comPte renDu Du scf.rncan.gc.ca/forum Centre Shaw, Ottawa |

comPte renDu Du scf.rncan.gc.ca/forum Centre Shaw, Ottawa |
Compte rendu du
Centre Shaw, Ottawa |Du 2 au 4 décembre 2014
Pour plus d’information :
Forumsurlarepressionravageursforestiers@rncan.gc.ca
scf.rncan.gc.ca/forum
Forum 2014
CATALOGAGEAVANTPUBLICATIONDEBIBLIOTHÈQUEET
ARCHIVESCANADA
Forumsurlarépressiondesravageursforestiers
(2014:Ottawa,Ontario)
ProceedingsoftheForestPestManagementForum2014
[ressourceélectronique]=CompterenduduForumsurla
répressiondesravageursforestiers2014.
MonographieélectroniqueenformatPDF.
Texteenanglaisetenfrançais.
Publiépar:Servicecanadiendesforêts.
ISBN978‐0‐660‐03492‐8
Nodecat.:Fo121‐1/2014‐PDF
1.Arbres‐‐Maladiesetfléaux,Luttecontre‐‐Canada‐‐
Congrès.
2.Insectesforestiers,Luttecontre‐‐Canada‐‐Congrès.
3.Insectesnuisibles,Luttecontre‐‐Canada‐‐Congrès.
4.Arbres‐‐Maladiesetfléaux‐‐Canada‐‐Congrès.
5Forêts‐‐Gestion‐‐Canada‐‐Congrès.
6.Arbres‐‐Maladiesetfléaux‐‐Congrès.
7.Pesticides‐‐Congrès.
I.Servicecanadiendesforêts.
II.Titre.
III.Titre:CompterenduduForumsurlarépressiondesravageurs
forestiers2014.
SB764C3F662014634.9’670971C2015‐980046‐3F
©SaMajestélaReineduChefduCanada2015
NumérodecatalogueFo121‐1/2014‐PDF
ISBN978‐100‐54789‐3
Lestextesapparaissentdanslaversionfournieparles
auteurs,avecl’autorisationdepublier.Cesderniers
demeurentresponsablestantdelaformequedufondde
leursécrits.
Forum 2014
TABLEDESMATIÈRES
TABLEDESMATIÈRES.................................................................................................ii Conte
COMITÉD’ORIENTATION.........................................................................................vii ÉQUIPEDEPLANIFICATION...................................................................................viii COMMANDITAIRESETPARTENAIRES....................................................................x REMERCIEMENTS........................................................................................................xi PROGRAMMEDUFORUMSURLARÉPRESSIONDESRAVAGEURS
FORESTIERS2014........................................................................................................2 Séance I : Mise à jour sur le projet PPAG ...................................................................... 2 Protégerlesforêtscanadiennescontrelesespècesexotiquesenvahissantesparla
biosurveillancenouvellegénération:l’ACIAetlepartenariat..............................................2 Protégerlesforêtscanadiennescontrelesespècesexotiquesenvahissantesparla
biosurveillancenouvellegénération:lascienceauservice....................................................2 Séance II : Mise à jour sur la stratégie nationale de lutte contre les ravageurs
forestiers ............................................................................................................................. 2 MiseàjourduGroupedetravailsurlesravageursforestiersduConseilcanadiendes
ministresdesforêts................................................................................................................................2 Cadred’analysedurisquedelaStratégienationaledeluttecontrelesravageurs
forestiers:réussitesetleçonsretenues.........................................................................................2 Évaluationdurisquereliéaudendroctonedupinponderosa:miseàjour......................2 Labasededonnéesnationalesurlesforêts:pertinence,utilisationetincidencedes
donnéesnationalessurlesforêtsduCanadaetleuraménagement....................................2 Séance III : La répression des ravageurs dans l’Est ...................................................... 2 RapportdeTerre‐Neuve‐et‐Labrador.............................................................................................2 RapportdelaNouvelle‐Écosse...........................................................................................................2 Séance IV : Rapport des États-Unis................................................................................. 2 AperçudesconditionsdesravageursforestiersauxÉtats‐Unis............................................2 Séance V : La répression des ravageurs dans l’Est ........................................................ 2 RapportduNouveau‐Brunswick.......................................................................................................2 RapportduQuébec.................................................................................................................................2 Rapportdel’Ontario..............................................................................................................................2 Séance VI : Au nord du 60e parallèle ............................................................................... 2 RapportdesTerritoiresduNord‐Ouest..........................................................................................2 ii
Forum 2014
Séance VII : Règlements sur les pesticides, solutions possibles, usage limité .............. 3 Introduction..............................................................................................................................................3 Quandleprocessusréglementaireetlesexigencesopérationnellessont
inconciliables:commentpeut‐onlesconcilier?...........................................................................3 Miseàjourdel’ARLA.............................................................................................................................3 Aperçudel’évaluationenvironnementaledel’ARLA................................................................3 Séance VIII : La sémiochimie des insectes ...................................................................... 3 Incidencesdesappâtsimprégnésdephéromonesetdelahauteurdespiègessurle
dépistagedescérambycidés................................................................................................................3 Incidencedelaconceptiondespiègesetdeladistanceentreceux‐cisurlacapture
descérambycidés....................................................................................................................................3 Détectionprécocedesinsectesexotiques:pointdevueaméricain.....................................3 L’incidencedel’hétérogénéitédespaysagessurl’étudeetladétectiondes
cérambycidés............................................................................................................................................3 Lesprioritésetlesbesoinsdel'ACIAencequiconcerneladétectionetlasurveillance
desespècesforestièresexotiques.....................................................................................................3 Séance IX : Mises à jour sur les espèces exotiques envahissantes et les matériaux
d’emballage en bois ........................................................................................................... 3 Interceptionsdesmatériauxd’emballageenboismassif:ajoutducontexteaux
détections...................................................................................................................................................3 Séance X : La répression des ravageurs dans l’Ouest ................................................... 4 RapportduManitoba.............................................................................................................................4 RapportdelaSaskatchewan...............................................................................................................4 Rapportdel’Alberta...............................................................................................................................4 RapportdelaColombie‐Britannique...............................................................................................4 Séance XI : Pathologie forestière ..................................................................................... 4 Heterobasidionirregulare,l’agentpathogènedelamaladiedesracines:envahisseur,
agentdeproliférationoutoutsimplementimportant?............................................................4 Séance XII : La foresterie urbaine ................................................................................... 4 EngagementduServicecanadiendesforêtsenverslesforêtsurbaines:science,
politiqueetprisedeposition..............................................................................................................4 Séance XIII : Mise à jour de l’ACIA ............................................................................... 4 Miseàjoursurlasurveillancephytosanitairedel’ACIA..........................................................4 L’importancedelaConventioninternationalepourlaprotectiondesvégétauxetde
sesnormes.................................................................................................................................................4 ProtégerlesressourcesvégétalestoutenfacilitantlecommerceenAmériquedu
Nord..............................................................................................................................................................4 Approchestratégiquepouraborderlesproblèmesdesantédelafauneetdelaflore.4 Miseàjoursurlesrôlesetresponsabilitésauseindel’ACIAnouvellement
restructurée..............................................................................................................................................4 iii
Forum 2014
Séance XIV : Tordeuse des bourgeons de l’épinette ...................................................... 5 LastratégieduSCFpourlatordeusedesbourgeonsdel’épinetteetl’engagement
principaldelastratégied’interventionrapide:aperçuetfinancementreçu..................5 Nouvellesdufront:cequenousapprenonssurlesapprochesdeluttecontrela
tordeuse......................................................................................................................................................5 Unbio‐indicateurduvolmigratoirechezlatordeuse...............................................................5 EssaisdeconfusionsexuellecontrelatordeuseauQuébec:édition2014.......................5 Implicationdupublicetpartenariat:développeruneapprocheproactivepourparler
desinquiétudesconcernantlagestiondelatordeusedesbourgeonsdel'épinette......5 «Stratégied’interventionhâtive»auCanadaatlantique:passerdelathéorieàla
pratique......................................................................................................................................................5 Québec.........................................................................................................................................................5 Lechangementclimatiqueetlagestiondesravageurs:projetsderecherche
collaboratifsentreleCanadaetlesÉtats‐Unis.............................................................................5 RÉSUMÉSDESPRÉSENTATIONS..............................................................................6 Séance I : Mise à jour sur le projet PPAG ...................................................................... 7 Séance II : Mise à jour sur la Stratégie nationale de lutte contre les ravageurs
forestiers ............................................................................................................................. 8 MiseàjourduGroupedetravailsurlesravageursforestiersduConseilcanadiendes
ministresdesforêts................................................................................................................................9 Cadred’analysedurisquedelaStratégienationaledeluttecontrelesravageurs
forestiers:réussitesetleçonsretenues......................................................................................10 Labasededonnéesnationalesurlesforêts:pertinence,utilisationetincidencedes
donnéesnationalessurlesforêtsduCanadaetleuraménagement.................................11 Séance III : La répression des ravageurs dans l’Est .................................................... 12 RapportdeTerre‐Neuve‐et‐Labrador..........................................................................................13 RapportdelaNouvelle‐Écosse........................................................................................................25 Séance IV : Rapport des États-Unis............................................................................... 29 Séance V : La répression des ravageurs dans l’Est ...................................................... 30 RapportduNouveauBrunswick.....................................................................................................31 RapportduQuébec..............................................................................................................................33 StatusofImportantInsects,Diseases,andAbioticEventsAffectingForestHealthin
Ontario2014..........................................................................................................................................37 Séance VI : Au nord du 60e parallèle ............................................................................. 54 RapportdesTerritoiresduNord‐Ouest.......................................................................................55 Séance VII : Règlements sur les pesticides, solutions possibles, usage limité ............ 62 Quandleprocessusréglementaireetlesexigencesopérationnellessont
inconciliables:commentpeut‐onlesconcilier?........................................................................63 iv
Forum 2014
Séance VIII : La sémiochimie des insectes .................................................................... 64 Incidencesdesappâtsimprégnésdephéromonesetdelahauteurdespiègessurle
dépistagedescérambycidés.............................................................................................................65 Incidencedelaconceptiondespiègesetdeladistanceentreceux‐cisurlacapture
descérambycidés.................................................................................................................................66 Détectionprécocedesinsectesexotiques:pointdevueaméricain..................................67 L’incidencedel’hétérogénéitédespaysagessurl’étudeetladétectiondes
cérambycidés.........................................................................................................................................68 Lesprioritésetlesbesoinsdel'ACIAencequiconcerneladétectionetlasurveillance
desespècesforestièresexotiques..................................................................................................69 Séance IX : Mises à jour sur les espèces exotiques envahissantes et les matériaux
d’emballage en bois ......................................................................................................... 70 Séance X : La répression des ravageurs dans l’Ouest ................................................. 71 RapportduManitoba..........................................................................................................................72 RapportdelaSaskatchewan............................................................................................................78 Rapportdel’Alberta............................................................................................................................90 RapportdelaColombie‐Britannique............................................................................................92 Séance XI : Pathologie forestière ................................................................................... 94 Heterobasidionirregulare,l’agentpathogènedelamaladiedesracines:envahisseur,
agentdeproliférationoutoutsimplementimportant?.........................................................95 Séance XII : La foresterie urbaine ................................................................................. 96 EngagementduServicecanadiendesforêtsenverslesforêtsurbaines:science,
politiqueetprisedeposition...........................................................................................................97 Séance XIII : Mise à jour de l’ACIA ............................................................................. 98 Miseàjoursurlasurveillancephytosanitairedel’ACIA.......................................................99 L’importancedelaConventioninternationalepourlaprotectiondesvégétauxetde
sesnormes............................................................................................................................................100 ProtégerlesressourcesvégétalestoutenfacilitantlecommerceenAmériquedu
Nord.........................................................................................................................................................101 Séance XIV : Tordeuse des bourgeons de l’épinette .................................................. 102 Nouvellesdufront:cequenousapprenonssurlesapprochesdeluttecontrela
tordeuse.................................................................................................................................................103 Unbio‐indicateurduvolmigratoirechezlatordeuse..........................................................104 EssaisdeconfusionsexuellecontrelatordeuseauQuébec:édition2014..................105 Implicationdupublicetpartenariat:développeruneapprocheproactivepour
discuterdesenjeuxreliésàlagestiondelatordeusedesbourgeonsdel'épinette..106 «Stratégied’interventionhâtive»contrelatordeuseauCanadaatlantique:passerde
lathéorieàlapratique.....................................................................................................................107 v
Forum 2014
RÉSUMÉSDESAFFICHES.......................................................................................108 Desbasesdedonnéesensoutienàl’analysederisquedesravageurs...........................109 Lecouvertforestierpermanent:unestratégiedelutteantiparasitaire.......................110 Voiesd’entréepotentiellesàrisqueélevépourlesravageursforestiersselonles
importationsdeboisauCanada...................................................................................................111 Lecharançonduhêtre,Orchestesfagi–écologieetgestion...............................................112 Plantes‐hôtespréféréespourl’alimentationducharançonduhêtre,uninsecte
envahissantdansleCanadaatlantique......................................................................................113 L’ipsénol,lemonochamoletl’α‐pinène:unecombinaisondepiègesappâtéspourles
espècesdeMonochamus(cérambycidés)auCanadaetauxÉtats‐Unis..........................114 LISTEDESPARTICIPANTS....................................................................................115 vi
Forum 2014
COMITÉD’ORIENTATION
AnthonyHopkin,responsable,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendes
forêts,CentredeforesteriedesGrandsLacs
KathyBeaton,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedel’Atlantique
DavidCarmichael,PrinceEdwardIslandDepartmentofAgricultureandForestry
LiseCaron,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesterie
desLaurentides
TerryCaunter,SantéCanada,Agencederéglementationdelalutteantiparasitaire
TimEbata,BritishColumbiaMinistryofForests,LandsandNaturalResourceOperations
JeremyGullison,ministèredesRessourcesnaturellesduNouveau‐Brunswick
MichaelIrvine,MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario(Pesticides‐
usagelimité)
KlausKoehler,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
DanLavigne,NewfoundlandandLabradorDepartmentofNaturalResources
EricaSamis,AlbertaSustainableResourceDevelopment,ForestManagementBranch
RobertLegare,GovernmentofYukon,Energy,Mines,andResource
ChrisMacQuarrie,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesGrandsLacs
RoryMcIntosh,SaskatchewanMinistryofEnvironment,ForestServiceBranch
LouisMorneau,MinistèredesForêts,delaFauneetdesParcsduQuébec
VinceNealis,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresterieduPacifique
StephenNicholson,ValentBioSciencesCanadaLtd.
JakubOlesinski,GovernmentoftheNorthwestTerritories,EnvironmentandNatural
Resources
GinaPenny,NovaScotiaDepartmentofNaturalResources
StanPhippen,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesGrandsLacs
TodRamsfield,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresterieduNord
FionaRoss,ManitobaConservation,ForestryBranch
Jean‐LucSt‐Germain,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Région
delacapitalenationale
TaylorScarr,MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario
vii
Forum 2014
ÉQUIPEDEPLANIFICATION
StanPhippen,chefdel’équipedeplanification,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Service
canadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesGrandsLacs
BenoitArsenault,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesLaurentides
LiseCaron,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesterie
desLaurentides
AnthonyHopkin,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesGrandsLacs
KarenJamieson,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesGrandsLacs
IsabelleLamarre,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesLaurentides
FionaOrtiz,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesGrandsLacs
DianePaquet,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesLaurentides
StephanieParzei,InstitutforestierduCanada
MariePothier,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centrede
foresteriedesLaurentides
viii
Forum 2014
COMPTERENDUDUFORUMSURLARÉPRESSIONDES
RAVAGEURSFORESTIERS2014
CENTRESHAW
2AU4DÉCEMBRE2014
LeForumsurlarépressiondesravageursestparrainéannuellementparleServicecanadiendes
forêtsdeRessourcesnaturellesCanada.Ilpermetàdesreprésentantsdediversgouvernements
provinciauxetdugouvernementfédéraldeprésenteretd’examinerlasituationdesprincipaux
ravageursforestiersauCanadaetauxÉtats‐Unis.
AnthonyHopkin
Responsable,Comitéd’Orientation
RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesGrandsLacs
NaturalResourcesCanada,CanadianForestService,GreatLakesForestryCentre
1219QueenStreetEast,SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Anthony.Hopkin@nrcan.gc.ca
705‐541‐5568
POURUSAGEOFFICIELSEULEMENT
Lestextesapparaissentdanslaversionfournieparlesauteurs,avecl’autorisationdepublier.Ces
derniersdemeurentresponsablestantdelaformequedufonddeleursécrits/résumés.Lesarticles
qui paraissent dans ce rapport sont reproduits tels qu’ils ont été reçus, sans être soumis à une
lectured’expertsniàunerévisionparlepersonnelduServicecanadiendesforêts.
ix
Forum 2014
COMMANDITAIRESETPARTENAIRES
x
Forum 2014
REMERCIEMENTS
LeForum2014surlarépressiondesravageursforestiersaconnuencoreungrandsuccès
grâceàlacontributiondeplusieurspersonnes.Nousremercionstoutd’abordnos
conférenciersquiontfaitétatdeleursconnaissancessurlesquestionsdiscutéesetquiont
bienvoululesrésumerpourlesbesoinsduprésentrecueil.Nousaimerionsaussi
témoignernotrereconnaissanceauxpersonnesquiontparticipéausoutientechnique.Nos
remerciementsvontégalementauxparticipantsquiprovenaientdedifférentesrégionsdu
CanadaetdesÉtats‐Unis.
