We need to do forestry differently
Common forestry practice may be fanning the flames, researcher says
Yes, climate change is real. But researchers say there’s another factor likely feeding the flames eating up Alberta’s forests.
The widespread practice of killing aspen trees, which forestry companies mechanically remove or spray with herbicide from helicopters, is also having an impact.
Aspen are the trees with white bark and small, fluttering green leaves that grow in clumps or colonies around Edmonton and through northern Alberta. They’re less likely to burn than spruce or pine and cool the forest so well that, when fully-leafed out, wildland firefighters flee to a stand of aspen if the fire unexpectedly shifts.
They’re also food for moose in winter.
Different trees have different wood fibres. Forestry companies consider aspen to be a weed when growing conifers, spruce or pine. So roughly 30,000 hectares a year of forest are sprayed with glyphosate, the active ingredient in RoundUp. That’s roughly half the size of Edmonton or 40 per cent of the 80,000 hectares of forest harvested annually.
It creates a monoculture, killing all broad-leafed plants, making a coniferous tree plantation instead of a forest.
Jen Beverly, assistant professor of wildland fire at the University of Alberta, spent the last years measuring how wildfire creates a protective effect in the forest. Land burned one year is unlikely to burn again for 25 to 45 years when left to regrow naturally. Aspen reclaims the charred earth and only slowly adds fuel to the landscape as they die and are replaced with spruce.
The forestry industry used to think harvesting had a similar effect because it removes fuel. But Beverly’s new research focus finds that theory wanting.
Harvesting doesn’t take out all the dead grass, brush and twigs, and the practice of trying to regrow conifers instead of the pioneering aspen is risky.
“You have this planted conifer in a field of grass. A fire is going to move through that really well,” said Beverly, who started gathering satellite images, visiting cutblocks and tracking burn patterns.
The impact of spraying glyphosate is better known west of the Rockies, where it’s been done for decades. B.C. Liberal MLA Mike Morris, of Prince George-Mackenzie, plans to introduce a private member’s bill to ban the practice there this fall.
“It’s too indiscriminate,” said Morris, a trapper for 40 years. He believes glyphosate spray is a big reason why moose populations fell 80 per cent in his area. Fur-bearing animals and bird populations are also down dramatically throughout the interior of B.C.
Eighty-nine species of animals nest or den in hollowed out aspen. They’re suffering. And the insect infestations sweeping the province — pine beetle and now spruce beetle — make the situation worse.
Here in Alberta, the widespread use of glyphosate in forestry started in the 1990s but now outpaces B.C. Local trappers complain it devastates their lines. The government allows companies to spray a forest twice, which ensures aspen won’t return.
“Any time they plant conifers, most of the time they spray them,” said Victor Lieffers,
U of A professor of silviculture and forest ecology.
He says part of the issue is provincial regulations. Alberta analyzes the forest by satellite photo, mapping patches of forest as small as two hectares. They’re labelled as mixed, aspen or coniferous and companies are expected to return the forest to the same state as quickly as possible, regardless of natural succession.
The rules assume having this patchwork quilt of a landscape is good enough. It’s likely not, said Lieffers, who presented this week on the topic at a forest ecology conference in Flagstaff, Ariz.
“All you have to do is look at the level of disturbance. We ate smoke for five years every summer,” he said. He is calling for a new industry-wide dialogue. Forestry companies need to be willing to change, even just to protect their investment.
There’s no simple answer here. One could say simply ban the practices of stripping out aspen, but thousands of good-paying jobs in northern Alberta depend on quality timber.
Plus, the science of fire and forestry is complex, as is the regulatory framework where private companies are logging on Crown land. It gets doubly complex in the face of climate change, a political wedge. Blame forest management for the intensity of wildfires and risk getting called a climate change denier. But most catastrophes have multiple causes.
In Alberta’s case, researchers and industry experts have already seen warmer, drier conditions. There’s been a 20-year drought. Could it help to let more aspen grow? What about planting drought-resistant trees, sourcing seed from forests further south, and encouraging mixed forests to hedge our bets?
This is all part of a climate emergency. All parties need to act fast.