Integrated pest management in silviculture as a model for future food and

fibre production

Keith Littlekeith.little@mandela.ac.za

CLSA and SAAHA Combined Congress - hosted by AVCASA

World Planted Forests in Perspective

• Planted forests are mostly established for the purpose of production (provide for various forest goods and services), but they also help to reduce pressure on natural forests

• Globally there has been an increase in the area dedicated to fast-growth plantations, which is driven mainly by a combination of population growth and demand for forest products

– 4x increase in population growth from 1914, but with a 17x per capita increase in the use of forest products

– population predicted to increase from 7.5 to 9.7 billion in 2050

SA Planted Forests in Perspective

• In SA there are only 0.5 mil ha of Natural Forests, and although fairly stable in area (6 % reduction between 1944 and 1996), these areas generally:• consist of species with very specific site requirements

• are fragmented and/or confined to inaccessible areas

• unproductive in terms of production for commercial use

• SA Planted Forests occupy a small area, both nationally and internationally• Nationally: < 1.0% of land in SA (1.27 mil ha)

• Internationally: 0.4% of planted forests world-wide (291 mil ha)

Regeneration

TendingHarvesting

To meet the increased demand for forest products for use within SA, we therefore needed to either import, or establish a resource base

from which this demand could be satisfied

Forest plantations established extensively from late 1940’s onwards

In SA these plantations are intensively managed so as to achieve:• Higher yields

• Reduced rotation lengths

• Greater uniformity

• Product-specific management = products of higher quality

In SA we subscribe to only one type of silvicultural system!

Clear-cutting with the management of even-aged stands

- regeneration and tending separated in time

As we intensify management, or increase investment in land (site), the demand for information increases (Stone 1975

South African plantations are so-called technological forests as they require high levels of silvicultural understanding and input

A few aspects to consider

saw timber

mining timber

pulpwood

matchwood

wood chips

bark (wattle)

laths/droppers

charcoal

poles

veneer

fuelwood

Products

Although one would assume the practice of plantation forestry within SA would be relatively straight forward, it is

complex due to:

• Divergent companies and growers (large + medium companies + small growers)

• Different end products and hence genera planted

• Sites and site productivity

• Different economic models in use– maximising sustainable

production irrespective of cost

– cost:benefit operations

– purely cost driven models

– constant cash flow models

Considerable research (from 1940’s) has generated a large body of fairly detailed, discipline-specific knowledge, albeit

mainly related to the magnitude and longevity of any treatment-induced response

• Research towards maximisation of production, whilst subscribing to the general principles associated with sustainable economic, social and environmental practices

• Main research areas include:–understanding site and the inherent site productivity

–optimising site occupancy though a combination of

• species choice,

• genetic improvement, and

• planting density for that site

– stand management to ensure optimum production is achieved through

• tending,

• management, and

• tree protection (abiotic and biotic)

High MagnitudeHigh Longevity

Low MagnitudeLow Longevity

High MagnitudeLow Longevity

Low MagnitudeHigh Longevity

-When interpreting treatment responses we also need to consider:

• multiple treatments with multiple impacts

• interaction between treatments

• increased/decreased response over time

• late rotation response

• bias and precision within each of these responses

also = integration

The magnitude and longevity of response will influence whether to implement a treatment (or not)

(2 x 2 combination)

Explored the magnitude and longevity of treatment responses, within discipline and within site

Vegetation management within siteRotation-end data for a Eucalyptus grandis x E. camaldulensis vegetation management trial

situated in Zululand, South Africa.

A few South African examples

6%

0.6%0%0%

6%

10%

17%

27%

12%

6%

0.9%

4%

1.3%

13%

16%

11%

46%

16%

0

6

12

18

24

30

36

42

48

54

60

Winte

r - M

elm

oth

Winte

r - P

iete

rmar

itzbu

rg 2

Spr

ing

- Piet R

etief

Spr

ing

- Bos

ton

Spr

ing

- Zululan

d 2

Sum

mer

- Eston

Sum

mer

- Zul

ulan

d 1

Sum

mer

- Piete

rmar

itzbu

rg 1

Winte

r - Z

ululan

d 3

Winte

r - T

zane

en

Inc

rea

se

in

in

itia

l g

row

th (

Gld

) fo

r w

ate

r a

nd

hy

dro

ge

l re

lati

ve

to

th

e d

ry p

lan

tin

g (

%) water

hydrogel

450% 400%

Explored the magnitude and longevity of treatment responses, within discipline and

between sites

Dri

eko

p

Mo

ssb

an

k

Be

rgvlie

t

Lo

ng

rid

ge

Lo

nd

on

Ma

c M

ac

Bly

de

Cla

n

Dri

eko

p

-10

0

10

20

30

40

Re

lative

diffe

ren

ce (

%)

