If you could decide how our forests will be managed, what would you do? Would you make drastic changes? Who, or what would be informing those changes? Would it be politics? Science? Culture? History? Or maybe a combination of these things. Today, we are going to dig into one of these aspects. Our history, specifically the history of forest regeneration. This will provide some much-needed context for what should come next.
Episode highlight
Milo Mihajlovich speaks about the problems in forestry and their solutions - past, present and future.
Resources
The Lance and the Shield: The Life and Times of Sitting Bull: https://www.amazon.ca/Lance-Shield-Life-Times-Sitting/dp/0805012745
Sponsors
West Fraser: https://www.westfraser.com/
GreenLink Forestry Inc.: http://greenlinkforestry.com/
Damaged Timber: https://www.damagedtimber.com/
Giveaway
Enter YourForest10 at checkout at the Damaged Timber store for a 10% discount!
Quotes
25.19 - 25.38: “We have done better and better at reforestation. At the same time, we have tended to do a much less robust job of examining our assumptions and adjusting our assumptions to reflect learning.”
Takeaways
The way we were (06.43)
Milo shares that the structure of the bison on the great plains was not primarily a commercial enterprise, but a United States military plan to defeat the indigenous by destroying their cavalry. He also clarifies that regeneration standards in Alberta had not come into place in the 1990s, but much earlier, and explains the new paradigm of forest management that was emerging which involved reforesting and sustainable management.
Milo’s journey (17.06)
Milo worked with his father on the diameter limit - not cutting trees below a certain diameter. His uncle, who was a forest ranger, inspired him to enter the professional stream instead of the technical one. He discusses the models and agreements in place in the 1960s which led to better forest inventory. However, he laments not considering anthropology at the time or the importance of low-intensity fires.
The changing faces of the forest (28.41)
Milo’s most important work following his early years was to protect the forest from low-intensity fires. He also worked in silviculture and land reclamation. He breaks down the use of sequential surveys in regeneration. He worked in chemical herbicides when the regeneration standards were being redefined to include a performance requirement of the forest. He returned to forestry because he wanted to improve the forestry practices in Alberta.
Ground truth with statistical rigour (52.46)
Milo’s solution to some conflicting requirements of the performance standard was to discuss it with policy personnel. It was difficult to balance the free-growing conifers with maintaining wildlife habitats. The current regeneration standard in Alberta is now different and compares the present state to the assumptions made in the written forest management plan. However, the new challenge is that stakeholders want ecosystem services to be considered as well.
Risks of regeneration approaches (1.03.17)
Milo warns that some approaches to regeneration are risky because we don’t understand “the dynamics of how forests achieve the volumes that we harvest, especially mixed woods”. He expounds on the challenges of using tools in the management of mixed woods. Apart from that, there are also the myriad other footprints humans have on the landscape. However, now, it is possible to assess outcomes using computerized image collection and data manipulation.
True consultation and engagement (1.08.41)
Milo believes that consultation and engagement should not just be asking stakeholders what they want and including it in the plan, but to have them be a part of the planning and execution processes as well. When stakeholders see plan optimizations, there is a recognition of the “shifting mosaic of plant communities” and the associated ecosystem services. Stepping away from deterministic succession allows a discussion of plant community assembly.
Assembly theory (1.13.47)
Milo delineates the assembly theory as the assessment of the disturbance on a site and its impact on the plant community. He uses the examples of drought and caterpillars to explain how natural phenomena can cause disturbances. He used the assembly theory to build a habitat supply model, which can also become a platform for collaboration for the energy and forest industry, and their stakeholders.
Thinking things together (1.19.29)
Milo organized a workshop in partnership with the business facilitators at the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (NAIT). 30 people were invited but the government was excluded. They presented the habitat supply model and had the attendees break out into focus groups with one representative from each industry to offer solutions. Milo believes that a triad approach would be the solution, even though there may be challenges on this path too.
The rocky road (1.28.50)
Milo lists the skepticism and criticism he has had to encounter, but is heartened that the conflict of opinions pushes everyone towards progress. He also looks back on the mistakes made in forest management - denying the value of fire, and assuming that forests were untouched by indigenous populations. In working with the indigenous, he has learned about their political structures and the “well-deserved resentment” they hold towards settlers.
Learning and personal growth (1.39.22)
Milo is of the opinion that to gain the trust of indigenous people, someone who has the knowledge of geography and psychology will have to be the neutral mediating third party. Energy companies support this approach but forestry companies don’t. He encourages the next generation of foresters to engage with reconciliation and make change the center of their approach. He says that when people feel empowered, they will continue to do this difficult work
If you liked this podcast, please rate and review it, share it on Instagram and Facebook and tag a friend, and send your feedback and comments to yourforestpodcast@gmail.com.