District Operational Monitoring Initiative

By the DOMI Team

A presentation at the PFIT Post FSP Workshop by Brian Westgate on the MoFR’s DOMI monitoring program.

Introduction Who is DOMI? Role of DOMI & do we need it? Where does DOMI Fit? DOMI Objectives Inputs and Outputs of District Monitoring Examples Next Steps & Timeline

Who is DOMI? Districts

Campbell River Okanagan-Shuswap Burns Lake

Regions Coast Southern Interior Northern Interior

Branch Stewardship

Role of DOMI Highlight the need for district monitoring Provide tools and methodology to help

prioritize and implement monitoring Coordinate district monitoring with other

agencies/programs Identify future initiatives which

standardize approach (methodology, reporting, data management)

Why District Monitoring

Need to assess and monitor forest management practices to address specific local needs and concerns

This is outside the scope of: FREP C&E Other monitoring initiatives

Where does DOMI fit?

MoE

ILMB

Other?

FREP

C&EDOMI

DOMI Objectives To fulfil a District need to monitor areas not in

the scopes of FREP, C&E and other initiatives (a gap analysis)

To monitor the effectiveness of local FSP r/s and associated practices

To monitor forest management practices in the “non-legal” realm, and performance in areas not covered by an FSP

To promote collaborative and constructive professional dialogue, ensuring the success of the professional reliance model under FRPA.

Inputs and Outputs of Monitoring

Local Priorities Risk

Analysis

Adaptive Management Legislative updates Further/different type of

monitoring

Improve FSP approval decisions Adjust admin decisions Professional dialogue Adjust TSR assumptions

Monitoring Model

Risk Analysis will include: DM Request for monitoring Significant variation from past practice (no

current data) Effect on land base (spatial/temporal) Political sensitivity FTE/$$ available Feasibility ETC…

Example – Non-Legal

Question: What is licensee performance regarding Forest Health Factors in sensitive Community Watersheds?

Monitoring Methodology: Analyze and track CP submissions for retention and harvest levels of non-forest health impacted species.

Outcome: Professional discussion resulting in retraction of harvesting non-impacted contiguous areas within sensitive watersheds. Retention planning initiative for several sensitive watersheds. Improved on-block retention.

Example – Legal

Question: Is approved FSP strategy for alternative WTR practices affecting biodiversity at the stand/landscape level?

Monitoring Methodology: Track blocks affected as CPs are submitted, routine (checklist) field assessment on those blocks

Outcome: Summary of results provide information to DM as to whether to approve such a result/strategy again

Next Steps Feedback and ideas from all Districts DOMI to develop a model (i.e. Risk Analysis) Each district to use model to identify priority

areas Determine monitoring methodology Monitor priority areas IMPROVE FOREST PRACTICES &

ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS

Timeline

All districts who have approved FSPs and are working under FRPA could be thinking about this now, and planning on monitoring this year!!

We Need Your Feedback

Contact the DOMI Team DOS: Richard Toperczer, Brian WestgateDCR: Erin Boelk, John IngramDND: Garth O’MearaSI Region: Bernie PeschkeCoast Region: Jim DunkleyNI Region: George HallidayForest Practices Branch: Peter Bradford