in b

asa

l a

rea

1.1*

1.2

1.3

2 3 4

5

7.1

7.2

8.1

6.2

8.2

9

6.1*

6%

0.6%0%0%

6%

10%

17%

27%

12%

6%

0.9%

4%

1.3%

13%

16%

11%

46%

16%

0

6

12

18

24

30

36

42

48

54

60

Winte

r - M

elm

oth

Winte

r - P

iete

rmar

itzbu

rg 2

Spr

ing

- Piet R

etief

Spr

ing

- Bos

ton

Spr

ing

- Zululan

d 2

Sum

mer

- Eston

Sum

mer

- Zul

ulan

d 1

Sum

mer

- Piete

rmar

itzbu

rg 1

Winte

r - Z

ululan

d 3

Winte

r - T

zane

en

Inc

rea

se

in

in

itia

l g

row

th (

Gld

) fo

r w

ate

r a

nd

hy

dro

ge

l re

lati

ve

to

th

e d

ry p

lan

tin

g (

%) water

hydrogel

450% 400%

Explored the magnitude and longevity of treatment responses, within discipline and

between sites

Dri

eko

p

Mo

ssb

an

k

Be

rgvlie

t

Lo

ng

rid

ge

Lo

nd

on

Ma

c M

ac

Bly

de

Cla

n

Dri

eko

p

-10

0

10

20

30

40

Re

lative

diffe

ren

ce (

%)

in b

asa

l a

rea

1.1*

1.2

1.3

2 3 4

5

7.1

7.2

8.1

6.2

8.2

9

6.1*

Site preparation across sites

Application of insecticides and

fungicides across sites

Planting techniques across sites

Fertilizer responses across sites

Explored the magnitude and longevity of treatment responses, between disciplines and between sites

Rotation-end data for three contrasting sites linking species choice, level of tree improvement, planting density and intensity of silviculture

(KZN Midlands, South Africa).

Dependent on their specific end-objectives, forest companies have successfully developed “best operating

practices” based upon the timing of these different kinds of treatments, or interventions, in a logical

sequence to control stand establishment and development (growth).

“Game Changers”

But there have been additional challenges in South Africa which have influenced the degree to which the application of tree growing practices can be implemented.

These include:

• Increased impacts of abiotic and biotic factors (risk)

• Increasing importance of long-term sustainability

• Certification and impacts on biotic risk management

• Conversion of IPM theory into practice

• Technology transfer and uptake

Biotic risk, sustainability and certification(all three are interlinked!)

• Understanding “Risk” and subsequent “Risk Mitigation” is of critical importance to the SA Forest Industry

• For example, the total damage to plantations between 1998 and 2008 amounted to 907 765 ha, with– 58% of that lost through fire, and

– 42% lost through other causes, including invertebrate pests and pathogens

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

GC_t GC_s GU_t GU_s

Sto

ckin

g (

ste

ms h

a-1

)

Species

aa

b

aa

c

12

12.5

13

13.5

14

14.5

15

15.5

16

GC_t GC_s GU_t GU_s

Heig

ht

(m)

Species

Sprayed

Control

bcc

dd

a a aba

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

GC_t GC_s GU_t GU_s

Volu

me (

m3

ha

-1)

Species

d

aa

a ab

bc c

d

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

GC_t GC_s GU_t GU_s

Dia

mete

r (c

m)

Species

abc

cbc

ab ab aab

abc

a a

Recent introduction of Leptocybe invasa = exclusion of E. grandis x E. camaldulensis as

an option in the drier, hotter regions of SA

Biotic risk, sustainability and certification

• The practice of Sustainable Forest Production is not new!

• Internal & external auditing processes have, and always will be in place– part of good corporate governance, and an intrinsic part of doing business

• Perhaps what is more recent is the recognition for the need of independent global bodies that take into consideration principles around forest sustainability common to all

• Most SA Forest Companies have;– 1st World Ownership and/or linked to 1st World Markets

– the highest % of certified planted area in the world (~ 82%)

• Some examples of these global certification bodies are:– Forest Stewardship Council (FSC);

– Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC);

– Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) etc….

• Standards

– These are documents that set out the forest management requirements which must be met by the forest manager and against which certification assessments are made

• Certification

– This is the process of establishing whether or not a standard has been met

• Accreditation

– process that ‘certifies the certifiers’

Biotic risk, sustainability and certification

NB: What we need to understand is that certification only highlights and sets standards, it does not contribute to solving any issues that result from

their exclusion

Much effort focussed on the process and getting certified, but not nearly enough effort has been invested into understanding and finding solutions

where existing standards have been compromised

P

r

o

c

e

s

s

Certification objectives regarding pesticide-use

•Any pesticide used in forestry needs to conform to any environmental and/or ecological constraints. To ensure this, the FSC (as would any other certification body that

subscribes to sustainable forest management) has a process regarding pesticide use in forestry, with three main objectives:

– the identification and avoidance of ‘highly hazardous’ pesticides;

– the promotion of ‘non-pesticide’ methods of pest management as an element of an integrated pest management strategy; and

– the appropriate use of the pesticides that are used.

