Lack of a management framework on which to base silviculture options has plagued the forest management planning process in Ontario. The Forest Management Planning Manual for Ontario's Crown Forests directs that strategic silvicultural options be developed and identified in terms of the (i) applicable forest unit, (ii) associated assumptions, and (iii) extent to which they can be used on a forest management unit. In this paper, we describe a framework for classifying management (or silviculture) intensity and propose definitions for extensive, basic, intensive, and elite intensities of silviculture to support the framework's use in planning and application. We outline how the Canadian Ecology Centre -Forestry Research Partnership, a research partnership between Tembec Inc., the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Natural Resources Canada, is considering applying these in the forest management planning process. The framework and definitions can be used to develop strategic silviculture options within an active adaptive management approach. This framework should help to reduce uncertainties associated with forest development, treatment costs, response to treatments, and success rates provided appropriate monitoring. The framework and definitions described were specifically developed for silviculture related to reforestation of even-aged boreal forests.

This study, a component of the Fallingsnow Ecosystem Project, was designed to investigate the effects of conifer release alternatives on the quality of regenerating trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.). A randomized block design was used to compare untreated aspen with aspen growing in areas treated with two broadcast cutting treatments (brushsaw and Silvana Selective) and two broadcast herbicide treatments (glyphosate and triclopyr). The glyphosate treatment virtually eliminated aspen, whereas triclopyr tended to top-kill aspen, resulting in lateral dominance. Both fall cutting treatments generated prolific aspen root suckering and stump sprouting. Stain was common in aspen across the study site in damaged, untreated, and post-treatment stems, indicating that stain develops rapidly in young aspen suckers. Stems damaged by the treatments had higher incidences of decay (33% of cut stems and 10% of herbicide-damaged stems) than untreated aspen (8% of stems); however, decay volume was low for all treatments (1–4% of total stem volume affected). The location of decay (e.g., near ground level in cut stems) and presence of stem crooks in herbicide-treated aspen are important effects of the treatments on aspen quality. Armillaria root disease, which was found throughout the study site, was more prevalent in roots of treatment-damaged and untreated aspen than in suckers that originated post-treatment. These differences can be attributed to proximity to parent stumps, prevalence of root wounds, and older age of damaged and untreated stems. Key words: aspen quality, decay, conifer release, vegetation management, fibre production

The term forest management refers to the science and business of operating a forest property, which, on Crown lands in Ontario, is typically a forest management unit. Silviculture is a component of forest management that refers to the suite of stand-level activities used to control stand composition and growth. Intensive forest management (IFM) is a concept that has been discussed and considered in Ontario for at least 30 years. Originally, it referred to an intensively managed forest in which most stands are subject to relatively intensive silvicultural practices. Over time, both professional foresters and stakeholders began using the term IFM as if it were synonymous with intensive silviculture. As a result, IFM has been inappropriately used to reference stand-level activities in several published definitions and key policy documents, creating confusion among the science community, professionals, and the public. This confusion has made it difficult to implement aspects of the 1999 Ontario Forest Accord, which calls for the use of IFM (meaning intensive silviculture) to increase forest growth and productivity in some areas to offset the withdrawal of lands for parks and protected areas. We call on forest managers to refer to the term IFM correctly and to portray forest management to stakeholders as consisting of a portfolio of natural and/or anthropogenic disturbance regimes. With this approach, forest managers could more meaningfully define the intensity of forest management and silviculture on their landbase.Key words: forest policy, land use planning, intensive silviculture, portfolio concept of forest management, triad principle of land-use zoning, Forest Research Partnership, NEBIE Plot Network RÉSUMÉ L'expression aménagement forestier fait référence à la science et à la gestion d'une propriété forestière, qui, sur les terres publiques de l'Ontario, constitue généralement une unité d'aménagement forestier. La sylviculture est un élément de l'aménagement forestier qui fait référence à une suite d'activités réalisées au niveau du peuplement dans le but de contrôler la composition et la croissance d'un peuplement. L'aménagement forestier intensif (AFI) est un concept qui a fait l'objet de discussion et d'étude depuis au moins 30 ans en Ontario. À l'origine, ce concept porte sur une forêt aménagée de façon intensive dans laquelle la plupart des peuplements sont assujettis à des pratiques sylvicoles relativement intenses. Avec le temps, tant les forestiers professionnels que les gestionnaires ont commencé à utiliser le terme AFI en tant que synonyme de sylviculture intensive. Il en résulte que l'expression AFI a été utilisée erronément en référence aux activités réal-isées au niveau des peuplements dans plusieurs définitions ayant été fait l'objet de publication ainsi que dans d'importants documents de politiques ce qui a créé de la confusion au sein de la communauté scientifique, des professionnels et du public. Cette confusion fait en sorte qu'il a été difficile d'implanter certains points de l'Entent...