LECOMITÉORGANISATEURDUFORUM2014
xi
Forum 2014
PROGRAMMEDUFORUMSURLARÉPRESSIONDES
RAVAGEURSFORESTIERS2014
2au4décembre2014
CentreShaw
8h
8h20
MARDI2DÉCEMBRE
Inscription
BienvenueauForumsurlarépressiondesravageursforestiers
GlennMason,Sous‐ministreadjoint,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadien
desforêts
Présidente:LiseCaron,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
SéanceI:MiseàjoursurleprojetPPAG
8h30 Protégerlesforêtscanadiennescontrelesespècesexotiquesenvahissantesparla
biosurveillancenouvellegénération:l’ACIAetlepartenariat
CameronDuff,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
8h40 Protégerlesforêtscanadiennescontrelesespècesexotiquesenvahissantesparla
biosurveillancenouvellegénération:lascienceauservice
RichardHamelin,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
Présidente:LiseCaron,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
SéanceII:Miseàjoursurlastratégienationaledeluttecontrelesravageurs
forestiers
8h50 MiseàjourduGroupedetravailsurlesravageursforestiersduConseilcanadiendes
ministresdesforêts
JudiBeck,CoprésidenteduGroupedetravailsurlesravageursforestiersduCCMF,
RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
9h10 Cadred’analysedurisquedelaStratégienationaledeluttecontrelesravageursforestiers:
réussitesetleçonsretenues
JaniceHodge,Coordonnatricetechnique,JCHForestPestManagement
9h30 Évaluationdurisquereliéaudendroctonedupinponderosa:miseàjour
JudiBeck,CoprésidenteduGroupedetravailsurlesravageursforestiersduCCMF,
BarryCooke,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
Forum 2014
9h50 Labasededonnéesnationalesurlesforêts:pertinence,utilisationetincidencedes
donnéesnationalessurlesforêtsduCanadaetleuraménagement
SimonBridge,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
10h10 Pause
Président:TimEbata,BritishColumbiaMinistryofForests,LandsandNaturalResourceOperations
SéanceIII:Larépressiondesravageursdansl’Est
10h50
11h10
RapportdeTerre‐Neuve‐et‐Labrador
DanLavigne,NewfoundlandandLabradorDepartmentofNaturalResources
RapportdelaNouvelle‐Écosse
GinaPenny,NovaScotiaDepartmentofNaturalResources
11h30 Dîner(lerepasn’estpasfourni)
SéanceIV:RapportdesÉtats‐Unis
13h
AperçudesconditionsdesravageursforestiersauxÉtats‐Unis
RobertRabaglia,USDAForestService,ForestHealthProtection
Présidente:GinaPenny,NovaScotiaDepartmentofNaturalResources
SéanceV:Larépressiondesravageursdansl’Est
13h30 RapportduNouveau‐Brunswick
RobertJohns,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,pourleministère
desRessourcesnaturellesduNouveau‐Brunswick
13h50 RapportduQuébec
LouisMorneau,MinistèredesForêts,delaFauneetdesParcsduQuébec
14h10 Rapportdel’Ontario
TaylorScarr,MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario
SéanceVI:Aunorddu60eparallèle
14h30 RapportdesTerritoiresduNord‐Ouest
RobertRabaglia,USDAForestService,ForestHealthProtection
14h50 Pause
2
Forum 2014
Président:MichaelIrvine,MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario
SéanceVII:Règlementssurlespesticides,solutionspossibles,usagelimité
15h30 Introduction
MichaelIrvine,MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario
15h35 Quandleprocessusréglementaireetlesexigencesopérationnellessontinconciliables:
commentpeut‐onlesconcilier?
DaveKreutzweiser,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
16h05 Miseàjourdel’ARLA
TerryCaunter,SantéCanada,Agencederéglementationdelalutteantiparasitaire
16h30 Aperçudel’évaluationenvironnementaledel’ARLA
ScottKirby,Directeur,SantéCanada,Agencederéglementationdelalutteantiparasitaire
17h
Ajournementdestravaux
MERCREDI3DÉCEMBRE
8h
Inscription
Président:JeremyAllison,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
SéanceVIII:Lasémiochimiedesinsectes
8h30 Incidencesdesappâtsimprégnésdephéromonesetdelahauteurdespiègessurle
dépistagedescérambycidés
JonSweeney,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
8h55 Incidencedelaconceptiondespiègesetdeladistanceentreceux‐cisurlacapturedes
cérambycidés
JeremyAllison,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
9h20 Détectionprécocedesinsectesexotiques:pointdevueaméricain
RobertRabaglia,USDAForestService
9h45 L’incidencedel’hétérogénéitédespaysagessurl’étudeetladétectiondescérambycidés
BrianStrom,USDAForestService
10h10 Pause
10h40 Lesprioritésetlesbesoinsdel'ACIAencequiconcerneladétectionetlasurveillancedes
espècesforestièresexotiques
TroyKimoto,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
SéanceIX:Misesàjoursurlesespècesexotiquesenvahissantesetlesmatériaux
d’emballageenbois
11h05 Interceptionsdesmatériauxd’emballageenboismassif:ajoutducontexteauxdétections
GrahamS.Thurston,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
11h25 Dîner(lerepasn’estpasfourni)
3
Forum 2014
Président:TaylorScarr,MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario
SéanceX:Larépressiondesravageursdansl’Ouest
13h
RapportduManitoba
FionaRoss,ManitobaConservationandWaterStewardship,ForestryBranch
13h20 RapportdelaSaskatchewan
RoryMcIntosh,SaskatchewanMinistryofEnvironment,ForestServiceBranch
13h40 Rapportdel’Alberta
EricaSamis,AlbertaSustainableResourceDevelopment,ForestManagementBranch
14h
RapportdelaColombie‐Britannique
TimEbata,BritishColumbiaMinistryofForests,LandsandNaturalResourceOperations
Président:AnthonyHopkin,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
SéanceXI:Pathologieforestière
14h20 Heterobasidionirregulare,l’agentpathogènedelamaladiedesracines:envahisseur,agent
deproliférationoutoutsimplementimportant?
GlennStanosz,UniversityofWisconsin‐Madison
15h Pause
SéanceXII:Laforesterieurbaine
15h20 EngagementduServicecanadiendesforêtsenverslesforêtsurbaines:science,politique
etprisedeposition
GlennStanosz,UniversityofWisconsin‐Madison
Président:CameronDuff,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
SéanceXIII:Miseàjourdel’ACIA
15h40 Miseàjoursurlasurveillancephytosanitairedel’ACIA
MireilleMarcotte,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
16h
L’importancedelaConventioninternationalepourlaprotectiondesvégétauxetdeses
normes
CameronDuff,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
16h10 ProtégerlesressourcesvégétalestoutenfacilitantlecommerceenAmériqueduNord
RebeccaLee,NorthAmericanPlantProtectionOrganization
16h20
16h40
17h
Approchestratégiquepouraborderlesproblèmesdesantédelafauneetdelaflore
MikeWood,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
Miseàjoursurlesrôlesetresponsabilitésauseindel’ACIAnouvellementrestructurée
GregWolff,Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments
Ajournementdestravaux
4
Forum 2014
JEUDI4DÉCEMBRE
8h
Inscription
Présidente:LiseCaron,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
SéanceXIV:Tordeusedesbourgeonsdel’épinette
8h20 LastratégieduSCFpourlatordeusedesbourgeonsdel’épinetteetl’engagementprincipal
delastratégied’interventionrapide:aperçuetfinancementreçu
DerekMacFarlane,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
Essaisdelaméthoded’interventionprécoce
8h40 Nouvellesdufront:cequenousapprenonssurlesapprochesdeluttecontrelatordeuse
JacquesRégnière,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
9h
9h20
Unbio‐indicateurduvolmigratoirechezlatordeuse
JohanneDelisle,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
EssaisdeconfusionsexuellecontrelatordeuseauQuébec:édition2014
JohanneDelisle,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
9h40 Implicationdupublicetpartenariat:développeruneapprocheproactivepourparlerdes
inquiétudesconcernantlagestiondelatordeusedesbourgeonsdel'épinette
VéroniqueMartel,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
10h Pause
Interventionprovincialefaceàl’infestation
10h20 «Stratégied’interventionhâtive»auCanadaatlantique:passerdelathéorieàlapratique
RobertJohns,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
10h40 Québec
LouisMorneau,MinistèredesForêts,delaFauneetdesParcsduQuébec
11h
Lechangementclimatiqueetlagestiondesravageurs:projetsderecherchecollaboratifs
entreleCanadaetlesÉtats‐Unis
BarryCooke,RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts
11h20 Discussionsengroupe
12h
Ajourn
5
Forum 2014
RÉSUMÉSDESPRÉSENTATIONS
6
Forum 2014
SéanceI:MiseàjoursurleprojetPPAG
(nondisponible)
7
Forum 2014
SéanceII:MiseàjoursurlaStratégie
nationaledeluttecontrelesravageurs
forestiers
8
Forum 2014
MiseàjourduGroupedetravailsurlesravageursforestiersduConseilcanadien
desministresdesforêts
JudiBeck1,RosalynLawrence2etJean‐LucSt‐Germain3
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesterieduPacifique
506WestBurnsideRoad,Victoria(BritishColumbia)V8Z1M5
2MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario,Divisiondespolitiques
WhitneyBlock,99WellesleyStreetWest,Toronto(Ontario)M7A1W3
3RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesLaurentides
1055,rueduP.E.P.S.,C.P.10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy,Québec(Québec)G1V4C7
Les gouvernements fédéraux, provinciaux et territoriaux font progresser les objectifs d’une
StratégienationaledeluttecontrelesravageursforestierssousleleadershipduConseilcanadien
desministresdesforêts(CCMF).En2014‐2015,leGroupedetravailsurlesravageursforestiersdu
CCMF a fait progresser une stratégie de mise en œuvre pour un nouveau plan stratégique
quinquennalalignéauxprioritésduCCMFetauxbesoinsdesautorités.Bienquelescomposantes
debasedelaStratégienationaledemeurentaucœurdecettestratégie,denouvellesthématiquesde
travailontémergéestelsquelesanalysessocio‐économiquesenlienaveclagestiondesravageurs,
l’impactetl’adaptationauxchangementsclimatiquesdansuncontextedegestiondesravageurset
lesréponsesintergouvernementalesfaceauxespècesenvahissantes.Laprésentationfourniraune
mise à jour sur les résultats de ce processus et sur le statut des projets techniques entrepris en
2014‐2015.
9
Forum 2014
Cadred’analysedurisquedelaStratégienationaledeluttecontrelesravageurs
forestiers:réussitesetleçonsretenues
JaniceHodge
JCHForestPestManagement,7700DeJongDrive,Coldstream,BritishColumbiaV1B1P3
Depuisplusieursannées,lecadred’analysedurisquephytosanitaire(ARP)delaStratégienationale
de lutte contre les ravageurs forestiers (SNLRF) est mis à la disposition des membres du Conseil
canadiendesministresdesforêts(CCMF)partoutauCanada.Aucoursdecettepériode,plusieurs
ARPouARPmodifiéesontétéréalisées;ces analysesportaientsurplusieursravageursforestiers
envahissants et indigènes et couvraient une ou plusieurs juridictions. Dans le cadre du processus
d’apprentissagecontinu,lesutilisateursontétéinvitésàfairepartdeleurscommentairesafinde
déterminersil’ARPavaitréponduàleursbesoinset,cequiétaitencoreplusimportant,àindiquer
cequiavaitbienetcequiavaitmalfonctionné.Cesrenseignementsservirontàéclairerleguidede
l’utilisateurdel’ARPetàévaluerlamiseenapplicationducadreparlesmembresduCCMFetson
incidence sur les processus décisionnels – une mesure de la performance définie dans le plan de
miseenœuvredelaSNLRFde2008.
10
Forum 2014
Labasededonnéesnationalesurlesforêts:pertinence,utilisationetincidencedes
donnéesnationalessurlesforêtsduCanadaetleuraménagement
S.R.J.Bridge
RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,580rueBooth,Ottawa(Ontario)K1A0E4
Depuis1990,labasededonnéesnationalesurlesforêts(BDNF)fournitdesrenseignementsfiables
etdisponiblesentempsopportunsurl’aménagementdesforêtsauCanadaetsonincidencesurles
ressources forestières. Cette initiative fédérale, provinciale et territoriale vise à fournir des
informations cruciales afin de contribuer à l’élaboration et à l’amélioration des pratiques et des
politiques en matière d’aménagement durable des forêts; promouvoir les fortes compétences du
Canadaenmatièred’environnement;etalimenterledébatpublicsurl’aménagementdesforêtsau
Canada.LesutilisateursdelaBDNFproviennentdetouslessecteursdelasociété.Ilsutilisentles
donnéesafinderépondreauxexigencesnationalesetinternationalesenmatièredeproductionde
rapports,d’éclaireretd’influencerlesdécideurs,d’offriruncontenupertinentetutileàunauditoire
payant,d’influersurlesmarchésetlesinvestisseursetdesoutenirlarecherche.Cetteprésentation
fourniraunaperçudesinformationsdisponiblesdanslabasededonnées(tellesquedesdonnées
sur les superficies perturbées par les insectes, le feu et la récolte) et de leur pertinence, leur
utilisation et leur incidence. Les difficultés que pose la mise à jour de la base de données et les
nouvelles possibilités seront abordées dans notre présentation, notamment les évènements
importantsquiaurontlieuen2015nécessitantlaproductionderapportssurlesforêtsduCanada
etsurleuraménagement.
11
Forum 2014
SéanceIII:Larépressiondesravageurs
dansl’Est
12
Forum 2014
RapportdeTerre‐Neuve‐et‐Labrador
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
DanLavigne
NewfoundlandandLabradorDepartmentofNaturalResources,4HeraldAvenue,P.O.Box2006
CornerBrook(Newfoundland)A2H6J8
The following is a brief summary of the status of forest pests and results of monitoring activities
conductedintheprovinceofNewfoundlandandLabrador(NL)in2014.
Please note – These are only interim results. Final results will be made available in the provincial
annualforestpeststatusreport.Thisreportwillbeavailableat:
http://www.nr.gov.nl.ca/nr/forestry/insect_disease/index.html.
InvasiveForestPests
IntheprovinceofNewfoundlandandLabrador(NL)invasiveforestpestsareprimarilymonitored
by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Pests monitored by the CFIA in NL in 2014
included:gypsymoth,brownsprucelonghornbeetle(BSLB),emeraldashborer,Asianlong‐horned
beetle, Japanese beetle and monitoring of other wood boring insects through the IAS forest pest
survey.ResultsofmonitoringconductedfortheseinvasivepestscanbeobtainedfromRonNeville,
PlantHealthSurveyBiologist,CFIA,AtlanticCanada(ron.neville@inspection.gc.ca).
Presently,theprovinceonlymonitorsEuropeanScleroderrisCankerandBalsamWoollyAdelgid‐
twoinvasivespeciesestablishedintheprovince.
EuropeanScleroderrisCanker
The European strain of Sclerroderris Canker was
first found in the St. John’s area in 1979. This
introduced disease poses a threat to indigenous
redpineofecologicalsignificanceandplantedred
pine on the island. Following its discovery, efforts
were made to contain the disease through
sanitationandtheuseofquarantinestorestrictthe
movementofinfectedmaterial.Thiswassuccessful
forca.25years;however,in2007thediseasewas
found 150 km outside the quarantine zone in the
Berry Hill area. This site was sanitized in 2008.
Despitetheseeffortsanadditionalthreesiteswere
detectedin2011(seemap).Oneofthesesiteswas
only 3 km north of the site detected in 2007. In
2012, directed survey efforts detected an
additional four sites outside the quarantine area
(seemap).
13
Forum 2014
ProhibitionsofmovementwereissuedbytheCFIAtorestrictthemovementoflivingpineatand
withina1kmradiusofthesesites.Anapplicationtosanitizethesesiteswasalsosubmittedunder
the province’s Environmental Protection Act. Following the 45‐day Environmental Assessment
reviewprocess,theapplicationwasapproved.Todate,onlyone(ColdBrook)ofthesevensiteshas
beensanitizedwithsanitationstillbeingproposedattheothersites.
Fortunately aerial surveys and general surveillance results have not detected any new sites since
2012.Withinknownsites,however,levelsofinfectionandmortalityhaveincreased.
BalsamWoollyAdelgid
Unlikeotherjurisdictions,noannualmonitoringofoverwinteringsurvivalofbalsamwoollyadelgid
(BWA)lifestagesisconductedCurrently,theonlyinformationcollectedistheincidenceandlevels
ofBWAdamageobservedduringsurveillanceofsilviculturalareas(i.e.plantationsandthinnings).
To date, results have shown that the incidence and damage observed from BWA is higher in
southwesternandcentralportionsoftheprovince(seemap)withtwigattack/damage(seeimages)
the most common. Conversely, the incidence and levels of damage found at higher latitudes and
higher elevation sites is lower or absent. This is most likely related to climate (i.e. colder winter
temperatures).BWAdamageisparticularlyevidentincoastalareas,alongroadcorridorsandother
openareas.
14
Forum 2014
SpecialnoteregardingBSLB:
On the island over 85% of the
growing stock is softwood with
spruce representing ca. 35%. Spruce
is an important species to the
sawmilling industry and to the
pulping process utilized by Corner
Brook Pulp and Paper (i.e. certain
compositionofsprucerequired).
Concerns still exist over the
potentialderegulationofBSLBpest
and its spread to the island. A
discussion was held with senior
CFIAandNLDNRofficialsregarding
thepotentialuseofmeasuresatthe
Ferry Terminal in North Sydney to
reducetheriskofspreadofBSLBto
theisland.
GiventhenewBSLBdetectionsinKouchibouguacNationalPark,andthepotentiallinktofirewood
movementbythepublic,theadditionoftrapsinGrosMorneandTerraNovaNationalparksaspart
ofCFIABSLBdetectioneffortsontheislandshouldalsobeconsideredfor2015.
NativeForestPests
MajornativeforestinsectpestsaremonitoredannuallybytheProvince.Theyincludetheeastern
spruce budworm (SBW), eastern hemlock looper (HL), balsam fir sawfly (BFS), as well as other
minorpests.Aerialcontrolprogramsarealsoconductedasneededtoprotecttheforestresources
oftheprovince.