Pesticides by their very nature have a potential impact on the target, as well as non-target, biotic and abiotic

components

• Pesticides are NB in intensively managed plantations which are exotic to that country

• Countries with natural forests (or where indigenous species are planted) are not as dependent of pesticides (eg. Canada and Finland)

• In general, pesticide use within forest stands:– is highly regulated (in terms of type and management), and

– is part of a planned action to bring about a desired response, and as such is not ad hoc,

– and where pesticides are used, their application is directed

• Many forest stands receive minimal pesticide treatment, and of those that do, typically no more than two or three applications are made during an entire tree rotation

How did the forest industry respond?

• Representatives from forest companies formed the Timber Industry Pesticide Working Group to promote the responsible and effective use of pesticides in the forest industry, in line with Local Legislations, International Conventions and Global Certification Programmes.

• TIPWG was established in direct response to Certification and focused mainly on the first objective - “the identification and avoidance of ‘highly hazardous’ pesticides”

• This was (and still is) achieved through facilitating:– technical support,

– compliance,

– provision of guidelines,

– industry collaboration,

– group applications for derrogations.

• More reactionary in function

2013: TIPWG 12 years on

• Increase in biotic risk, coupled with

• Decreased availability of acceptable pesticides

– 9x Herbicides: triclopyr amine/ester; glyphosate; imazapyr; fluroxypyr; flumioxazin; fludioxonil; cycloxydim; clopyralid; clethodim

– 2x Fungicides specifically for “wattle rust”: propoconizole; azoxystrobin

– 3x synthetic Insecticides which are under derogation (alpha-cypermethrin; cypermethrin; deltamethrin), and 1x natural (Bacillus thuringiensis var Kurstaki)

• If we continue with BAU, the efforts of TIPWG according to the original mandate will not address future challenges

2013: TIPWG 12 years on and the need for change

• Change: We (as a forest industry) needed a significant change in how we were going about things (mind-shift) so as to:

– become pro-active rather than reactive

– achieve standards that supersede those of any certification body

– obtain and generate robust data related to pesticide use so we have a foot to stand on when making a pesticide-related “case”

• Development and adoption of a strategic research proposal with 4 key focus areas to take us forward:

“Towards reduced pesticide-use in South African Plantations”

1. Data is keyUsed as a tool to inform and direct research

The Risks Associated With Glyphosate-Based Herbicide Use in Planted

Forests (CA Rolando, BR Baillie, DG Thompson and KM Little - Forestry 2017)

Few countries have reliable up-to-date systems, as practiced in Canada, for tracking pesticide use across primary industry, including that for forest management.

A lack of data renders industries vulnerable to public enquiry and unable to demonstrate actual herbicide use (rates, active ingredients and total amounts applied), or changes in practice/trends of active ingredient usage over time, a factor which can reliably demonstrate a sector’s commitment to responsible use of herbicides.

More robust tracking of herbicide use at a national scale by all primary industries should be a consideration for all regions heavily dependent on pesticides for vegetation or weed control.

• List essential pesticides together with associated information so as to establish combined data-base for whole industry:– pesticide usage (type/amount/quantities/timing and methods of

application)

– associated pesticide properties (literature data base)

– associated target and non-target impacts (biotic and abiotic)

– impacts on production if not applied

• Used amongst other things to:– direct work/research into areas where there are gaps in information,

– link changes between past and current use, and

– be used to support areas targeted for reduction in use (help minimise use)

1. Data is keyUsed as a tool to inform and direct research

2. CollaborationWe are not alone!

• Other countries are facing similar challenges, not only in terms of pesticide use in general, but also regarding specific pesticides that are key to the success of their plantations

• What may be unique are our specific circumstances and what pesticides specifically apply to our country

• “Global” strategy needed so as to:

– combine efforts and form support group,

– develop principles, strategies and tools for dealing with key pesticides/practices, and to

– learn from others where they have been successful in terms of• reducing pesticide use, or

• where they have been successful in getting a pesticide re-instated (not derogation - that is temporary)

3. Revisit past research so as to:a. Show we are well along the way in terms of reduced pesticide use

from an integrated management perspective

• For Example: We already have a wealth of information regarding IVM and how it has resulted in reduced herbicide use– +25yrs of co-ordinated and planned research

• Much of this research already highlights integrated practices that reduces competition from vegetation and hence pesticide use:– slash retention/mulching; manual control (ring weeding); selective weed control

(control broadleaves and let grasses smother); cover cropping; optimising weeding operations (timing and/or distance); establishment vs. post-establishment phase; altitudinal gradients

• Consolidate this information, make it known, and combine this with data related to reduced pesticide usage for these practices, such that it can be built into and used by design (and not by default as is currently happening!

