Transcript Using Science to Inform the place of Forests in the Landscape

NZ Institute of
Forestry Conference
July 2013
C R Richards
Introduction Do we know our place…?
Has NZ learnt its lessons…?
No value = no place at the table!
The Science Challenge
New tools to inform societal
knowledge …
•
•
•
Spatial economics
Biodiversitry
Hazardous environments
Next Steps – Big problems
Our Operating
Environment
Log Prices
•
Static or slightly falling in
real terms.
Land Values
•
Non forested land – rising
approx 10% /yr last
decade.
New planting
•
•
Short +ve response to
ETS @ $20/t.
Rapid –ve response on
ETS price collapse.
http://www.gisborneherald.co.nz/opinion/letter/?id=31615
Do we know
our place…?
Stop planting filthy pinus radiata trees
A Community View?
Is there any more obscene sight than hectares of good farmland disappearing into
pinus radiata, or recently harvested land? The majority of trees are foreign owned
while we supply the land and a predominantly low-wage employment role.
Forestry of little value.
Have you ever seen an attractive and inspiring forestry town? There isn’t one!
Wednesday, March 06, 2013
If you are around 10 years and older, then hold on to your memories of Gisborne, the
Poverty Bay region and the East Coast: the soul and character, image and “feel” of
this great region is steadily being lost to the gross impact of the forestry industry,
grower of the filthy pinus radiata tree.
This industry did not get going on its own in a commercial world: it got incentives
post-Cyclone Bola and, more recently, the nonsense of the ETS scheme.
Erosion / debris problems are a
“forestry problem”
Pastoral erosion is “bad luck”
Ecosystem service provision – a
subsidy to forestry….
or
a compensation for opportunity
lost to agriculture?
Has NZ Learnt
it’s lessons…?
An Official View….!
Good farmland ..AND ..why we are not going to plant!
4.0%
$9,000
3.5%
$8,000
RoI %
$7,000
Capital value/ha
3.0%
$6,000
$4,000
1.5%
$3,000
1.0%
$2,000
0.5%
$1,000
-1.0%
12_13 fcst
11_12
10_11
09_10
08_09
07_08
06_07
05_06
-0.5%
04_05
0.0%
$-
Imputed capital @8%
Capital (Incl Land)/ha
$5,000
2.0%
03_04
Return on Capital %
2.5%
Weighted RoI
1.4%
Weighted CV
@ 8% RoI
$1,270/ha
-$1,000
-$2,000
Years
Meat & Lamb NZ farm models – E Coast Hill. Ie Hawkes Bay, Manawatu, mid hill Gisborne
But is Perception
…………Reality?
Not bad for an industry that
struggles for a place at the table!

GDP per million ha established
Pastoral Agriculture – 12 million ha
2009 – 0.75% GDP/mill ha
2010 – 0.74 % GDP/mill ha
Contribution to GDP growth
Last :
10yrs
2yrs
Pastoral
+2.0%
+1.5%
Food/ Bev +0.8%
-0.5%
Forestry – 1.7million ha
2009 – 1.24%GDP/mill ha
2010 – 1.71%GDP/mill ha
Contribution to GDP growth
Last :
10yrs
2yrs
Forestry
+2.1%
+8.9%
Processing +0.4%
-0.3%
Not overcutting
In 2009 – 2010 forestry was the
third largest contributor to GDP
growth behind “Wholesale trade”
and “Transport and storage”.
The Science Challenge
At a time when NZ Inc desperately needs to strengthen its balance sheet and ensure capital is used productively we
have many millions of hectare “underemployed”, debt poorly allocated and environmental consequences arising
from lack “free capital flows” as production is maximised to extract “land value”
Recent Science challenge – “enhance p0
Productivity while maintaining land and
water Quality.
We have 10.mill ha of land under –
performing. Perhaps we start here?!!

Fundamental Science.

Economics.

Societal understanding.

Political process

Improved economic AND
environmental performance.




Many fundamentals
well known – for decades!
Marriage of economics
and biological sciences.
We need science to “join
the dots” & paint the
“Big Pictures.”
Provide spatial and
temporal context for
society.
Bringing it together…
Spatial Economics




Land at current
values. Pastoral ROI
of approx 1.5%.
Land available for
forestry @ 8% = 0%
Land value imputed
@ 8% RoI.
Land available for
forestry = 44%
Napier
Spatial Economics


What if we also hedge
NZ carbon liabilities
@ $10 - current land
values & RoI….
Forests = 2.5%
Hedge NZ carbon
liabilities @ $10 and
land values reflect
farming @ 8% RoI…
Forests = 60%
So what what else…?
Environmental Services
What else do the public get out of this?
Water Quality
If sediment yield is at least in part a
surrogate for water quality – NZEEM
suggests forests produce less sediment
most of the time.
If avoided erosion means less sediment
where does that leave forests
FORESTS DO HAVE IT!