Controlin2014
Withpopulationsofmajorforestinsectsforecastedtobeatlowlevelsacrosstheislandin2014,no
aerialcontrolprogramwasrequired.Thisisonlythethirdtimeinthelast36yearsthatnoaerial
control program has been conducted in Newfoundland. In Labrador, SBW populations were
forecasttobeactiveagainfortheeighthstraightyearintheGooseBayarea;however,theabsence
orlackofaforestindustryintheareaprecludedtheneedforanyprotection.
Easternsprucebudworm
AerialDefoliationSurveyResults‐Asexpected,moderatetosevere(M‐S)defoliationwasobserved
againintheGooseBayareain2014.Atotalof50,767haofdefoliationweremapped.Mortalitywas
observedwithinhalfofthisarea.Thetotalareadefoliatedin2014waslowerthanthe82,230haof
M‐S defoliation observed in 2013 (see map below). On the island of Newfoundland, no SBW
defoliationwasobservedin2014.
15
Forum 2014
PheromoneTrappingResults–InresponsetorisingSBWpopulationsintheprovinceofQuebec,NL
increased its pheromone trapping network to ca. 100 locations on the island in 2012. Two
Unitrap® non‐saturating traps are placed 30‐40 m apart at each location. Each trap contains one
330 µg SBW flex lure and one Vaportape killing strip. In 2014, based on differences in seasonal
developmenttrapswereplacedovertheperiod ofJune 16toJuly 4inadvance oftheadultflight
period. Unlike in 2013, where a 2‐4x increase was noted in trap catches particularly on the
northern Peninsula, trap catches dropped by the same order of magnitude in 2014. The overall
provincial trap catch decreased from 86.3 moths per trap to 23.4 moths per trap. In a similar
fashion,trapsusedonthewestcoastandnorthernpeninsulaformonitoringmothmigrationinto
the province detected little or no moth immigration in 2014 compared to 2013. In Labrador, the
trapping network for monitoring SBW populations was expanded to include the Cartwright and
Port Hope Simpson areas. Within the Goose Bay area, in Labrador, where SBW populations
remainedactive,trapcatchesrangedfrom158to1479mothspertrap.
16
Forum 2014
In 2014, SBW pheromone trapping activities also included a paired comparison of trap catches
using 330 µg SBW flex lures supplied by two different suppliers (Contech and Synergy). The
provinceofNLstartedusingtheSBW330µgflexlurefromSynergyin2012.Trapswerepairedat
116 locations and, surprisingly, trap catches were consistently 2x higher in the traps using the
Synergy versus the Contech lure. Given both lures had the same pheromone load, the reason for
thesedifferencesintrapcatchwasunknown.LuresfrombothsupplierswereprovidedtoDr.Peter
SilkoftheCFStoexaminethereleaserates.Regardlessofexposuretimehefoundthereleaserate
of the Synergy lure to be roughly 2x higher. This difference in release rate and subsequent trap
catcheswillobviouslyhaveimplicationswhenyeartoyeartrendsorresultsbetweenjurisdictions
areexamined.
Synergy Lure
Moths - Contech Lure
17
Contech
Forum 2014
Forecast/Outlook for 2015 – To forecast SBW population and damage levels expected in 2015,
collection and processing of branch samples for overwintering second instar (L2) larvae was
conducted. Sampling in Labrador was expanded in 2014 to also include the Cartwright and Port‐
HopeSimpsonareas.L2resultsfromLabradorindicatethatSBWpopulationscapableofcausingM‐
SdefoliationwillagainbeactiveintheGooseBayareain2015–thiswillbeninthconsecutiveyear
thatpopulationshavebeenactiveinthisarea.
Ontheisland,in2014,140locationswereassessedforL2s,withspecialattentiongiventoareason
the northern and along the west coast (i.e. areas where evidence of moth immigration was
observed in 2012 and 2013). Of the 140 locations assessed, 27 locations were NIL, 51 had trace
populationswith<1L2/branch,and62locationshadlowpopulations(1‐6L2/branch)capableof
causing light defoliation. The area where the highest low counts were observed was on the
northern peninsula in an area north of Gros Morne National Park. This is the same area where
evidenceofmothimmigrationwasobservedin2013alongwithhighpheromonetrapcatches.L2
populations at five locations within this area are above the threshold of four or more L2/branch
suggestedbyDr.JacqueRégnièreforearlyinterventionofSBW.
18
Forum 2014
Additional supplementary L2 sampling is still being conducted in this area to determine if early
intervention is needed in 2015. In the absence of any control, on‐going monitoring of SBW
populationsisbeingconsidered.
EasternHemlockLooper
AerialDefoliationSurveyResults–In2014, 2,506haof M‐Sdefoliationcausedwasunexpectedly
found on the Northern Peninsula. Another 577 ha of M‐S defoliation was also observed on the
Avalon Peninsula near Tors Cove Pond; however, this area of defoliation was expected based on
forecastedpopulation/damagelevelsfor2014.
19
Forum 2014
PheromoneTrappingResults–WiththedeclineofHLinNLinrecentyears,apheromonetrapping
networktomonitorlowdensityHLpopulationswasestablishedin2011.Thisnetworkoftrapswas
increasedin2012toca.100locations.TwoUnitrap®non‐saturatingtrapsareplaced30‐40mapart
ateachlocation.Eachtrapcontainsone10µgHLseptalureandoneVaportapekillingstrip.Based
ondifferencesinseasonaldevelopmentin2014trapswereplacedovertheperiodofAugust11–25
in advance of the adult flight period. On the island little change was observed in trap catches
between2013and2014.Eveninareaswithnoticeabledefoliationonthenorthernpeninsula,only
slightincreasesintrapcatcheswerenoted.Unlikein2012,wheretrapcatchesof300‐500moths
werefoundinareassubsequentlyforecasttohaveM‐Sdefoliation,trapcatchesinthelastseveral
yearshavebeenlessresponsivetoincreasesinHLpopulations.Thereasonsforthisareunknown.
20
Forum 2014
In2014,thepheromonetrappingnetworkwasexpandedinLabradortoimproveHLmonitoringin
the Goose Bay and Port‐Hope Simpson areas, and conduct monitoring in the Cartwright area.
TrappingresultsinLabradorindicateHLpopulationsarepresentinallthreeareasatlowlevels.
In2014,HLpheromonetrappingalsoincludedapairedcomparisonoftrapcatchesusing10µgHL
septa lures supplied by two different suppliers (Contech and Sylvar Technologies Inc.). The
provinceofNLhasbeenusingthe10µgHLflexlurefromContechsince2011.Trapswerepairedat
25 locations. Surprisingly trap catches were consistently higher in traps using the Sylvar
Technologies Inc. lure. Given both lures had the same pheromone load, differences in the
pheromone blend were likely responsible for differences in trap catches with the Sylvar
TechnologiesInc.luremoreresponsivetochangesnotedinHLpopulationdensity.
Moths-Sylvar Lure
Moths - Contech
21
Moths-Contech
Forum 2014
Forecast/Outlook for 2015 – To forecast HL population and damage levels expected in 2015,
collection and processing of branch samples for overwintering eggs was conducted. Sampling in
Labradorwasexpandedin2014toalsoincludetheCartwrightandPort‐HopeSimpsonareas.
Sampling levels were increased from 735 plots in 2013 to 1139 plots in 2014 with increases
primarily on the northern Peninsula. As indicated in the map above, HL populations capable of
causingM‐Sdefoliationin2015haveeruptedonthenorthernPeninsulaintheTenMileLakeand
HawkesBayarea.Thegrossforecastedareaisca.11,000ha.Supplementarysamplingisstillbeing
conductedtobetterdefinetheseareasinanticipationofapotentialcontrolprogramin2015.
BalsamFirSawfly
Aerial Defoliation Survey Results – No balsam fir sawfly (BFS) defoliation was detected on the
islandin2014.
PheromoneTrappingResults–In‐kindsupporttohelpdevelopapheromonelureformonitoringof
BFSpopulationswasprovidedtoDr.GaetanLeclairin2014withresultstobereportedatSERG‐I.
Forecast/Outlook for 2015 – To forecast BFS populations and damage levels expected in 2015,
collectionandprocessingofbranchsamplesforoverwinteringeggswasconductedat94locations.
CollapseofBFSpopulationsonConnaigrePeninsulaandSt.Albansareacontinuedasexpectedwith
onlythreelocationsfoundtohavealightforecast.Onthewestcoast,concernsoverthestartofan
increasing trend in BFS populations based on results in 2013 were put to rest with no BFS eggs
foundatlocationsonthewestcoastin2014.
22
Forum 2014
OtherForestPests
OtherforestpestsanddamageobservedintheprovinceofNLin2014included:i)Poplarsawflyin
the St. Anthony area on the northern Peninsula, ii) Serpentine leafminer damage on aspen in
portionsofLabrador,iii)SpruceneedlerustinareasonthenorthernPeninsula,iv)Mapletarspot
onmaplesincentral/easternportionoftheisland,v)reddish‐browndiscolorationinuppercrowns
ofbalsamfirtreesoverwide‐spreadareasofislandcausedbyheavyconecrops2‐3yearsago;and
vi)moosebrowsedamageonconifersinNationalParksandsilviculturalareasonisland.
23
Forum 2014
24
Forum 2014
RapportdelaNouvelle‐Écosse
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
GinaPenny
NovaScotiaDepartmentofNaturalResources,RiskServicesUnitP.O.Box130,Shubenacadie
(NovaScotia)B0N2H0
The last Eastern blackheaded budworm (Acleris variana) outbreak erupted in 2004, covering
approximately 114,000 hectares, in the Cape Breton Highlands. In 2014, an overwintering egg
survey was conducted at 68 sites in the Eastern Region. Eggs were detected at 74% of sites
surveyed down from 82% in 2013. A pheromone trial was initiated in 2013, using a pheromone
synthesizedbyresearchersattheCanadianForestService.Itwasdeployedin40multiphertraps
throughouttheCapeBretonHighlands.Thetrialwasrepeatedin2014andtherewasasubstantial
increaseinboththeaverageandmaximumtrapcatchesascomparedtothepreviousyear.Average
mothspertraprosefrom39to161andthemaximumnumberofmothscapturedincreasedfrom
144to884.
The spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana) has caused more damage to Nova Scotian
softwood forests than any other insect. In 2014, Forest Health staff monitored 144 pheromone
trapsprovincewideofwhich60%werepositive,downfrom92%recordedin2013.Averagemoths
per trap and maximum trap catch were also down with two moths per trap and 23 moths
respectively as compared to 19 moths per trap and 206 moths the year previous. The number of
sitessampledforoverwinteringsecondinstarlarvae(L2s)wasincreasedfrom287in2013to299
in2014.Onepercentofthesesiteswerepositive,withthreeL2sbeingdetectedinVictoriaCounty,
CapeBreton.Thisishalfthenumberdetectedin2013.However,itisstillnoteworthyasthisisthe
secondyear inarowthatL2s have beenfound.Priorto2013,no L2shad beendetectedinNova
Scotiasince1994.
Jackpinebudworm(Choristoneurapinuspinus)defoliationwasfirstdetectedin2005withina
mature white pine stand in the Western Region. In 2014, Forest Health staff monitored 40
pheromone traps in the Central and Western regions. Both the percentage of positive traps and
averagetrapcatchweredownwith63%oftrapspositiveandthreemothspertraprespectivelyas
compared to 88% positive and six moths per trap in 2013. Three sites were surveyed for
overwinteringsecondinstarlarvae(L2s)in2014.Ofthesitessurveyed,33%werepositive,upfrom
10%in2013.WhereasthemeanL2/m2barkisdownfrom23in2013totwoin2014.
Since1961,thehemlocklooper(Lambdinafiscellariafiscellaria)hasdefoliatedapproximately
135,000 hectares in Nova Scotia. Control programs were conducted in portions of Victoria and
Inverness counties 1996 and 1997. Forest Health staff monitored 143 pheromone traps province
wide in 2014. As in 2013, 96% of these traps were positive. However, both the average and the
maximum trap catches have risen. In 2014, the average moths per trap was 63 with a maximum
trapcatchof375mothsascomparedto42mothspertrapandamaximumof332mothsin2013.
Overwinteringeggsurveyswereconductedat40sitesintheeasternregion.Eggsweredetectedat
7.5%ofsitessampled,downfrom15%in2013and24%in2012.
Recorded outbreaks of the balsam fir sawfly (Neodiprion abietis) in Nova Scotia date back to
1942.In2014,ouroverwinteringeggsurveyincluded152sitesintheEasternandCentralRegions.
The percentage of positive sites has steadily decreased over time from a high of 59% in 2011 to
25
Forum 2014
22%in2014.Meaneggnichesper100cmbranchhavefollowedthesamepath,droppingfroma
highof36.6in2010to0.59in2014.
Thelastwhitemarkedtussockmoth(Orgyialeucostigma)outbreakoccurredin1998covering
1.4 million hectares in central and northern Nova Scotia. Since that time two mini population
eruptionshaveoccurred:CapeBretonin2005andGuysboroughin2007.In2014,319siteswere
sampled province wide for overwintering egg masses. The percentage of sites where egg masses
weredetectedhasdroppedbyhalffrom10%in2013to5%in2014.
Forest Health staff monitor balsam twig aphid (Mindarus abietinus) and balsam gall midge
(Paradiplosis tumifex) populations in a general way by assessing their presence on balsam fir
branchsamplescollectedforthebalsamfirsawflysurvey.Thisisnotapredictivesurvey;itsimply
quantifies the damage that occurred the previous summer. Each branch is visually inspected for
balsamtwigaphidandgallmidgedamage.Ofthe152sitessurveyedin2014,13%hadbalsamtwig
aphiddamageandsevenpercenthadbalsamgallmidgedamage.
Balsamwoollyadelgid(Adelgespiceae)overwinteringwassurveyedat18permanentmonitoring
plotsprovincewideinthespringof2014.Increasedpopulationsweredetectedatfiveplots,seven
plotshaddecreasedpopulationsandnochangewasdetectedintheremainingsixplots.Oneofthe
most important natural factors limiting adelgid populations is temperature. Mortality of
overwintering nymphs increases as temperatures dip below ‐20°C and temperatures of ‐30°C or
lower are fatal. Late spring frosts will also kill exposed feeding nymphs. When the minimum
temperatures recorded at each of these plots during the winter of 2013‐14 were examined, on
average,plotswherepopulationsincreasedrecordedfourdaysatorbelow‐20°Cwhileplotswhere
populationsdecreasedrecordedeightdaysatorbelow‐20°C.Theseextracolddaysmayhavebeen
sufficient to result in some of the observed mortality. Forest Health staff also monitor balsam
woollyadelgidpopulationsinamoregeneralway.Balsamfirbranchescollectedforthebalsamfir
sawfly survey are visually inspected for adelgid damage. Three live buds per branch are also
examinedforthepresenceofoverwinteringadelgidnymphs.In2014,overwinteringnymphswere
foundat12%ofthe152sitessurveyed,downfrom24%in2013whilenoneofthesitessurveyed
hadgoutedbranches;downfrom2%in2013.
Forest Health staff, in cooperation with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, conduct detection
surveysforthehemlockwoollyadelgid(Adelgestsugae).AnativeofAsiathisinsectisathreatto
easternhemlockforests.In2014,11remotehemlockstandsweresurveyedinthewesternregion
andnohemlockwoollyadelgidsweredetected.
Forest Health staff collaborate with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency when conducting
pheromone surveys for the gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar). Our portion of the survey is
conductedintwoparts.Individualmultiphertrapsaredeployedatdesignatedsitesprovincewide
tomonitorpopulationtrends,whiledeltatrapsareplacedintownsoutsideoftheCanadianFood
InspectionAgency’sregulatedzonetodetermineifthepopulationisspreadingintonewareas.In
2014,21multiphertrapsweredeployedprovincewide;76%ofthesewerepositive,upfrom67%
in2013.Averagemothspertrapareupwith231mothscapturedin2014versus220in2013.Delta
traps were deployed throughout nine towns (10 traps/town) outside of the Canadian Food
InspectionAgenciesregulatedzone.Averagetrapcatchesinallofthesetownswerelessthanone
mothpertrap.Since2000,withtheexceptionofalargeincreaseinthetownofCheticampin2002,
averagetrapcatchesintownsoutsideoftheregulatedzonehaveconsistentlyremainedbelowtwo
mothspertrap.
26
Forum 2014
Thebeechleaf‐miningweevil(Orchestesfagiis)isacommonandwidespreadpestofbeechinits
nativeEurope.In2012,surveysconductedbytheCanadianForestServiceandtheCanadianFood
InspectionAgency,foundittobewellestablishedinNovaScotia(primarilywithina20‐kmradius
ofHalifax,butalsonearSydneyandChester).ThisisthefirstrecordofthispestinNorthAmerica.
CurrentlytheCanadianForestServiceandtheCanadianFoodInspectionAgencyarecollaborating
on surveys to determine the weevil’s distribution and risk to beech in North America. During the
summerof2014,adetectionsurveywascompletedbytheCanadianFoodInspectionAgencyinthe
MaritimeProvinces.Beechstandsinbothforestedandurbanenvironmentsweretargeted.Visual
surveys for symptoms of attack were conducted and branches were beaten for adults. In Nova
Scotiathreenewpositivelocations,alllocatedinCapeBretonCounty,weredetected.
Thebrownsprucelonghornbeetle(Tetropiumfuscum),nativetonorthernandcentralEurope,
arrivedinHalifaxinthe1990s.Aspartofajointeffort,theForestHealthworkswiththeCanadian
FoodInspectionAgencyandtheCanadianForestServicetomonitorthebeetle’sspreadwithinthe
province.The2014detectionsurveyincludedextensivepheromonetrappinginEasternCanada.In
Nova Scotia, there were five new positive sites detected outside of the brown spruce longhorn
beetle regulated area in the counties of Colchester (2), Pictou (1), and Guysborough (2). In New
Brunswick there were two new positive locations. One within the South Kouchibouguac
CampgroundattheKouchibouguacNationalParkandoneinMemramcook,WestmorlandCounty.