3. Revisit past research so as to:b. Link current pesticide use to any management decision

• This is critical to show that cognisance is being taken during the management decision process regarding pesticide use per se

• The use of a systems approach (“decision trees”) that shows steps are in place regarding pesticide use in terms of: – tree growth impacts (costs/benefits)

– environmental impacts

– ways to reduce off-site impacts

– ways to reduce pesticides where used

• Many examples of “decision trees” that relate to any pesticide used. The following is one example to illustrate the principles involved - all lack comprehensive data

Problem:Taking into consideration the consequences if problem not dealt with

(cost to company)

3. Take actionThis should only be considered if the problem cannot be tolerated or avoided (data to understand impacts = cost to company)pesticide use is but one of the options at this stage

2. Avoidance of problem- change silvicultural practice of

species

1. Take no action- need data to understand

impacts

A. Non-pesticide methodA non-pesticide method needs to be adopted unless it proves to be impractical or excessively costly

- species selection- biological control- cultural control methods

B. Pesticide methodA pesticide method should only be used if all other control options have been considered

3. Of those that are approved, determine non-target impacts in terms of:- operators - aquatic environment- neighbours/forest users - risk- local environment (invertebrates/flora/birds/mammals etc.)

2. List suitable pesticides taking into consideration only those products that are:- approved, and- those that provide effective control of the target species without damage to the

trees

1. Environmental sensitivity:- Need to understand the environmental sensitivity of the area to be treated in

terms of pesticide used. If not limiting then proceed.

Pesticide decision system(pesticide method of control)

4. From this list select suitable pesticide based on the following: - least toxic - most selective- most active - most cost-effectiveness

3. Revisit past research so as to:c. Re-assess all “treatments” to look for alternatives

• Re-assess those treatments that may have used pesticides, but often at reduced rates

• often 2nd best treatments that may not be significantly different

• in weed control it will mostly include a reduction in the intensity of operations = reduced herbicide use

– This will give a suite of alternative “treatments”

– For example - treatments in eucalypt weeding trials showing reduced spatial (area weeded) and intensity (number of operations) of weeding operations.

High weeding

intensity

Moderate weeding

intensity

Low weeding

intensity

1.5m Row weeding

Weedy

High weeding

intensity

Moderate weeding

intensity

Low weeding

intensity

2m Row weeding

Weedy

0 2 4 6 8

High weeding

intensity

Moderate weeding

intensity

Low weeding

intensity

2m Row weeding

Weedy

Dbh (cm)0 2 4 6 8

High weeding

intensity

Weedy

High weeding

intensity

Weedy

Dbh (cm)

EstonKT

Enon

4. Where pesticide use is key to staying in business:a. There must be continual development in terms of its use

International forestry data show that most off-site/off-target impacts that result from the delivery of pesticides during forestry operations is variable and strongly dependent on:

• application technique,

• the presence or absence of buffers, and

• pesticide characteristics

All of which can be managed!

Potential for more work to be done in this regards

4. Where pesticide use is key to staying in business:b. It may be time to re-visit known products that work

• As important as is the need to reduce/restrict pesticide use, is the need to re-visit current legislation regarding the use of specific products that are known to work, but that currently do not meet prescribed certification criteria

– this will be limited to a specific number of products where no suitable alternative has been found and where the success of the industry will be compromised if not used.

• For example (pesticides):– 1x fungicide for use in pines at planting;

– 1x insecticide for use in pines/eucalypts/wattle at planting;

– 1x insecticide for use in trees post-planting etc.

4. Where pesticide use is key to staying in business:c. We need to be actively testing alternative pesticides

• Where continued pesticide use is seen as the only alternative then we also need to:– test the use of alternative pesticides that are

currently not prohibited, nor likely to become prohibited with time

– set up design criteria/protocols for the testing of these products

• initial rapid screening trials to assess potential

• further development into use if they show promise

Additional Keys to success

• Although having a well co-ordinated and pro-active strategy is key to success we also need:

– Resources (support/people/time/funding) as this will ensure the ultimate success of this strategy

– Appropriate technology transfer system that allow for the uptake and adaption of any changes

– To actively use the principles of IPM as an enabling tool to bring about change

Acknowledge

• TIPWG as a group

• Forest industry and pesticide companies for their support

• Gerhard for his advice and assistance in finding alternative products (past, current and future)

• Congress organisers for this opportunity to share what we are doing

Thank you for tolerating a rather dry presentation!

I will be more than willing to engage if anyone is wanting further information - Collaboration? (for Laurence)