Well established base that
plantation forests can harbour
important species.
Can maintain good biodiversity
an ecosystem service.
Spatial dimension now present.
How will it play out for the
service provisioner v.s the service
consumer?
Sum of Number
ThreatClassDesc
Declining

Nationally Vulnerable Total
Naturally Uncommon
Naturally Uncommon Total
Nationally Endangered
Nationally Endangered Total
Relict
Relict Total
Coloniser
Coloniser Total
Nationally Critical
Nationally Critical Total
Grand Total
Local Govt District
Marlborough Northland
75
Science has
repeatedly told
us that
plantation
forests are not
devoid of
biodiversity.
Casual
observations
and expert
surveys
confirm this.
Declining Total
Nationally Vulnerable

SpeciesDesc
Western Weka
Fern Bird
Kunzea ericoides (var linearis)
Long finned eel
Pimelea villosa
Coprosma acerosa
Hochstetter’s Frog
Koura
Ptisana salicina
Cyclosorus interruptus
Red Finned Bully
Scandia rosifolia
Koaro
Rifleman (South Island)
Giant Kokopu
North Island Brown Kiwi
North Island Weka (Gallirallus aus - Greyii)
New Zealand Falcon
North Island Kaka
Long Tailed Bat (North Is)
Dabchick
Blue Duck
North Island Kokako
Great Spotted Kiwi
Long Tailed Cuckoo
Kea
Dwarf Inanga
Prostrate Kanuka
Black Shag
2
0
1
0
0
8
20
1
12
3
11
36
12
0
1
1
75
3
15
20
20
1
20
9
3
1
1
4
10
1
69
81
24
27
6
33
1
4
2
178
18
1
1
2
11
12
2
1
15
14
3
1
0
1
South Island Kaka
Bittern
Spotless Crake
Buff Weka
Kakariki (Red Crowned)
Auckland Waikato Bay Of Plenty Gisborne Hawkes Bay Wellington Nelson
1
1
1
1
1
18
3
1
1
18
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
98
11
Australasian Little Grebe
2
Kotuku (White Heron)
15
31
267
15
West Coast Otago Grand Total
1001
3
1079
2
32
0
2
16
0
0
39
11
12
0
1
1
4
4
1
1
2
2
1012
3
1198
82
26
2
24
105
6
19
56
2
7
2
22
22
2
65
308
23
118
10
128
1
0
1
118
10
153
15
15
1
15
16
3
2
1
1
1
6
1
1
3
3
3
3
2
1214
13
1685
Terrestrial
Biodiversity
Recent work has sought to test the relationship between
LiDAR metrics and biodiversity.
•
•
Coincidentally the work has already revealed….
Taxonomic
group
Native
species
(number)
Exotic
Species
(number)
%Total
described
Plants
195
75
8.3%
Birds
15
11
18.3%
Beetles
?
?
469
Species
total
The future?... Dynamic landscape scale assessment
and modeling of biodiversity.
•
•
•
•
What richness and diversity can we expect between
forest species?
How does biodiversity change over the cycle of
management of a large plantation?
Are coupe sizes relevant?
How do plantations perform as buffers and
connectors?
Hazardous
Landscapes
Forestry not without its problem
areas.
Tools for Hazard ID
Shallow landslide hazard models.
•
Looking promising.
•
Tool for harvest planning and
afforestation?
•
Plus Melton’s ratio… tool for
downstream hazard
management
Other Forestry
Models
Meltons rations between 0.63 – 0.86.
Debris flows a distinct hazard!
What can we do in these situations?
Whose in the wrong place??
The forest…?
The subdivision….?
Will “inappropriate subdivision and
development” be better managed also.
_________________________________
Ultimately big issues over….
•
Who gains and who looses?
•
How do you make it transparent ?
•
What are the right species and
patterns at local and landscape
scales?
•
Can ecosystem services cover the
sunk costs of other species – in the
right place.?
•
Are there other forestry models?
Integrative Science
We can see there are significant
problems and questions arising from
the examples used.
Current economic constructs may not
be giving NZ a good deal from its 10
million ha of rural land!
•
Our economic performance is
poor.
•
Our environmental performance
is poor.
How do we as a nation integrate all
the competing pressures to deliver the
best results for investors,
communities, the environment and
NZ Inc?
How de we demonstrate results,
implications, cause and effect to
improve acceptance and adoption?
A role for multi-objective, multidimensional problem solving?
Real time
data
Evolutionary
algorithm
Think this is far
fetched….?
Watch this space!
Triple
bottom
line





Increasing
environmental
footprint.
E.S depletion
transferred to future
generations.
Wealth transfer to E.S
consumers.
Poor economic AND
environmental
performance
Less forest.








Luke Barry – Scion
Oliver Chikumbo - Scion
Duncan Harrison – Scion
Steve Pawson – Scion
Richard Quinlan – PF Olsen
John Hanlen – PF Olsen.
DoC FENZ
Peter Bellingham – Landcare.