These new finds brings the total number of positive sites outside of the brown spruce longhorn
beetle regulated area to 109. All of the traps deployed in Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince
EdwardIsland,andQuebecwerenegativeforbrownsprucelonghornbeetle.
Post tropical storm Arthur made landfall in Nova Scotia on July 5, 2014, reaching maximum
sustainedwindspeedsof110km/h.Duringtheprovincialaerialoverviewsurvey,low‐extensive
wind damage was recorded over a 64,040 hectare area. Damage was more profound in coastal
areasduetothesaltsprayassociatedwiththestormsurge.Pocketsofdamagewerealsorecorded
provincewideasaresultofsprucebeetle(Dendroctonusrufipennis)mortality(534ha),Sirococcus
shootblight(Sirococcusconigenis)damage(2098ha),andflooding(3906ha).
27
Forum 2014
28
Forum 2014
SéanceIV:RapportdesÉtats‐Unis
(nondisponible)
29
Forum 2014
SéanceV:Larépressiondesravageurs
dansl’Est
30
Forum 2014
RapportduNouveauBrunswick
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
ForestPestManagementGroup
NewBrunswickDepartmentofNaturalResources,1350RegentSt.P.O.Box6000,Fredericton
(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5H1
This summary provides an overview of the status of forest insect and pest conditions in New
Brunswick (NB) in 2014, and highlights many of the pest management activities of the NB
DepartmentofNaturalResources'ForestPestManagementGroup(FPMG).Ifrequired,thereader
cancontactFPMGforfurtherinformation.
Fromthe1950stothe1990s,sprucebudwormwasthemostseriousforestpestinNB,andacross
many jurisdictions in eastern North America. No defoliation has been detected in NB since 1995.
Since 1997, there has been an irregular though gradually increasing trend of populations as
indicated by annual changes in moth catches in a pheromone trapping survey, particularly in the
northern part of the province. This trend has gained more attention in light of the increasing
outbreakinQuébec,withdefoliationmappedapproximately15‐25kmfromtheNBborderineach
of the last three years. FPMG significantly increased its monitoring effort of spruce budworm in
2012.Thiswasfurtherincreasedin2013withacollaborativeoverwintering(L2)larvalsampling
program between FPMG and forest industry. This cooperative L2 survey was continued in 2014
with 1543 plots being sampled. This enhanced sampling effort was conducted throughout New
Brunswick,regardlessoflandownershipbutwasconcentratedinthenorthernhalfoftheprovince.
Afurther279locationsweresampledbytheCanadianForestServiceaspartoftheirresearcheffort
undertheHealthyForestPartnership’sEarlyInterventionStrategyresearchprojectinthewinterof
2015. No defoliation was observed from aerial and ground surveys and spruce budworm
overwintering larvae were detected at 20% of the 1543 cooperative L2 survey plots. Positives,
mostly trace to very low counts, were primarily concentrated in northern New Brunswick.
However,twopocketsofmoderatepopulationsweredetected;oneinanareasouthofCampbellton
andtheotherinnorth‐westernNBadjacenttotheQuebecborder.Theseareashavebeenselected
as locations for early intervention research in 2015. In light of the proximity of the outbreak in
Québec, and based on rising L2 counts, there is a high probability that the first pockets of light
defoliation will be detected in northern NB in 2015, the first time since the collapse of the last
outbreakin1995.
In2011,asinglebrownsprucelonghornbeetlewasfoundinKouchibouguacNationalPark,most
likely transported to the park in a piece of firewood from Nova Scotia. In the fall of 2011, the
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) in collaboration with Parks Canada and the Canadian
ForestServicecollectedlogsfromsixteentreeswithsymptomsofbrownsprucelonghornedbeetle
(BSLB)attackandplacedtheminfacilitieswherescientistsobservedforbeetlesemergingfromthe
logs.NoBSLBweredetectedinthese.In2012and2013approximately100pheromone‐basedtraps
hungbyfederalagencieswithinKouchibouguacNationalParkalsofailedtocatchasinglebeetle.In
2012,FPMGconductedvisualassessmentsofsprucetreesat282locationsthroughouttheprovince
lookingforsignsandsymptomsofBSLBattack(inconjunctionwithotheroperationalsurveys).In
2013 and 2014, assessments were again conducted by FPMG, this time at 259 and 363 locations,
respectively,throughoutthesummermonths.Nosuspecttreeswerefoundeitheryear.
31
Forum 2014
However,thatwasnotthecasefromsurveysconductedin2014bytheCFIA,withtheaidofParks
CanadainKouchibouguacNationalPark.FromtrappingconductedthroughoutNewBrunswick,two
sites were found positive, one in Memramcook and one in Kouchibouguac National Park. For the
Memramcook detection, CFIA placed more traps in the area around the original find, but no
additional beetles were caught. The property on which this beetle was detected is now under a
federal Prohibition of Movement order. A Prohibition of Movement order has been in place for
KouchibouguacNationalParksincethefirstbeetlefindin2011,sothenewbeetledetectiondoes
notrequireaneworder.
Balsam fir sawfly is a native insect that feeds mainly on balsam fir. The larvae feed on older
needlesleadingtoreducedvolumeincrement,weakenedtreesandsometimestreemortality.Since
thepopulationcollapseobservedin2012,noforecastsurveyshavebeenrequired.
Hemlock looper populations remain at endemic levels, with pheromone trap catches declining
fromthoselevelsfoundthepreviousyear.
Sirococcusshootblightisafungaldiseaseaffectingprimarilyredpine.Yearswithwetweatherin
May and June often result in intensification of disease symptoms (branch dieback and, after
successive attacks, tree mortality). In 2012, appropriate methodology was developed to evaluate
theseverityanddistributionofthediseaseinredpinestands.AssessmentsbyFPMGandRegional
Pest Detection Officers revealed that Sirococcus is widespread and a large portion of assessed
standsareatahighriskofexperiencingtreemortalitywithinthenextfiveyears.In2013,further
assessmentswereconducted,withanincreasedproportionassessedfromthenorthernhalfofthe
province.Between2012and2013,455redpinestandstotaling2819hahavebeenassessed.Ofthis
area,656ha(23%)wereclassedasathighrisk.Redpinestandswithsignificantdamagecontinued
tobefoundin2014.
Balsamgallmidgehasbeeninanoutbreakphaseintheprovinceforthelasteightyears.In2012,
91% of locations assessed for balsam gall midge injury had detectable levels of damage. This
declinedto58%in2013andthento6%in2014,indicatingthisinsectisnowatornearthetrough
in its population cycle. Populations and damage typically remain very low for several years
followingthecollapseofanoutbreakcycle.
In 2014 many other forest health problems were monitored through targeted and/or general
surveillancesurveys.Whileawetspringandsummerledtoahigherthannormalincidenceoffoliar
diseasessuchasneedle castsandneedlerustsin2013,diseasesymptomsonce againdroppedto
moretypicalbackgroundlevelsin2014.Foresttentcaterpillardefoliationwasmappedfromaerial
and ground‐based surveys over an area of ~3400 ha in north‐east New Brunswick. Birch
skeletonizer and fall webworm was widely observed throughout parts of the province. On July 5,
post‐tropicalstormArthurcausedsignificantpropertydamageandimpactsonurbantrees,butno
catastrophic losses were observed at the larger forest scale. Very limited and localized damage
caused by balsam fir tip blight (Delphinella balsameae), balsam woolly adelgid, birch leafminer,
whitepineweevil,andpitchnodulemakerswasalsoobservedin2014.
32
Forum 2014
RapportduQuébec
LouisMorneau,CédricFournier,JulieBouchard,PierreTherrien,DanièlePouliotet
SébastienBélanger
MinistèredesForêts,delaFauneetdesParcsduQuébec,2700EinsteinStreet,SuiteD.2.370A,
Québec(Quebec)G1P3W8
http://www.mffp.gouv.qc.ca/forets/fimaq/insectes/fimaq‐insectes‐portrait.jsp
Le mandat de détection des insectes et maladies dans les forêts québécoises est assumé chaque
annéeparlaDirectiondelaprotectiondesforêts(DPF)duministèredesForêts,delaFauneetdes
Parcs(MFFP).Cetteactivitépermetnotammentd’identifieretdelocaliserlesinfestationsd’insectes
forestiers à caractère épidémique et de suivre leur évolution à l’aide de réseaux de surveillance
provinciaux et de relevés aériens des dommages. La collecte des données sur les insectes et les
maladies est effectuée par 15 techniciens régionaux. La DPF planifie, coordonne et supervise les
activitésdesrelevésetfournitlesoutientechniqueauxéquipesrégionales.Sonlaboratoireréalise
les diagnostics entomologiques et pathologiques pour l’ensemble du Québec. La DPF fournit
également son expertise dans les programmes spéciaux d’évaluation de dommages ou de
récupération de matière ligneuse mis en place à la suite d’importantes perturbations naturelles
(chablis,verglas,feux,etc.).En2014,lestechniciensenprotectiondesforêtsontvisité2593sites
d’observation, dont 539 plantations de pins, d’épinettes, de mélèzes et de feuillus. De plus, le
personnelaeffectuédesrelevésaériensafindedétecteretdecirconscrirelesdégâtscausésparla
tordeusedesbourgeonsdel’épinette,l’arpenteusedelapruche,ledipriondeSwaineetdeschablis,
cequiarequisenviron390heuresdevol.Enfin,20pépinièrespubliquesetprivéesontfaitl’objet
d’inspectionsphytosanitaires.Deslotstotalisantquelque138,8millionsdeplantsontétéexaminés
lorsdesinspectionsdecertificationetquelque 9,7millionsdeplants ont faitl’objetd’inspections
d'automne.
La tordeuse des bourgeons de l’épinette (TBE), Choristoneura fumiferana, demeure le principal
ravageur des résineux dans la province. Les superficies défoliées par la TBE en 2014 totalisent 4
275065hectares(carte1)comparativementà3206024hectaresen2013età2226095hectares
en2012.LesrégionslesplustouchéessontlaCôte‐Nord,leSaguenay–Lac‐Saint‐Jean,leBasSaint
Laurent,l’Abitibi‐TémiscamingueetlaGaspésie–Îles‐de‐la‐Madeleine.Larépartitiondesdommages
dans ces régions est, respectivement, de 69 %, 15 %, 7 %, 5 % et 4 % du total provincial. Les
infestationsrelevéesdanslarégiondelaMauricieetcelledesLaurentidessontminimes.Ailleursau
Québec,aucuneairedéfoliéen’aétédétectéeparlesurvolaérien.Unpland’interventioncontrela
TBE a été mis en œuvre pour une première année dans la région du Bas‐Saint‐Laurent en 2014.
Dans la région de la Côte Nord et celle du Saguenay–Lac Saint Jean, des interventions de lutte
directe sont menées depuis 6 et 5 ans, respectivement. L’objectif est de limiter la défoliation par
l’insecte dans des peuplements forestiers ciblés afin de maintenir les arbres en vie. La Société de
protectiondesforêtscontrelesinsectesetmaladies(SOPFIM)estl’organismedéléguépourlamise
en application de ce plan. Des pulvérisations aériennes avec un insecticide biologique, le Bacillus
thuringiensisvar.kurstaki(Btk),ontétéréaliséesdu1erau28juinsurunesuperficietotalede148
006 hectares comparativement à 120 310 hectares en 2013. Le site Web de la SOPFIM
(www.sopfim.qc.ca) contient de plus amples renseignements sur les résultats du plan
d’intervention2014.
33
Forum 2014
Carte1.Défoliationscauséesparlatordeusedesbourgeonsdel’épinetteauQuébecen2014.
Lessuperficiestouchéesparl’arpenteusedelapruche,Lambdinaf.fiscellaria,ontdiminuéen2014
dans la région de la Capitale‐Nationale comparativement à 2013 (carte 2). De la mortalité a été
observée dans des sapinières sur 680 hectares. De nouveaux foyers sont apparus plus au nord et
jusque dans la région du Saguenay–Lac‐Saint‐Jean (353 hectares). Les défoliations causées par
l’arpenteuse de la pruche sur l’île d’Anticosti depuis 2012, dans la région de la Côte‐Nord, ont
diminué pour totaliser 11 273 hectares en 2014 dans l’ouest de l’île. De plus, une partie des
dommages est attribuable à la tordeuse des bourgeons de l’épinette qui est aussi en période
épidémique dans la région. On trouve quelques foyers de défoliation dans la région du Bas‐Saint‐
Laurent et dans celle de la Gaspésie–Îles‐de‐la‐Madeleine. Aucun dommage significatif important
n’aétéobservéailleursdanslaprovince.
34
Forum 2014
Carte2.Défoliationscauséesparl’arpenteusedelaprucheauQuébecen2014.
Aucunedéfoliationparlatordeusedupingris,Choristoneurap.pinus,n’aétédétectéeparlerelevé
aérien des dommages en 2014 et les captures de papillons dans les pièges à phéromones
demeurent faibles. Le déclin des dommages causés par la cochenille‐tortue du pin, Toumeyella
parvicornis,s’estpoursuivien2014dansl’ouestdelaprovince.
Lalivréedesforêts,Malacosomadisstria,causedepuis3ansdesdommageslocalisésdansl’ouestde
laprovince.En2014,quelquesmilliersd’hectaressonttouchésprèsdeMatagami,Rouyn‐Noranda
etDuparquet.
L’Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments(ACIA)aconfirmélaprésencedel’agriledufrêne,
Agrilusplanipennis,danslarégiondelaMontérégieenjuin2008.Laprogressiondel’insecteesten
constante évolution depuis au Québec. En 2014, la DPF a installé 20 pièges afin de détecter cet
insecteendehorsdelazoneréglementéedeGatineau.Unpièges’estrévélépositifaunorddeNotre
Dame du Laus. L’ACIA a consolidé cette année les zones réglementées en une seule zone pour le
Québecetl’Ontario.
En 2014, des maladies du feuillage et des pousses ont été détectées dans plusieurs régions du
Québec. La rouille des aiguilles de l’épinette causée par Chrysomyxa spp. a été trèsabondantesur
l’épinetteblanche,l’épinettenoireetl’épinettebleueduColoradodanscertainesrégions,tellecelle
duSaguenay‐Lac‐Saint‐Jean.Labrûlureenbandesbrunes,Lecanostictaacicola,surlepinblancetla
35
Forum 2014
brûlureenbandesrouges,Dothistromapini,surlepinrougeengendrentannuellementdeschutes
d’aiguilles importantes et sont rapportées beaucoup plus fréquemment depuis les cinq dernières
années.Ilarrivesouventqu’onobserveuniquementlapousseannuellesurlesarbresatteints.Les
pinsaffaiblismontrentparlasuitedessymptômesdedépérissement.
Les brûlures des pousses ont été présentes à de très nombreuses occasions sur les feuillus et les
résineux de plusieurs régions du Québec. Le peuplier faux‐tremble a été affecté par Fusicladium
elegansetF.radiosumvar.lethiferum.Surlesapin,labrûluredepoussesetlabrûluredesaiguilles
causées par Delphinella balsameae se trouvent à grande échelle mais sont concentrées sur de
petites superficies sur le territoire des régions du Bas‐Saint‐Laurent, de la Gaspésie−Iles‐de‐la‐
Madeleine, de la Capitale‐Nationale, de la Chaudière‐Appalaches et de l’Estrie. Le champignon
Sirococcus conigenus a endommagé les pousses de plusieurs espèces d’épinettes dans plusieurs
régionsduQuébec.
Lechancrediplodien,causéparDiplodiapineaetàl’occasionparD.scrobiculata,estdeplusenplus
souvent rapporté sur le pin rouge et le pin noir d’Autriche. Ces champignons seraient présents
naturellement à l’intérieur des tissus de l’hôte (endophytes) et deviendraient actifs lorsque leurs
hôtes sont affaiblis. Les conditions climatiques ou édaphiques défavorables telles la sécheresse
estivalede2012,desconditionsprintanièreshumidestellescellesde2014ouencorel’étatdessites
oùlesarbressontétablis,sonttoutesdescausesquiportentatteinteàlasantédesarbres.
Unautrefléauestledépérissementetlamortdenombreuxarbrestelsleschênesdansdesrégions
oùlasécheressede2012aétéparticulièrementimportante.Cesarbresétaientsouventétablissur
des sols minces ou argileux. Le dépérissement des arbres est une maladie résultant de l’effet
combinédeplusieursfacteursnéfastesd’originesvivanteetnonvivante.Lasécheresseprolongée
del’été2012,lesfroidsextrêmesdel’hiver2013‐2014,letypedesolnonadéquatàl’établissement
de l’espèce, les blessures au tronc et aux racines, la chute prématurée du feuillage atteint d’une
maladiefoliaireetlapollutionsonttousenpartieresponsablesdecesdépérissements.
Pourfinir,d’importantschablisdansl’estdelaprovinceetquelques‐unssituésenOutaouaisontété
répertoriésen2014.C’estlatempêteArthurquiafaitleplusdedégâtsdanslaBaie‐des‐Chaleursen
Gaspésie.Autotal,unpeumoinsde10000hectaresontétéaffectés,principalementenforêtprivée.
Lesdommagesenforêtontétéconsidérables,carlesventsviolentsdépassantunevitessede100
km/hontcouchédespeuplementsforestiersfeuillussurlesflancsdemontagne.
BilansdurelevédesinsectesetmaladiesdesarbresduQuébec:
http://www.mffp.gouv.qc.ca/forets/fimaq/insectes/fimaq‐insectes‐portrait.jsp
Cartesdesrelevésaériensdedéfoliation:
http://www.mffp.gouv.qc.ca/forets/fimaq/insectes/fimaq‐insectes‐portrait‐releves.jsp
36
Forum 2014
StatusofImportantInsects,Diseases,andAbioticEventsAffectingForestHealthin
Ontario2014
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
TaylorScarr,DanRowlinsonetRichardWilson
MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario,Suite400,70FosterDrive
SaultSte.Marie(Ontario)P6A6V5
Introduction
Forest health monitoring has been conducted in Ontario since the 1930s under a partnership
arrangementbetweentheOntarioMinistryofNaturalResources(OMNRF)andNaturalResources
Canada–CanadianForestService(CFS).Since2008thefieldprogramhasbeendesignedandled
by OMNRF, with CFS providing scientific advice, and leading research projects relevant to
monitoring,detection,control,andimpactassessment.
