1. A New Way to Look at Aspen Competition in the Cariboo when Assessing Free Growing 1

2. A New Way to Look at Aspen Competition in the Cariboo when assessing Free Growing The Three Presenter's 1.Teresa: Research results and how they were applied operationally 2.Dave: Administrative Update – Free Growing Standards and Appendix 9 3.Jean: Recommended changes to guidance for pine and aspen and plot protocol 2

3. The “Research” The research question Research completed Summary of research results Research to operations Considerations regarding post-brushing activities 3

4. 4 There was always a feeling that a certain density of broadleaf trees could be retained without compromising conifer growth and that our current free growing guidelines for aspen tolerance were too restrictive. Narrowing the question usually results in more solid results. Pine and aspen are the most common combination in the Cariboo so the research question was initially narrowed to those two species and on 2 subzones (IDFdk3 and n SBSdw1&2). Our research question: How much aspen is too much? 21 year old SBSdw1 stand

5. What research was done? Over time the trial was expanded to include a few other subzones and a number of different designs. 5 Ecological Classification Range of Stand Ages Studied Type of study SBPSxc11-18Variable density IDFdk312 - 31Retrospective 6-20Variable density SBSdw1&213-34Retrospective 8-14Variable density 1-20Variable radius SBPSmk8-15Variable density

6. Summary of Research Results The effects of aspen competition on pine development increased between subzones (SBSdw1&2>IDFdk3>SBPSxc) SBPSxc: Aspen competition did not affect pine development after establishment Where aspen was an important competitor (SBSdw1&2 and IDFdk3) – Density was a key factor that could be easily assessed – Aspen could be 125% taller than the pine and not affect growth 6

7. 7 Under-story Pine 2001 (11 yrs) Pine now growing thru aspen (18 yrs) SBPSxc