that characterise forest management problems suggest modelling should help. Land-use decisions can profoundly impact our economy and our ecology, with consequences that may reach forward several generations. Wise decisions seem essential. While the analysis methodologies and software discussed in this report aim to improve the quality of decisions, passable software and modelling expertise have existed for many years. We believe decision-support projects have failed primarily for two reasons. First, modellers and decision-makers do not understand each other’s objectives and limitations. Decision-makers must often decide quickly, using available information and subjective judgement, and they may have unreasonable expectations about what can be modelled. Modellers, on the other hand, often aim for efficient elegant models, backed by thorough research, and are not unduly constrained by time. Second, influential stakeholders have not been adequately included in modelling projects (McLain and Lee 1996, Selin et al. 1997). Thus, to support our analytical methods developed, we have developed a framework for involving stakeholders—the framework simply aims to align the objectives of the modellers and the decision-makers (including stakeholders). If this main aim is remembered, then we believe modelling can inform forestry decisions.

In the Morice Forest District we analysed the historic range of patch size and age composition of the landscape. We then were able to assess individual landscape units and how they would fit into that age and patch size continuum, thus linking spatial and temporal scales.

Our techniques for processing complex timber management rules and extensive areas allowed us to spatially analyse large planning areas such as the Iskut-Stikine LRMP. We were also able to spatially represent non-spatial timber supply models, such as the Ministry of Forests FSSIM, to explore spatial questions, such as landscape pattern in an operationally relevant way.

Acknowledgements

DULP is a BC Ministry of Forest Research Branch project with funding assistance from Forest Renewal BC.