In 2014 the scientific and program direction was provided by OMNRF’s Forest Health and
Silviculture Section. The program implementation and coordination was done by OMNRF’s
Biodiversity and Monitoring Section. The province was divided into work areas, with 11 Forest
HealthTechnicalSpecialists(Figure1)conductingthesurveysandmonitoring,andparticipatingin
severalresearchprojectswithCFS.
Figure1.ForestHealthMonitoringworkareas,2014.
37
Forum 2014
Insectdiagnosticswasdone throughathree‐waypartnershipwithOMNRF,CFS,andtheInvasive
Species Centre. Samples collected by the program were identified by Lena van Seggelen of the
InvasiveSpeciesCentre.CFSsupportedinsectdiagnosticsbyprovidingverificationoftheoriginal
insectidentification,andaccesstotheGreatLakesForestryCentrelaboratoryandinsectcollection.
ResultsoftheinsectcollectionswereenteredintothenationaldatabasemanagedbyCFS.
Disease samples were identified by Sylvia Greifenhagen at the Ontario Forest Research Institute.
The aerial mapping results of major forest disturbances were collated into maps and graphical
reportsbyOMNRF’sBiodiversityandMonitoringSection.
Theannualforesthealthmonitoringprogramhasfivecomponents:
• Aerialmappingofmajorforestdisturbances(e.g.,insectoutbreaks,weatherevents,decline,
anddiseasedamage)toquantifytheirextentandseverity.
• Biomonitoring through the collection of insect and disease samples to track occurrence,
changesinrangeorhostspeciesattacked,orchangesinabundance.
• Special surveys for pests of interests, particularly invasive species, or pests affecting high
valuetreessuchasplantationsorseedorchards.
• Conducting or supporting research projects in forest entomology, pathology, or weather
impacts.
• Temporaryandpermanentsampleplotstomonitorhealthofforestecosystems.
All forested land in the province, regardless of ownership (e.g., Crown land, private land, county
forests,FirstNationsreserves,provincialparks,federalparks)ismonitoredeachyear.Theforest
pests which are surveyed include native and introduced species. Abiotic events include extreme
occurrences such as drought, pollution, frost, freezing, snow, ice, and scorch. Decline events
reportedbytheprogramcanbecausedbybiotic(e.g.,insectsordiseases)orabiotic(e.g.droughtor
pollution)factors,oracombinationofthesefactors.
Weatherpatterns
Weather affects the growth, phenology (timing of the different life cycle stages), dispersal, and
survival of forest insects. Forest pathogens, especially leaf diseases and needle cast fungi, can
become much more common during periods of wet or humid weather. Also, extreme weather
eventssuchasdrought,snowfall,flooding,tornadoes,microbursts,frost,freezing,scorch,andrapid
fluctuationsintemperaturecanaffecttreehealth,causingfoliageortwigdeath,ortreedeclineor
mortality.
Springof2014continuedthecolderthanaveragetemperaturesofthe2013‐14winter,withsnow
continuing to fall from March to April, especially in Northeast Region extending into Southern
Region. May temperatures were in the normal range throughout most of the province.
TemperaturesthendroppedtobelownormalinJuneandJulywithabovenormalrainfalloccurring
most notably in Southern and Northeast regions. The remaining summer and fall months were
withinaverageconditionswithsomehighandlowspikesintemperature.
The2014weatherconditionsgenerallyfavouredtreegrowthandhencehealthyforests.Thecooler
tonormaltemperatureswerelessfavourabletoinsectgrowthandsurvival.Fungilikelybenefited
fromthecoolwetweather,butdidnotresultinabundantmajorforestdisturbances.Anexception
waswidespreadoccurrenceinearlyfalloftarspotonmaples,especiallyNorwaymaples,fromSault
Ste.MarietoSudburyandsouth.
38
Forum 2014
Extremeweatherandabioticevents
Similarto2013,therewerenonewdroughteffectsmappedin2014.Standsaffectedbythedrought
of2012didhowevercontinuetoshowsignstheeffects,withstandingdeadconiferandhardwood
treesstilldetectable.
An ice storm that began December 21 and continued until December 23, 2013 caused extensive
damage in southern Ontario. Top, stem, and branch breakage, plus uprooted and bent over trees
occurredfromnorthofLondonthroughKitchenerintotheGoldenHorseshoe,theneastalongthe
northshoreofLakeOntario,anduptheSt.LawrencetoCornwall.Thousandsoftreesinlandscaped
areas,riparianzonesandotherwoodedareasweredamagedbyicebuildup.Treeswereaffectedin
urban forests, landscaped areas, riparian zones and other wooded areas. Aerial mapping of the
damagewasnotconductedbecauseofthelogisticalchallengeofconductinglowlevelflightsover
metropolitan areas. Furthermore, although the damage was extensive it was also inconsistent
across the landscape. Severely damaged trees were often adjacent to unaffected trees, making it
difficulttodelineateandclassifythedamage.Nonetheless,groundassessmentsdidshowthatgreen
andwhiteashtreeswerethemostaffectedspecies,whetherornottheywereinfestedwithemerald
ashborer.
In June of 2014, high winds and large hail occurred in the town of South Porcupine (city of
Timmins),TimminsDistrict.Hailbroke,splitandtoreawaybranchesandcauseddamagetomain
stems on a variety of tree species including white birch, trembling aspen, balsam fir, black and
whiteashandwhiteandblackspruce.
Tornados and high wind events caused 3,415 ha of blowdown across the province in 2014. The
majorityofdamagewasrecordedinThunderBayDistrict(1,867ha),NorthwestRegion,withareas
affectedinNortheast(168ha)andSouthern(136ha)regions(Figure2).
SeveraltornadosoccurredinSouthernRegionresultinginseveredamagetoscattered,opengrown
treesandwoodlotedges.AtotalofsixtornadoeswerereportedfromJune17toJuly30occurring
between Barrie and Orangeville, northwest of Huntsville on Bear Lake, and along the northern
boundary of Pinery Provincial Park to Grand Bend. Damage was mostly to wind rows and forest
edges.
39
Forum 2014
Figure2.BlowdownandtornadodamageinOntario,2014.
Insectinfestations
The jack pine budworm (Choristoneura pinus pinus Freeman) outbreak which had been steadily
decliningfromitspeakof740,116ha2006,butincreasedin2012and2013,returnedtoatrendof
decreasinginfestationwith22,010haofdefoliationin2014,comparedfrom83,075hain2013.As
in2012and2013,jackpinebudwormdefoliationin2014wasrestrictedtoaneskerareainSioux
LookoutDistrict,northwestofthetownofSiouxLookout(Figure3).Relativetoitshistoricallevels,
jackpinebudwormremainsatlowlevelsprovincially(Figure4).
40
Forum 2014
Figure 3. Area‐within‐which jack pine budworm caused moderate‐to‐severe defoliation and tree
mortalityin2014.
Figure4.Areaofmoderate‐to‐severedefoliationbyjackpinebudworminOntario,1950‐2014.
41
Forum 2014
Thereislimitedforestmanagementortimberharvestingintheareacurrentlybeingdefoliatedby
jack pine budworm. Thus at this time, no insect management programs are expected to be
undertaken. Although pheromone trapping for this insect shows populations are expected to
remain low, a slight rise in moth captures in northeastern Ontario suggest populations may be
increasing there (Figure 5). The jack pine budworm situation will continue to be monitored to
determinewhethertheinfestationcontinuestoincrease,orreturnstoendemiclevels.
Plot Reg
District
Twp/Location Z Easting Northing Avg moths/trap
2014 2013 2012
62
40
60
50
20
11
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
47
NE
NE
NE
3
48
21
NE
NE
NE
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sault Ste.
Marie
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sault Ste.
Marie
Sudbury
Sudbury
Sault Ste.
Marie
Sudbury
Sudbury
Ulster
MERRITT
Moncreif
Hart
17
17
17
17
453000
440207
462299
455432
5186000
5121496
516868
5170409
47.5
45.5
41
33
0
15.5
2
1
18
2
0
SAGARD
NAIRN
Norman
MONESTIME
TEASDALE
Rhodes
MANDAMIN
Scadding
Allen
MONESTIME
Cartier
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
361495
452026
505643
401300
406762
468199
409548
528855
520551
404045
605514
5169372
5130131
5181512
5178534
5161956
5197071
5146417
5168596
5098553
5177149
5134207
30
25
25
23.5
19
18.5
18
15.5
15
14
14
1
8.5
0
0
12
7
0
0
0
0.5
0
2
2
7
SAGARD
Solski
Olinyk
17
17
17
362874
431286
411170
5170460
5172850
5178038
13.5
13
12
1
0
0
5
3
1
LANE
PRESCOTT
Antrim
17
17
17
337517
403966
451435
5220967
5171572
5196721
11.5
11
10.5
1
0
1
5
3.5
3
Figure5.ResultsofjackpinebudwormpheromonetrappinginnortheasternOntario,2014.
Theongoingsprucebudworm(ChoristoneurafumiferanaClemens)outbreakreboundedin2014to
30,317ha(Figure6),comparedtothecollapseof2013whendefoliationwaslimitedtoamere253
ha.Thiscomparedto99,797hain2012.Anewinfestationdevelopedin2014intheboundaryarea
betweenChapleauandHearstdistricts.Trappingresultsfrom2014alsoshowanincreaseinmale
moth captures in Northeast Region. Tree mortality increased modestly in 2014, reaching a
cumulativetotalof240,326hasince1997inSudburyandNorthBaydistricts.Susceptibleforestsof
spruceandbalsamfiracrossmuchofnorthernOntarioarebeginningtoreachageclasses(i.e.>40
years)preferredbysprucebudworm.
42
Forum 2014
Figure 6. Area‐within‐which spruce budworm caused moderate‐to‐severe defoliation in Ontario,
2014.
The spruce budworm outbreak is still at low levels compared to its potential to reach several
millionhectares(Figure7).Significantincreasedmothcapturesfrompheromonetrappingin2014
showed spruce budworm can be expected to increase in abundance in 2015 in northeastern
Ontario(Figure8).
43
Forum 2014
Figure7.Areaofmoderate‐to‐severedefoliationbysprucebudworminOntario,1950‐2014.
Avg moths/trap
Plot Reg
District
Twp/Location
Z
Easting Northing
2014 2013 2012
A
32
NE
NE
33
NE
46
24
56
95
NE
NE
NE
NE
34
NE
26
NE
104
97
NE
NE
North Bay
Wawa
Sault Ste.
Marie
North Bay
Wawa
Chapleau
Timmins
Sault Ste.
Marie
Sault Ste.
Marie
Wawa
Timmins
11
NE
North Bay
31
NE
57
59
51
102
NE
NE
NE
NE
Sault Ste.
Marie
Cochrane
Cochrane
Chapleau
Timmins
Blyth Twp.
Peever Twp
17
16
612054
684493
5152898
5238337
425.3
377.7
43.5
111.4
34.5
Shields Twp
16
718221
5191688
310.7
NA
NA
Strathcona Twp.
Asselin Twp
Shipley
Eldorado Twp.
17
16
17
17
590280
663961
374533
492777
5211792
5272560
5270874
5348746
236.3
227.0
119.3
116.7
Villeneuve Twp
17
322781
5189023
102.5
24.0
24.0
Bridgeland Twp
17
302183
5142292
101.0
19.3
69.5
Dumas
Hazen Twp.
Hugel Twp (blown
down)
16
17
670427
454503
5355493
5304172
100.0
99.3
13.7
39.3
6.7
57.3
17
556098
5150830
97.3
67.5
Lewis Twp
17
379314
5122851
97.0
34.7
18.0
Dempsey
Homuth
Ivanhoe
Sewell Twp
17
17
17
17
525504
462361
381011
428394
5446905
5497055
5334123
5442142
88.3
80.0
75.0
72.0
32.3
5.7
10.3
36.3
1.0
4.0
10.0
109.7
276.7 407.3
25.3
7.3
18.0 20.7
30.0 36.7
Figure8.ResultsofsprucebudwormpheromonetrappinginnortheasternOntario,2014.
44
Forum 2014
The forest tent caterpillar (Malacosoma disstria Hubner) outbreak more than doubled in size in
2014 reaching 468,866 ha of moderate‐to‐severe defoliation (Figure 9). The majority of this
(459,197 ha) was recorded in Northwest Region where all but Fort Frances District was aerially
mappedwithdefoliation.ForesttentcaterpillardefoliationcontinuedtooccurinSouthernRegion
with8,638haoccurringinwoodlotsandforestedareasnearthesouthernpartofGeorgianBay.A
newareaofinfestationwasrecordedinNortheastRegionin2014where1,031haofmoderate‐to‐
severedefoliationwereaeriallymappedinHearstDistrict.Thisoutbreak,particularlyinNorthwest
Region has the potential to reach millions of hectares in size over the next few years. Forest tent
caterpillar egg‐band forecasting and aerial surveys will continue to be carried out to help predict
expansionandpossibledeclines.
ThesouthernOntariodefoliationisnotexpectedtoincreasesubstantiallyin2015.However,asthe
outbreakspreadsinthenorthwest,andmovesintonortheasternOntario,itcanalsobeexpectedto
includethecentralpartsofSouthernRegionoverthenextseveralyears.Asof2014,however,the
outbreak of this insect has yet to reach its potential for affecting several millions hectares of
Ontario’sforests(Figure10).
Figure9.Area‐within‐whichforesttentcaterpillarcauseddefoliationinOntario2014.
45
Forum 2014
Figure10.Areaofmoderate‐to‐severedefoliationbyforesttentcaterpillarinOntario,1950‐2014.
For the third year in a row, gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar (L.)) caused moderate‐to‐severe
defoliation on white birch trees, other hardwoods, and understory blueberry bushes growing on
thinsoilsonrockysitesinandaroundSudbury.Defoliationin2014reached22,335ha(Figure11),
aconsiderableincreaseoverthe9,118haaffectedin2013.InadditiontothedefoliationinSudbury,
pockets of gypsy moth defoliation persisted in the Sarnia area (Aylmer District) in southwestern
Ontario. Despite three visible peaks in defoliation since the arrival and spread of this insect in
Ontario, there is no pattern visible in the periodicity of high populations on the province (Figure
12).
46
Forum 2014
Figure11.Area‐within‐whichgypsymothcausemoderate‐to‐severedefoliationinOntario,2014.
Figure12.Areaofmoderate‐to‐severedefoliationbygypsymothinOntario,1950‐2014.
47
Forum 2014
Larchcase bearer(Coleophoralaricella(Hubner)),whichhasbeenachronicdefoliatorinOntario
since1998,continuedtocausedefoliationoftamaracktreesinpocketsscatteredacrosssouthern
Ontario.Atotalof9,631hawereaffectedin2014,comparedto5,486in2013(Figure13).Forthe
first time since 1998, defoliation occurred in northeastern Ontario along Highway 11 in Hearst
District.
Figure 13. Area‐within‐which larch casebearer caused moderate‐to‐severe defoliation in Ontario,
2014.
Therewereseveralotherinsectinfestationsworthnotingin2014:
• For the third consecutive year, birch skeletonizer (Bucculatrix canadensisella Chambers)
andthefungusseptorialeafspot(SeptoriabetulaePass.)causedlate‐seasonbrowningand
earlyleaf‐dropacrossmuchofnorthernOntario.Thetwospeciesoftenco‐occurredonthe
sametrees,andonthesameleaves.Theaffectedareawasnotaeriallymapped,butground
observationsfoundtheeventoccurringfromKenoraeasttoNorthBay.Theseverityofthis
event (i.e., amount of leaves affected, and the proportion of trees affected in a stand),
appearedtobemuchlessthanin2012or2013.
• Forthethirdyearinarow,cedarleafminers(Argyesthiaspp.andColeotechnitesthujaella
(Kft.))causedseverebrowningoneasternwhitecedar,affecting10,780hainsouthcentral
Ontario.Althoughthisisasignificantincreaseoverthe6,209haaffectedin2013,itisonly
1/3ofthe30,486haaffectedin2012.
• Aspen two‐leaf tier (Enargia decolor Walker) caused only limited continued to cause
defoliationin2014,with749haoftremblingaspenaffectedinSaultSte.Marie,Wawa,and
Chapleaudistricts.Thisisdownconsiderablyfromthe22,450haofdefoliationinthesame
districtsin2013.
48
Forum 2014
• Eastern larch beetle (Dendroctonus simplex Leconte) continued to cause mortality to
tamarack trees in northwestern Ontario, affecting 759 ha in scattered pockets in Fort
FrancesDistrict.Thiswasverysimilartothe779haaffectedin2013.Thiseventappearsto
beanextensionofamuchmoresignificantareaoftreemortalitythathasbeenoccurringin
adjacentareasinMinnesota,USA.
Forestpathogensandtreedecline
Mosttreepathogensdonotcausesymptomsoverlargegeographicareastothepointwherethey
canbeaeriallymapped.Nonetheless,leafdiseasesoccasionallycanbemappedwhenthedamageis
exceptionally severe. Despite the relatively cool wet weather of 2014, foliar diseases were not
common. There were a few exceptions, such as tar spot (Rhytisma spp.) on maples, especially
NorwaymapleinmuchofOntario.ThisphenomenonalsooccurredinQuebec.
Invasivespecies
Emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire) is regulated by the Canadian Food Inspection
Agency(CFIA).TherewereseveralnewfindsofthisinsectinOntarioin2013byCFIAandOMNRF.
NewareasincludedSt.Joseph’sIsland(SaultSte.MarieDistrict)andGuelph,Midhurst,Aurora,and
Kemptvilledistricts(Figure14).
CFIA significantly expanded the regulated area in 2014 to include the southern portions of the
judicialdistrictsofAlgoma,Sudbury,andNipissing,andallpartsofOntariosouthofthesedistricts
(Figure15).
49
Forum 2014
Figure14.Locationswhereemeraldashborerinfestationswerediscoveredin2014.
50
Forum 2014
Figure 15. Area regulated by CFIA to reduce the risk of human‐assisted spread of emerald ash
borer.
Tree mortality from emerald ash borer usually exceeds 99% of the ash trees in an area. Aerial
surveys in 2014 showed new decline and mortality of 43,338 ha (Figure 16). Together with the
cumulativemortalityof153,052hafrom2004to2013,thetotalareaaffectedbyemeraldashborer
hasreached196,390ha(Figures16and17).
51
Forum 2014
Figure 16. Area‐within‐which emerald ash borer caused tree decline and mortality in Ontario in
2014(red)andcumulativelyfrom2004‐2013(yellow).
Figure17.AnnualcumulativetreedeclineandmortalitycausedbyemeraldashborerinOntario,
2004‐2014.
52
Forum 2014
2014 was the second year for the first release of a biocontrol agent for emerald ash borer were
madebytheCanadianForestServiceaspartofalongtermstrategytoreduceimpactscausedby
emerald ash borer. The larval parasitoid Tetrastichus planipennisi Yang, native to China, was
released at six sites in southern Ontario. Follow‐up assessments will be done in future years to
determineestablishment,andimpactsonemeraldashborerpopulations.
On April 5, 2013, CFIA declared Asian longhorned beetle (Anoplohora glabripennis Motschulsky)
eradicated from Toronto and Vaughan. The declaration was based on a program to cut and chip
infestedtreesandhosttreeswithin400m,followedbyfiveyearsofsurveyswhichfoundnobeetles
or infested trees. In August 2013, a new infestation was found in Mississauga following the
discoveryofabeetleonacar.SubsequentsurveysbyCFIA,thecitiesofToronto,Mississauga,and
Brampton,andMNRfoundapproximately25infestedNorwayandManitobamapletrees.Infested
trees were in the Mississauga area around Lester B. Pearson International Airport, with the
exceptionofonetreefoundinanadjacentareawithinthecityofToronto.InFebruaryandMarch
2014, CFIA led a multi‐agency eradication program to eliminate this insect from Mississauga and
Toronto. All known infested trees, plus any of the four primary host genera (maples (Acer spp.),
poplars(Populusspp.),willows(Salixspp.)andbirches(Betulaspp.))within800mofinfestedtree,
werecutandchipped.Followupsurveysin2014didnotfindanyadditionalinfestedtrees.Surveys
willcontinuefor5yearstoensureallinfestedtreeshavebeenfoundandcut.Collaboratorsonthis
eradication effort include CFIA, Natural Resources Canada – Canadian Forest Service, Ontario
MinistryofNaturalResources,andthecitiesofMississaugaandToronto.
Hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae Annand) was found by CFIA in 2013 infesting a single
easternhemlocktreeintheNiagaraRivergorge.Asecondinfestedtreewasfoundinthegorgeby
CFIA in 2014. As in 2013, the infested tree was cut and burned on‐site by the Niagara Parks
Commission.AsecondinfestationofthisinsectinagroupoffivetreesinEtobicokewasmadein
2012.TwoadditionalinfestedtreeswerefoundnearbybyCFIAin2013.Alloftheseinfestedtrees
wereremovedandincineratedbyCFIA.
Beechbarkdisease,whichisacombinationofaninvasiveinsect(beechscale,Cryptococcusfagisuga
Linding)andaninvasivestemfungus(Nectriafaginata(Lohmanetal.)Castl.)continuedtospread
in Ontario in 2014. Damage continues to accelerate in several locations. After several years of
presenceofbeechscale,thediseasewasfoundforthefirsttimein2014onSt.Joseph’sIsland,Sault
Ste.MarieDistrict.
For the third year in a row, a pheromone trapping survey was done for walnut twig beetle
(Pityophthorus juglandis Blackman), the vector for thousand canker disease (Geosmithia morbida
sp.nov.).Asin2012and2013,nowalnuttwigbeetleswerefoundintheOntariotraps.
53
Forum 2014
SéanceVI:Aunorddu60eparallèle
54
Forum 2014
RapportdesTerritoiresduNord‐Ouest
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
JakubOlesinski1andRogerBrett2
1EnvironmentandNaturalResources,GovernmentoftheNorthwestTerritories,173HayRiver,Dene
Reserve,Box4354HayRiver(NorthwestTerritories)X0E1G3
2NaturalResourcesCanada,CanadianForestService,NorthernForestryCentre,5320–122nd
Street,Edmonton(Alberta)T6H3S5
Summary
TheGovernmentoftheNorthwestTerritories’DepartmentofEnvironmentandNaturalResources
(ENR)deliversforesthealthmonitoringacrosstheNWT.The2014surveyswereconductedonJuly
8‐9andJuly22‐26withassistancefromtheCanadianForestService.Theaerialsurveyflightroutes
encompassed over 6000 km (Figure 1) focusing on areas identified as high risk, i.e. along major
rivers and waterways or uplands and hill slopes. Some areas between the Great Bear and Great
SlaveLake,andalongtheMackenzieRivervalleybetweenHayRiverandFortProvidencecouldnot
besurveyedbecauseoflimitedvisibilityduetosmoke.Overall,405,206hectaresweremappedas
affectedbyfourmajorinsectpests(Figure2):AspenSerpentineLeafminer(Phyllocnistispopuliella)
– 320,193 ha, Eastern Spruce Budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana) – 79,152 ha, Willow Blotch
Leafminer (Micrurapteryx salicifoliella) – 4636 ha, and Forest Tent Caterpillar (Malacosoma
disstria) – 1224 ha, while 1,600 ha were affected by abiotic factors. Overall, there was over a
threefold increase in total area affected by various forest heath agents compared to the previous
year.
Treemortality
Mortalitycausedbyabioticfactors
June and July saw extremely dry conditions across the whole Territories. These two months
combinedreceivedonly30%oftypicalprecipitationasperCanadianClimateNormals1981‐2010
whichmayhavecontributedtohighersusceptibilityoftreesforpestattacks,andconsequentlyto
anoverallincreaseintotalareaaffectedbyinsectpestscomparedtothepreviousyear(141,268ha
in 2013). However, only 433 ha of aspen dieback along the Mackenzie River Valley near Fort
Simpson and Tulita were identified as caused directly by climate related factors, i.e. drought or
unstablewatertable(Figure2).Itshouldbenotedthatthesechangesdidnotoccurasaresultof
the current year weather conditions but rather as a consequence of long term climate shifts in
certainareas.
Redbelt(orwinterdesiccation)wasmappedinthemountainousregionsoftheNahanniNational
Park,totaling1,200ha.
Mortalitycausedbyinsectagents
Approximately 1,500 ha of spruce mortality caused by repeated severe defoliation by spruce
budwormoverthelast4‐5yearsweremappedalongMackenzieRivernearTulitainSahturegion
(Figure 3). These areas contain >30% of the stand mortality and are observed in mature timber
alongmajorriversandwaterways.
55
Forum 2014
Figure1.NWTaerialsurveyflightroutesflownin2014coveredover6000km.
56
Forum 2014
Figure2.Hotspotsofincreasedtreemortalityresultingfromabioticfactors(redbelt,aspen
dieback)andrepeatedlong‐termdefoliationbysprucebudworm(sprucemortality).Shownin
theFigurearelocationsofstandsweremortalitywas>30%ofthestandarea.
InsectPestActivity
SpruceBudworm
Spruce budworm remains the most serious forest pest in the NWT; however, since 2005, its
population stays at fairly low and stable levels. The total area affected by this pest in 2014 was
76,400hawithmajorityofinfestationsoccurringintheSahturegion(over37,000ha)andsmaller
populationspersistingalongtheSlaveRiverarea(approx.14,000ha),intheDehChoRegionalong
MackenzieRiverandonsouthernslopesofEbbuttHills(11,400ha),andintheNorthSlaveregion
on islands of Lac La Martre near Whati and near Benchoko (3,350 ha). Approximately 82% of all
sprucebudworminfestationsintheNWTweremappedassevere,17%asmoderate,andonly1%
aslight.
57
Forum 2014
Figure 3. The northernmost populations of spruce budworm along Arctic Red River in the
Inuvik region and along the Mackenzie River in Sahtu continued to persist with severe
defoliationobservedin2014.
AspenSerpentineLeafminer
The larva of this moth is a common pest in the northern North America and its population levels
fluctuate significantly from year to year in the NWT. Over 266,000 ha were affected by Aspen
Serpentine Leafminer in 2014 which is three times greater than the previous year. Majority of
infestations occurred in the DehCho region (195,000 ha), along the Mackenzie and Liard Rivers
(Figure4).OtheraffectedareasweremappedintheSouthSlave(6,700ha),Sahtu(2,940ha)and
North Slave (1,400 ha) regions. Over 70% of infestations were considered severe and 30%
moderate.
58
Forum 2014
Figure4.AspenSerpentineLeafmineristhedominantinsectpestintheDehChoregion.
WillowLeafBlotchMiner
WillowLeafBlotchMinerisamothknowntoaffectseveralspeciesofwillowsfoundintheNWT.
Theleafminerlarvaecreateareasofnecroticblotchesontheuppersurfacesofthewillowleaves
whichcanresultincompletedefoliationofthetree.Willowsarewelladaptedtodisturbancesand
canusuallyrecoverwellunlessdefoliatedforseveralconsecutiveyears.Over4,600haintotalwere
mappedasaffectedbyWillowLeafBlotchMinerwhichisapprox.a1,000‐hadecreasecomparedto
thepreviousyear.MajorityofinfestationsoccurredintheSouthSlaveregionalongtheSlaveRiver
(2,700ha).AfewisolatedpatcheswereobservedintheDehCho(870ha),Sahtu(870ha)andinthe
NorthSlave(200ha)regions.
ForestTentCaterpillar
TheForestTentCaterpillarisnativetoNorthAmericaaffectingmainlytremblingaspen.Defoliation
resultsfromlarvalfeedingthatbeginsaboutthetimeaspenbudsbegintobreakinearlyspring.The
risk of aspen mortality is minimized because these trees refoliate 3 to 6 weeks after defoliation,
however,stressedtreestendtobemoresusceptibletodecay,boringinsects,andtheirstemgrowth
can be reduced as much as 90% of annual normal growth. Forest Tent Caterpillar has not been
observedintheNWTfortheprevious5yearswithsomeextensiveinfestationsintheLiardRiver
area in late 90’s. In 2014, 1,225 ha were mapped as a moderate to severe defoliation by the FTC
alongtheSlaveRiver(Figure5).
59
Forum 2014
Figure5.AreasalongSlaveRiverhavebeenaffectedbyseveralinsectagents.The2014survey
foundisolatedinfestationsofForestTentCaterpillartotaling1,225ha.
UpdateontheMountainPineBeetleSituationintheNWT
MountainPineBeetle(MPB)wasconfirmedinthesouthernNWTin2012forthefirsttime.Modest
winter survival was confirmed in March 2013 when the attacked trees were cut and burned. No
baitingoccurredinthisandfollowingyears.
MountainPineBeetlePestRiskAnalysisfortheNWTpineforestswascompletedin2013asoneof
theproactivemeasuresundertakenbytheENRtobetterunderstandtherisksassociatedwiththis
pest.TheanalysisassessedtheoverallriskofestablishmentandspreadoftheMPBintoNWTpine
forestsaslowintheshorttermandmediuminthelongterm.Climatewarmingisconsideredakey
factorthatwillcontributetopotentialexpansionofMPBintheNWT.
In2014,theENRcontinuedtomonitorfortheMPBactivityinthesouthernNWTbydedicatinga
special aerial survey along the NWT – AB border focusing on locating potential infestations. No
signsofMountainPineBeetleactivitywerenotedinareaspreviouslyinfestedaswellasotherpine
dominatedstandsalongsurveyroutes.Inaddition,thestandwheretheMPBwasfirstdiscoveredin
2012wasfoundtobecompletelyburnedinthe2013fireseason.Nootherlocationsaffectedbythe
MPBwerefoundacrosstheNWTin2014.
60
Forum 2014
TheENRparticipatesactivelyintheNationalForestPestStrategy(NFPS)whichisanationallevel
program aimed to create the platform for the most efficient use of knowledge and technology to
manage forest pests in a proactive integrated way. Currently, the ENR is actively involved in the
Action to Slow the Spread of Mountain Pine Beetle across Canada, one of the flagship programs
undertheNFPS.
61
Forum 2014
SéanceVII:Règlementssurlespesticides,
solutionspossibles,usagelimité
62
Forum 2014
Quandleprocessusréglementaireetlesexigencesopérationnellessont
inconciliables:commentpeut‐onlesconcilier?
DavidKreutzweiser
RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesGrandLacs
1219QueenSt.East,SaultSte.Marie(Ontario)P6A2E5
IlestgénéralementadmisqueleCanadapossèdeunprocessusréglementairerigoureuxencequia
traitauxpesticidesforestiers.Ilestégalementreconnuquelesdécisionsréglementairesdoivent
suivreunprocessusnormaliséafind’enassurerlacohérence,larigueuretl’impartialité,etquela
miseenoeuvredeceprocessuspeutprendreuncertaintemps.Cependant,ilestégalementévident
quecertainsnouveauxdéfisenmatièredelutteantiparasitairepeuventrevêtiruncaractère
d’urgence,exigerd’êtretraitésrapidementetsontimportantsd’unpointdevueéconomique.
Lorsquecessituationsrequièrentdesutilisationsnouvellesoumodifiéesdespesticidesforestiers,il
arriveparfoisqueleprocessusréglementaireaccuseunretardparrapportauproblèmedes
ravageurs.J’utilisel’exempled’unestratégied’interventionprécocevisantlatordeusedes
bourgeonsdel’épinettemiseenoeuvrerécemmentetl’utilisationdutébufénozidepourillustrer
cettedichotomie.Danscetexemple,unepositionenmatièrederèglementationaentravé,voire
compromis,lastratégied’interventionetétaitbaséesurunrisqueperçupourlesécosystèmes
aquatiques.Jevaisvousdémonterqu’ilexisteunesériededonnéesetderenseignementsnondictés
pardeslignesdirectricespermettantd’actualiseretdesouteniruneévaluationdesrisquesassociés
auxsystèmesaquatiques.Cependant,ilnesemblepasyavoirunprocessusclairourapide
permettantd’inclurecesinformationsafind’influer,entempsopportun,surunedécision
réglementaire.Cetexempleapourbutdesusciterdesidéesetdesdiscussionssurlafaçondont
nouspourrionsrésoudrecettedichotomie.
63
Forum 2014
SéanceVIII:Lasémiochimiedesinsectes
64
Forum 2014
Incidencesdesappâtsimprégnésdephéromonesetdelahauteurdespiègessurle
dépistagedescérambycidés
JonSweeney1,PeterSilk1,ReggieWebster2,LeahFlaherty3,DavidLangor4,GregPohl4,Jerzy
Gutowski5,DanMiller6etMengQingfan7
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedel’Atlantique
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000,Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5P7
224MillstreamDrive,Charter’sSettlement,(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3C1X1
3MacEwenUniversity,10700–104thAvenue,Edmonton(Alberta)T5J4S2
4RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedunord
5320–122ndStreet,Edmonton(Alberta)T6H3S5
5DepartmentofNaturalForests,Bialowieza,Poland
6USDAForestService,Athens,Georgia,USA
7BeihuaUniversity,Jilin,China
Les espèces exotiques de coléoptères perceurs du bois et de l’écorce, en particulier ceux des
familles des cérambycidés, des buprestidés et des curculionidés, comprennent certains des
ravageurs forestiers les plus redoutables au Canada. En dépit de la mise en oeuvre récente de
politiquesréglementairesphytosanitairesinternationales,tellesquelaNIMP15,oncontinueàles
intercepter dans les matériaux d’emballage en bois massif dans les ports du Canada et des États‐
Unis.Desrecherchesrécentesontdémontréquedenombreusesespècesdelongicornesréagissent
auxphéromonestellesqueleshydroxy‐cétones,leshexanédiols,lefuscumol,l’acétatedefuscumol
etlemonochamol.Nousrapportonslesrésultatsd’expérienceseffectuéessurleterrainen2013et
2014 ayant pour but de vérifier si les appâts et la hauteur des pièges pouvaient améliorer
l’efficacitédudépistagedesespècesdelongicornes.Engénéral,lenombred’espècesdelongicornes
dépistéesparsiteaaugmentéenappâtantlespiègesavecdesappâtsimprégnésdephéromones,en
plaçantlespiègesdanslecouvertforestiersupérieurainsiquedanslesous‐étageetenaugmentant
lenombredepiègesparsite.Nousprésentonségalementdesdonnéespréliminairesquipermettent
de penser qu’en moyenne, de 4,5 à 6 minutes supplémentaires par piège et des coûts d’environ
2,50$ de plus par piège sont nécessaires pour installer les pièges dans la partie supérieure du
couvertforestieraulieudelesposeràlahauteurstandardde1,5à2m.
65
Forum 2014
Incidencedelaconceptiondespiègesetdeladistanceentreceux‐cisurlacapture
descérambycidés
J.D.Allison1,K.J.Dodds2,T.A.Scarr3,J.J.Turgeon1etC.J.K.MacQuarrie1
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesGrandLacs,
1219QueenSt.East,SaultSte.Marie(Ontario)P6A2E5
2USDAForestService,NortheasternAreaStateandPrivateForestry,271MastRoad,Durham,New
Hampshire03824,USA
3MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario,Suite400,70FosterDrive,SaultSte.
Marie(Ontario)P6A6V5
Les enquêtes et les programmes de dépistage des insectes forestiers exotiques et indigènes
(notamment les cérambycidés) sont souvent basés sur des pièges appâtés avec des matières
odorantes.Desprogrèsremarquablesontétéréaliséscesdernièresannéesdansl’identificationdes
substances attractives pour les coléoptères cérambycidés. Par contre, relativement peu d’études
ont été réalisées pour examiner la relation entre la conception et la performance des pièges
destinés aux coléoptères cérambycidés. Très peu d’attention a été accordée aux mesures
concernant directement les activités de dépistage et la logistique de mise en place des pièges. La
plupart des études qui ont examiné la performance des pièges ont utilisé les paramètres de
l’abondance des taxons ciblés qui sont habituellement répandus ou fréquents dans
l’environnement.Idéalement,lesétudesopérationnellesetlesprogrammesdedépistagedevraient
permettre de détecter les espèces non indigènes avant qu’elles ne deviennent abondantes (c.‐à‐d.
quandellessontrares).Danscetteprésentation,nousallonscommuniquerlesrésultatsdetravaux
exécutésrécemmentetportantsurlespointssuivants:1)utilisationdesparamètresdelarichesse,
de la diversité et de l’abondance des espèces afin de comparer plusieurs conceptions de pièges
d’interceptionetleurefficacitépourl’échantillonnagedescérambycidésdansl’estdel’Amériquedu
Nord; 2) examen de la logistique de mise en place des pièges (distance entre les pièges) et son
influencesurlacapturedescérambycidéscibles;et3)observationdesfacteursliésàlaconception
quiinfluentsurlaperformancedediverspiègesd’interceptionpourlacapturedescérambycidés.
66
Forum 2014
Détectionprécocedesinsectesexotiques:pointdevueaméricain
RobertRabaglia
USDAForestService,ForestHealthProtection,1400IndependenceAvenueSW,Washington,DC20250
L’introductionetl’établissementdesinsectesexotiquessontunemenacegrandissantepourlasanté
des forêts rurales et urbaines en Amérique du Nord. La détection précoce de ces espèces
envahissantesaétésurnomméeladeuxièmelignededéfensedanslaprotectiondenosforêts.Le
défiàreleveraétédereconnaîtrelesmenacespotentiellesetdedétectercesdernièresleplusvite
possible, pour rapidement y répondre afin de minimiser les impacts. Le USDA Forest Service
(serviceforestierdesÉtats‐Unis)metenœuvreunprogrammededétectionprécoce/intervention
rapide depuis 2007. Depuis, sept nouvelles espèces de scolyte et de scolyte du bois ont été
détectées. Cependant, ces espèces étaient toutes bien établies avant qu’elles ne soient détectées.
Cette présentation abordera les efforts d’amélioration dans la détection précoce pour intervenir
rapidementàuneintroduction.Toutefois,lagestionpourraitêtrelaréponseàlongtermequiserait
utiliséepourunbonnombredecesnouvellesespècesenvahissantes.
67
Forum 2014
L’incidencedel’hétérogénéitédespaysagessurl’étudeetladétectiondes
cérambycidés
BrianStrom1,JeremyAllison2,JonSweeney3etTaylorScarr4
1USDAForestService,SouthernResearchStation,2500ShreveportHighway,Pineville,Louisiana
71360,USA
2RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesGrandLacs
1219QueenSt.East,SaultSte.Marie(Ontario)P6A2E5
3RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedel’Atlantique,
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000,Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5P7
4MinistèredesRichessesnaturellesetdesForêtsdel’Ontario,70FosterDrive,Suite400,SaultSte.
Marie(Ontario)P6A6V5
La réussite des programmes de dépistage et de surveillance des insectes dépend de nombreuses
variables.Cesprogrammesmaîtrisentuncertainnombredecesvariables,maisd’autreséchappentà
leurcontrôle.Cequiestprimordialpourlaréussitedesprogrammesestdeconnaîtrel’incidencede
l’habitatdanslequellespiègessontinstalléssurlacapturedesespècesciblées.Lesdécisionsrelatives
à l’emplacement des pièges sont éclairées par des expériences ou des résultats de travaux de
recherche qui peuvent être applicables ou non à l’ensemble des taxons. Les objectifs généraux de
notre étude sont de mesurer la variabilité de l’environnement et d’évaluer son incidence sur le
nombred’individuscapturésparmilesgroupesd’insectesciblés.Nousavonsdébuténosexpériences
en Louisiane et dans le nord de l’Ontario afin d’évaluer la capture des longicornes (Cerambycidae :
Cerambycinae et Lamiinae)surdestransectscourtsqui s’étendentperpendiculairementàlalisière
des forêts, allant des forêts couvertes aux clairières. Les analyses préliminaires que nous
présenterons semblent indiquer que l’incidence de l’habitat des pièges varie selon les espèces. Les
interactions entre les espèces d’insectes et l’hétérogénéité dans les zones boisées sont multiples et
nécessiteront davantage d’expérimentation avant de pouvoir choisir avec certitude les habitats à
préconiserpourdestaxonsprécis.Cependant,endépitdecescomplexités,lesprogrèssepoursuivent
grâceauxactivitésmenéesencollaborationparlesÉtats‐UnisetleCanada.Lamiseencommundes
ressourcesaccroîtlaportéedestravauxetlaprobabilitédetrouverdessolutionsrigoureuses.
68
Forum 2014
Lesprioritésetlesbesoinsdel'ACIAencequiconcerneladétectionetla
surveillancedesespècesforestièresexotiques
TroyKimoto
Agencecanadienned'inspectiondesaliments,4321StillCreekDrive,Burnaby(Colombie‐Britannique)
V5C6S7
L’Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments(ACIA)mèneunevariétéd’enquêtesphytosanitaires
visantàdélimiterleslimitesdespopulationsétablies,àdétecterdenouveauxorganismesnuisibles
ou à déterminer les zones exemptes d’organismes nuisibles. Les enquêtes visuelles au sol, les
pièges appâtés avec des substances sémiochimiques et la sensibilisation du public sont des outils
utilisés par l’ACIA pour la surveillance des ravageurs forestiers envahissants. Bien que l’ACIA
continuedecollaboreravecleServicecanadiendesforêts,lemilieuuniversitaireetl’industriedans
le développement de nouveaux outils de surveillance, il y a encore de nombreuses lacunes qui
doiventêtrecomblées(parexemple,l’absenced’outilspourcertainsgroupestaxonomiques)oude
la place pour l’amélioration dans les méthodes d’enquêtes actuelles (par exemple, la phéromone
pour la spongieuse rose, la sensibilisation du public, etc.). L’ACIA continue de travailler de pairs
avec ses partenaires pour améliorer les techniques de surveillance pour les ravageurs forestiers
envahissants.
69
Forum 2014
SéanceIX:Misesàjoursurlesespèces
exotiquesenvahissantesetlesmatériaux
d’emballageenbois 70
Forum 2014
SéanceX:Larépressiondesravageurs
dansl’Ouest
71
Forum 2014
RapportduManitoba
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
FionaRoss
ForestryandPeatLandManagement,ManitobaConservationandWaterStewardship,
200SaulteauxCrescent,Winnipeg(Manitoba)R3J3W3
AerialSurveys
In2014,ManitobaConservationandWaterStewardship(MCWS)continuedwithaprovincewide
systematicaerialsurvey.Thesurveyprovidedanoverallpictureofhealthissuesandanestimateof
forest defoliation. The survey uses mobile PC Tablets to map defoliation in the following forest
regions of Manitoba: Northeast region, Northwest region, Western region, Interlake region and
Eastern region. The survey design allows for more coverage over a specific area when required
with a baseline survey conducted in each region every year. In 2014, a base line survey was
conductedacrosstheprovinceofManitobaasdepictedinFigure1.
Figure1.MapofaerialsurveyconductedinManitobain2014.
72
Forum 2014
ForestTentCaterpillar‐Malacosomadisstria
The population of forest tent caterpillar increased within the province in 2014. The aerial survey
observed that the Nelson River and Interlake forest section experienced the most severe
defoliation. However, all forest section had some moderate to severe defoliation from forest tent
caterpillar(Figure2).Thetotalestimateddefoliationprovincewidefor2014is904,126ha.Similar
defoliationisexpectedfor2015.
Figure2.MapofforesttentcaterpillardefoliationobservedbyaerialsurveyinManitobain
2014.
JackPineBudworm‐Choristoneurapinus
AsmallpocketofjackpinebudwormdefoliationwasobservedinthePinelandforestsection
(Figure3).Theestimatedprovincewidedefoliationis4,345ha.
Figure3.MapofjackpinebudwormdefoliationobservedbyaerialsurveyinManitobain
2014.
73
Forum 2014
BudwormFieldPlots
In2014,Manitobastartedre‐distributingitsspruceandjackpinebudwormfieldplotsinorderto
mirrorthechangeinaerialsurveymethod.By2015,all33SBWand33JPBWplotswillbenew.
InAugustandSeptember,branchsamplesandpheromonetrapsarecollectedfromallspruceand
jackpinebudwormplots.Branchesareprocessedtoassesscurrentdefoliationlevelsandeggmass
densities. Moths are counted from traps. Data analysis generates hazard ratings that predict the
nextyear’sdefoliation.
Sprucebudworm‐Choristoneurafumiferama
In2014,nodefoliationbysprucebudwormwasobservedthroughoutManitoba.
Basedon2013defoliationpredictionsderivedfromfalleggmasssurveysandhazardratingfortree
condition,nooperationalsprucebudwormsuppressionprogramwasimplementedin2014.
In August and September, spruce and fir branch samples are collected at plots throughout the
province and processed to assess current defoliation levels and determine egg mass densities to
predict2015defoliation(Table1).
Table1.2014sprucebudwormdefoliationandaverageeggmass,andpredictionsfor2015.
2015defoliation
Location
2014defoliation* 2014averageegg
prediction
mass/10m2
NortheastRegion
Light
Light
0
NorthwestRegion
Light
18.7
Light
WesternRegion
Light
15.7
Light
InterlakeRegion
Light
0
Light
EasternRegion
Light
0
Light
*Defoliationclassesareasfollows:
Light ‐upto35%defoliationofcurrentshoots
‐basedon<40eggmassesper10m2ofbrancharea
Moderate‐35%to70%defoliationofcurrentshoots
‐basedon40to185eggmassesper10m2ofbrancharea
Severe ‐greaterthan70%defoliationofcurrentshootsandpossiblefeedingonoldfoliage
‐basedon>185eggmassesper10m2ofbrancharea
Sprucebudwormpheromonetrapswereplacedat32locationsthroughouttheprovince.Traps/lures
wereprovidedtoRidingMountainNationalParkformonitoringsixsites.ThreeMULTIPHER®insect
trapscontainingsprucebudwormpheromone(PVClurecontaining0.3%byweightofa95:5blendof
(E)‐and(Z)‐11‐tetradecenal)areplaced40mapartateachplotlocationinatriangularconfiguration.
Averagemothcapturespertrapincreasedinthreeregionswithalargedropinmothcapturesfound
within the Northwest region, however, moth captures are still low province wide (Table 2). No
operationalsuppressionprogramisplannedfor2015.
74
Forum 2014
Table2.Sprucebudwormpheromonetrapping.
2013moth
Location
capture/trap
2014moth
capture/trap
%change
NorthwestRegion
151
650
+330%
NortheastRegion
424
132
‐69%
WesternRegion
367
550
+46%
InterlakeRegion
64
51
‐20%
EasternRegion
20
22
+9%
JackPineBudworm‐Choristoneurapinus
Defoliationbyjackpinebudworm,continuestobenegligiblethroughoutjackpine(Pinusbanksiana)
forests in Manitoba. In 2014, 33 trapping locations were distributed across the province using a
0.03% or 100 µg concentration of pheromone lure.This trapping method is being evaluated as an
earlywarningmethodforoutbreaksandasupplementaltechniquetodefoliationpredictionsbyegg
massdensitysurveys.
InAugustandSeptember,jackpinebranchsamplesarecollectedatplotsthroughouttheprovince
andprocessedtoassesscurrentdefoliationlevelsanddetermineeggmassdensitiestopredict2015
defoliation(Table3).
Table3.2014jackpinebudwormdefoliationandaverageeggmass,andpredictionsfor
2015.
2015defoliation
Location
2014defoliation* 2014averageegg
2
prediction
mass/10m NortheastRegion
Light
Light
0
NorthwestRegion
Light
0
Light
WesternRegion
Light
0
Light
InterlakeRegion
Light
0
Light
EasternRegion
Light
0.28
Light
*Defoliationclassesareasfollows:
Light ‐upto35%defoliationofcurrentshoots
Moderate‐36%to70%defoliationofcurrentshoots
Severe ‐greaterthan70%defoliationofcurrentshootsandpossiblefeedingonoldfoliage
DutchElmDisease‐Ophiostomanovo‐ulmi
Provincial Dutch elm disease (DED) sanitation crews removed 3,892 trees in 2013‐2014; 2,311
withintheDEDbufferzoneofWinnipegand1,581throughouttheremainderoftheprovince.The
City of Winnipeg removed 4,850 elms, and Brandon removed 182 elms. Total elm tree removals
were8,924.
In 2014, Cost‐Sharing Agreements were administered within 34 communities and six rural
municipalitiesinthebuffersurroundingWinnipeg.Provincialsurveycrewsmarked4,000elmsfor
removal (2,272 within the Winnipeg buffer zone, 248 in the City of Brandon and 1,480 in and
75
Forum 2014
around the 34 Cost‐Sharing Agreement communities). In addition, 73 elm firewood piles were
identifiedforremoval.IntheCityofWinnipeg,4,850elmsweremarkedforremoval.
ElmBarkBeetleMonitoring‐ScolytusmultistriatusandScolytusschevyrewi
In1982,MCWSbeganmonitoringforpresenceoftheinvasiveforestpest,thesmallerEuropeanelm
bark beetle (Scolytus multistriatus) which is another vector of Dutch elm disease in Canada.
Pheromone traps are situated at several locations throughout southern Manitoba. From 1982 to
2006, only eight specimens of S. multistriatus had been captured. In 2011, an adult of S.
multistriatus was captured. Numbers of S. multistriatus continued to increase with six beetles
caughtatthreelocationsin2012.In2014,noS.multistriatuswerecaught.
In 2007, eleven adults of a new invasive forest pest, banded elm bark beetle, Scolytus schevyrewi,
were captured in Otterburne and positively identified by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency
(CFIA).ThisnewinvasiveinsecttoCanadaattacksandbreedsinbothAmericanandSiberianelm
and has the potential to transmit Dutch elm disease. Since its introduction several S. schevyrewi,
havebeencapturedin2008,2009,2011and2012.In2013,10Scolytusschevyrewiwerecaughtat
fourlocationswithinManitoba.
EuropeanGypsyMoth‐Lymantridispar
In the fall of 2014, Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship assisted the Canadian Food
Inspection Agency (CFIA) in conducting a survey for gypsy moth egg masses within the Rural
MunicipalityofLacduBonnet.Fortwoconsecutiveyears,anintensivegridofpheromonetrapsin
thissmallareahascapturedanincreasingnumberofmoths.Thegroundsurveyresultedinpositive
finds of egg masses, pupal casings, dead larva and a dead adult moth. An eradication program is
nowbeingplannedfor2015.Monitoringforthisinvasiveforestpestwillcontinuein2015withtrap
delineationdeployedbytheCFIA.
InvasiveForestPestsandMovementofFirewood
Manitoba is concerned about the spread of invasive forest insects and diseases through the
movement of firewood. Since 2008, four wood collecting bins have been established on major
highways at the provincial boundaries: two along the TransCanada Highway and one each at
Highways 5 and 16. Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship is asking the public not to
transportfirewoodintotheprovinceandtodepositallwoodtheyaretransportinginthebins.For
2014,travelersdepositedpine,ash,oakandothertreespecies,inbothbinsalongHighway1andin
bins along Highways 16 and 5. A total of 159 pieces of firewood were deposited by the public.
Firewoodisinspectedforsignsofinsectactivityandburned.
76
Forum 2014
EmeraldAshBorer‐Agrilusplanipennis
Ash species (Fraxinus spp.) are a cornerstone species along riparian forest and within Manitoban
communities. Planning and preparation continues within Manitoba for the invasive forest insect,
Emeraldashborer(EAB).ToaidinEABdetectionMCWSdeployed34greenprismtrapsplacedat
high risk location within the province. Trap deployment is coordinated between the City of
Winnipeg,MCWS,CFIAandTreesWinnipeg.AlltrapsinManitobawerefoundtobenegativeforthe
presenceofEAB.
Municipalities and communities are encouraged to start monitoring for EAB within their
community with technical support provided from the province. In 2014, four additional
communities’ purchases green prism traps to complement the current ongoing effort by the
province.
PublicEducationandOutreach
Increasingpublicknowledgeandunderstandingofforesthealthissuesincludingtheriskassociated
with firewood movement and invasive species management is important to the province of
Manitoba. In 2014, Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship launched a new online
questionnaire Got a Sick Tree? www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/forestry/questionnaire/. Forest
health staff participated in 10 trade shows attended by tens of thousands, provided 10
presentationstospecialinterestgroupsandrespondedto425publicinquiries.
77
Forum 2014
RapportdelaSaskatchewan
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
RoryMcIntosh
SaskatchewanMinistryofEnvironment,PrinceAlbert,Saskatchewan
Defoliators–Softwood
SprucebudwormChoristoneurafumiferana
Since the peak of the outbreak in 2002,
defoliation by the eastern spruce budworm
(Choristoneura fumiferana) has been
graduallydeclining(Figure1).Aerialsurveys
in 2011 revealed 92,406 ha of moderate and
severe defoliation. This area dropped
significantly to 28,272 ha in 2012. In 2013,
just over 13,000 ha of mostly moderate
defoliationweremapped.In2014,noareaof
defoliation was mapped during aerial
Figure 1. Area of moderate to severe defoliation
surveys – this is the first time since the early
caused by the spruce budworm Choristoneura
1990s. Although small pockets are present in
fumiferana in Saskatchewan 2004-2014.
the Pine House and Besnard Lake areas in
north‐central Saskatchewan, the outbreak throughout the rest of the province has collapsed. In
2014, overwintering L2 surveys reveal low numbers. No spray program will be implemented in
2015.
JackpinebudwormChoristoneurapinuspinus
In2014,therewasagainnodetectablejackpinebudwormdefoliationinSaskatchewan.Jackpine
budworm,aperiodicdefoliatorofjackpine,hasnotbeendetectedsincetheearly1980s.In2014,
theprovincecontinuedthepheromonetrappingnetworktomonitormothactivity.Ingeneral,trap
counts remained low throughout the province with the exception of some elevated counts in the
FortaLaCorne.Nosignificanttrapcountswererecordedin2014.
Defoliators–hardwood
LargeaspentortrixChoristoneuraconflictana
andforesttentcaterpillarMalacosomadisstria
The annual area of hardwood defoliation has
been approximately doubling since 2010. In
2014, the outbreak really took off and the area
of defoliation tripled to 304,107 ha. While in
2011thedamagewaspredominantlycausedby
the large aspen tortrix, this disturbance
continues mostly in the western part of the
province. The damage in the central (Prince
Figure 2. Net area of moderate to severe defoliation
Albert National Park and the Churchill River)
caused by hardwood defoliators in Saskatchewan
2008-2014.
78
Forum 2014
and eastern parts of the province (including Greenwater Lake and Duck Mountain provincial
parks), is caused by forest tent caterpillar. Forest tent caterpillar is also defoliating aspen in the
CypressHillsinthesouthwest(Figure3).
Figure3.AreaofmoderatetoseveredefoliationcausedbytheforesttentcaterpillarMalacosoma
disstria(solidfill)andlargeaspentortrixChoristoneuraconflictana(diagonalfill)inSaskatchewan
in2014.
79
Forum 2014
FoliarDiseases
SpruceneedlerustChrysomyxaledicola
Spruce needle rust Chrysomyxa ledicola (Figure 4) was
detected again in 2014, for the fourth year in a row. In
2013,thenetareaaffectedwas98,712ha.In2014,aerial
and ground surveys revealed that the area affected had
increased dramatically to 152,427 ha. Areas affected by
spruce needle rust were predominantly in the western
part of the province in and around Dillon Lake, north of
theColdLakeAirWeaponsRange,andlargeareassouthof
theWeaponsRangeandaroundMeadowLake.Therewere
alsosignificantareasaffectedaroundTurtleLakebetween Figure4.SpruceneedlerustChrysomyxa.
GlaslynandTurtleford(Figure5).
Figure5.DistributionofspruceneedlerustdefoliationinSaskatchewanin2014.
80
Forum 2014
Invasiveandnon‐nativepests
DutchelmdiseaseOphiostomanovoulmi
In1980,Dutchelmdisease(DED)wasfirstdiscoveredinSaskatchewan(Regina).Sincethen,DED
has slowly spread along the Souris and Qu’Appelle river valleys in southeast and eastern
Saskatchewan and is now found throughout most of the range of native elms in Saskatchewan
(Figure6).
Withtheexceptionofthelargerurbancentres,since2010,17communities(showninFigure6as
stars)havesecuredacontractortoconductsurveillanceintheirjurisdictions.Thesecommunities
include:
•
Balcarres
•
Langham
•
Spiritwood
•
Broadview
•
Moosomin
•
Wadena
•
Carlyle
•
Outlook
•
Watrous
•
Caronport
•
Oxbow
•
Wolseley
•
Estevan
•
Pense
•
Wynyard
•
IndianHead
•
Preeceville
Figure6.DistributionofDutchelmdiseaseactivezones(redcross‐hatch)throughoutSaskatchewanin2014.
Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment continues to survey in wild stands in seven buffer areas outside
major communities (circles) and in two Provincial Parks (oval). In addition to the major urban centres, 17
communities(stars)conductDEDmanagementactionintheirowncommunities.
81
Forum 2014
SincechangestotheprovincialprogramwereimplementedinApril1,2010,ashared‐responsibility
approachistaken,wherethemunicipalitiesareresponsibleforDEDmanagementprogramsintheir
communities. The Ministry of Environment conducts surveillance and removal activities in seven
management areas outside major communities (as well as two provincial parks) threatened by
DED. The Ministry of Environment also ensures regulatory compliance, diagnostic services and
providesscientificandtechnicalsupporttocommunities.
2014Highlights
• According to the provincial crop protection laboratory, no new communities reported DED in
2014.
• Thenumberofinfectedtreesremovedin2014management(buffer)zoneshasincreasedwhen
comparedto2013.ThisisparticularlyevidentintheReginabufferzone,wherethenumberof
infectedtreesremovedalmostdoubled(Table1).
• Thenumberoftreesremovedfromprovincialparksisslightlylowerthanin2013(Table2).
• DEDstillextensiveinthesoutheastregionoftheprovince.
Table1.ComparativenumberofDEDinfectedtreesmarkedforremovalinthesevenbufferzones
inSaskatchewanfrom2012to2014.
82
Forum 2014
Table 2. Comparative number of DED infected trees marked for removal in two parks in
Saskatchewanfrom2012to2014.
EuropeangypsymothLymantriadispar
In 2014, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) continued its on‐going monitoring in
Saskatchewan,deploying522TrécedeltaIIgreentrapsbaitedwithGypsyMothStringLure(Table
3). All traps were targeted at the European gypsy moth Lymantria dispar. No male gypsy moths
were caught. In 2014, the CFIA conducted delimitation surveys (16 traps/mile) around all three
2013positivefinds.In2014,alldelimitationtrapswerenegative.
Table3.NumberanddistributionofgypsymothtrapsinSaskatchewanin2014.
LOCATION
NUMBER
NUMBER
(andarea)
Traps
Positive
*
REGINA/MOOSEJAW 195
0
SASKATOON
142
0
YORKTON
65
0
N.BATTLEFORD
40
0
NIPAWIN
40
0
MELFORT
40
0
522
0
Total
*Includes23trapsdeployedbytheCityofRegina.
2014Highlights
• In2014,theCFIAcontinueditson‐goingmonitoringinSaskatchewan,deploying499TréceDelta
II Green Traps baited with Disparlure Flex lure. All traps were for the detection of European
gypsymothLymantriadispar.TheCityofReginadeployedanadditional23traps,foratotalof
522traps.Allgypsymothtrapsdeployedin2014werenegative.
83
Forum 2014
• In total, 195 (172 by the CFIA and 23 by the City of Regina) European gypsy moth traps were
deployedinRegina,MooseJawandthesurroundingarea.142trapsweredeployedinSaskatoon
andthesurroundingarea.Anadditional40trapsweredeployedinandaroundNorthBattleford,
NipawinandMelfort.
• All traps (16 traps/mile) deployed in delimitation surveys around the three positive sites
reportedin2013werenegative.
• TheCFIAcontinuedemeraldashborer(EAB)trappingandvisualsurveillance.Intotal,20green
paneltrapsweredeployedin2014.TheCityofReginadeployedthree.
• Inthefall,theCFIAconductedvisualsurveysat20sitesfortheAsianlonghornedbeetle(ALB).
NosignsofALBwerefound.
• NOGYPSYMOTHSWEREFOUNDINANYOFTHETRAPSINSASKATCHEWANIN2014.
• NOEMERALDASHBORERSWEREFOUNDINANYOFTHETRAPSINSASKATCHEWANIN
2014.
MountainpinebeetleDendroctonusponderosae
The risk of mountain pine beetle (MPB) spreading
eastwardsandestablishinginSaskatchewan’sboreal
jack pine forests continues to be the primary
concern. In 2013, the Government of Alberta
reported that MPB had been found in a baited tree
southwest of Fort McMurray, within 50 km of the
Alberta–Saskatchewanborder.In2014,theclosest
detectedbeetlewasinabaitedtree120kmwest
of the border. Currently, there is an active MPB
outbreakintheCypressHillsInterprovincialParkin
southwesternSaskatchewan(Figure7).
InSaskatchewan,therestillremainstheopportunity
tofocusonproactive,preventiveapproachesinstead
Figure 7 Building mountainpinebeetle
ofactivebeetle‐focusedsuppressiveaction.
infestationinandaroundCypressHills
Since 2002, the Saskatchewan Ministry of InterprovincialPark,insouthwestern
Saskatchewan.
Environment(MOE)implementedregulatorycontrols
to prevent the long‐distance, human‐caused spread of MPB into the province. In July 2008, this
restriction order was strengthened by designating MPB a pest under the Forest Resources
ManagementAct(FRMA)anddesignatingthelandswherethemoratoriumistobeenforced.This
designationenablesgreaterpowersofinspectionandmitigativeactionundertheFRMA.
Saskatchewan&AlbertainterprovincialagreementtoslowthespreadofMPB,inAlberta
CentraltoSaskatchewan’sstrategicapproachistofocusonaggressivefallandburnoperationsin
theleadingedgeinAlbertatopreventorslowthespreadofmountainpinebeetleintotheboreal
forestandacrossCanada.AstheMPBinvadesnovelecosystems(andcolonizesnaïvehosts)thereis
a unique opportunity to reduce MPB spread into the boreal jack pine forest in the boreal bridge
zone east of Slave Lake, Alberta. The forests in this region are fragmented, beetle survival is
currentlypoor,andtheextentofdamageislow.In2011,theprovinceofSaskatchewanenteredinto
84
Forum 2014
amulti‐yearagreementtopartnerwiththeprovinceofAlbertatodevelopacoordinated,strategic
approachtocontrolthespreadofthemountainpinebeetleintoSaskatchewan’sborealforest.The
agreementendedinApril2014.InDecember2014,theagreementwasrenewedforanadditional
three‐yearterm.
Under this agreement annual work plans are developed by the Spread Management Action
Collaborative(SMAC)integratingAlberta’scurrentaerialandgroundsurveydatatoprioritizeand
coordinate control activities. Work in 2014 continued to focus on the leading edge through
maintainingatree‐baitingnetworktodelineatetheleadingedgeandLevel1(singletree)removal
ofMPBinfestedtreesintheSlaveLakeandMartenHillsareas.
Saskatchewan continues to be vigilant in early detection surveillance and preparations for rapid
response.In2011atree‐baitinggridwasestablishedinnorthwesternSaskatchewantoprovidean
extensionoftheAlbertadetectionbaitingprogramtohelpdetectanddelineatethe“leadingedge”
of MPB and detect its presence/spread into Saskatchewan. This grid was expanded in 2013 and
2014.Intotal,thereare69landingareasinwhichtreebaitingsitesarelocated.
Mountainpinebeetlesurveys
The surveillance program is divided into two components: the Cypress Hills Interprovincial Park
(CHIPP) and the northern boreal forest. Saskatchewan’s strategic approach to the MPB threat is
very similar to that of fire‐fighting: early detection leading to immediate, rapid and aggressive
response.TohelpfocussurveillanceanddetectionofMPB,Saskatchewanhasimplementedriskand
susceptibility mapping, i.e. forest‐focused approaches aimed at determining the extent and
distributionofsusceptiblepineinthewesternpartoftheprovince.Thedistributionofthesehigh
risk stands, coupled with fire disturbance data, is used to help focus efficient aerial and ground
surveillance activities. In late August and early September 2014, systematic surveys were
conductedinthenorthwestusingrotarywingaircraft(Figure8).
85
Forum 2014
Figure8.TracklogmapofwesternSaskatchewanshowingareaswheretheSaskatchewan
MinistryofEnvironmentconductsextendedaerialsurveysofsusceptiblepinestands.
CypressHillsInterprovincialPark(CHIPP)
TheSaskatchewanMinistryofEnvironmenthasbeenmonitoringMPBintheCHIPPsincethelast
outbreakdeclinedin1985‐1986.Aerialoverviewsurveysareusedtolocateallredtrees,shownas
red dots on the map. These observations are then verified by detailed and systematic ground
surveys.IntheWestblock,theoutbreakremainsconcentratedinthesouthwestcorner(Figure9)
andthroughoutthecoreareaoftheCentreblock(Figure10).
Each year, all trees verified during the ground surveys and marked for removal are removed. In
2006, only two trees were removed; however, this number started to increase in 2008‐2009. In
86
Forum 2014
2010,therewere257treescontrolled;in2011thisnumberwas280,itincreasedto417in2012
andin2013,411treesweremarkedintheWestblock(seetheredcurveFigure9).
Figure9.Locationanddistributionofmountainpinebeetleinfestedtrees(reddots)detectedthroughaerial
surveys and confirmed by ground checks in the west Block of the Cypress Hills Interprovincial Park in
southwesternSaskatchewan,in2014.Note:infestationsinthesouthwestoftheWestblock,bothinsideand
outsidethepark,aresoextensivetheyarerepresentedbybluepolygons.
ThenumberoftreestoberemovedinCentreblock(Figure10)hasbeenlowoverall(notethegreen
curve);however,in2014,themapshowstherearetwoareasofconcern:oneinthenortheast,and
oneinthesouth.Thenumberoftreesremovedincreasedslightlyfrom33in2013to49in2014.
However, overall, the TOTAL number of trees marked for removal in Cypress Hills was
DOWNin2014(Figure11).
87
Forum 2014
Figure10.LocationanddistributionofMountainpinebeetleinfestedtrees(reddots)detectedthroughaerial
surveys and confirmed by ground checks in the Centre block of the Cypress Hills Interprovincial Park in
southwesternSaskatchewan,in2014.
Figure11.TotalnumberoftreescontrolledintheCentreandWestblocksoftheCypressHillsInterprovincial
Park,from2006to2014.
Sincethisoutbreakislocatedacrossmultiplejurisdictions,includingprivatelandtothesouthofthe
CHIPP,Saskatchewancontinuestoextendaerialsurveillancetomonitorallsusceptiblepinestands
inside and adjacent to the park (with the exception of Alberta). The province continues to work
together with federal agencies and First Nations to coordinate work and assist in the control of
infestedtreesonFirstNationslandsoutsideoftheparkboundaries.Theministryisalsoworking
with the Province of Alberta, ranchers and municipal leaders to develop a collaborative, regional
approachtomanagingmountainpinebeetleinthearea.
88
Forum 2014
Northernborealforestsurveys
The Ministry of Environment conducts systematic monitoring at the northwestern Alberta‐
Saskatchewan border, with a focus on areas of highly susceptible jack pine. The Ministry surveys
approximately 1.6 million ha of pine forests, extending 100 km east from the Alberta border and
fromthesouthernforestfringenorthtotheChurchillRiver.
In2012,inalignmentwiththeleadingedgemonitoringnetworkinAlberta,theMinistryexpanded
theexistingearlydetectionbaitedtreenetwork.Toservethispurpose,40heli‐landingareaswere
cut in pine and pine‐leading stands (one per township, location is represented by the helicopter
symbolwithintheyellowsquaresinFigure12).In2013,anadditional24siteswereadded,fora
totalof69sitesrepresentedbytheblackdotsinFigure12.Thepurposeofthisinitiativewastwo‐
fold:first,toprovideacontiguousgridwithinwhichtodeploytreebaitingstationstodelineatethe
leadingedgeasittransitionsacrossAlbertaandSaskatchewan;andsecond,toprovideanetworkof
accesspointsfromwhichLevel1singletreeresponseactionmightbedeployedifnecessary.
Figure12.Distributionofheli‐landingsites(blackdots)installedin2011‐14tocreateaccessopportunities
andtoexpandtheleadingedgemonitoringnetworkacrosstheregion.Redpolygonsshowthedistributionof
susceptiblepinestands;orangepolygonsareareasburnedbyforestfiresoverpast30years.
CURRENTLY,NOMOUNTAINPINEBEETLESAREFOUNDINSASKATCHEWAN’SBOREAL
FOREST
89
Forum 2014
Rapportdel’Alberta
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
EricaSamis
AlbertaSustainableResourceDevelopment,ForestManagementBranch,GreatWestLifeBuilding,
Floor8,9920–108Street,Edmonton(Alberta)T5K2M4
Aspendefoliationdecreasedin2014byover40%from2013.Thegrossareaofaspendefoliationin
Alberta was 3,586,005 ha. Of this, 99% was caused by the forest tent caterpillar (Malacosoma
disstria). A major change was the decrease of aspen two‐leaf tier (Enargia decolor) from over
2,000,000hain2013tolessthan20,000hain2014.
Pheromone monitoring of eastern spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana) has not been
carriedoutinAlbertasince2013.Predicteddefoliationandobserveddefoliationwerecorrelated;
however, the need to predict defoliation in the absence of multiple severe defoliations and the
potential initiation of a spray program was not warranted. Defoliation of white spruce increased
from 37,195 ha in 2013 to 70, 935 ha in 2014. All defoliation was moderate. There was no
defoliation of Douglas fir by the western spruce budwor m (Choristoneura occidentalis) detected.
ThisinsectpesthasnotbeendetectedinsouthernAlbertaafter2011when6,914haofdefoliation
weremapped.
The mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) program reporting year spans August 1 to
July 31 of the following year. For the reporting year of August 1, 2013 – July 31, 2014 ground
surveys were conducted at 17,486 individual sites and 167,900 trees were controlled through
singletreetreatments.ActivitiesconductedfromAugust1,2014toDecember1,2014includeaerial
surveys, Green:Red ratios and dispersal bait removals. Dispersal baits were set up at 313 sites
across the province. Presence of mountain pine beetle was detected over 100 km west of the
Alberta–Saskatchewanborder.Thisisincomparisontodetectingbeetlepresence35kmfromthe
border in the year previous. Aerial surveys were conducted over a large portion of the province
withflightlinestotallingover106,000kminlength.Green:Redrationswereconductedat413sites.
These surveys provide an estimation of the number of current year attacked trees for each
previouslyattackedredtreedetectedthroughaerialsurveys.
DothistromaneedleblightwasdetectedatATISCforthefirsttimein2013inahighvaluepineclone
bank. In order to decrease mortality, Bordeaux mixture was sprayed twice in 2013 and twice in
2014.Foliarassessmentshavenotnotedanyimprovementintheoverallpercentcrownaffected
but there has been no further mortality. Based on the per cent crown affected, preliminary data
analysisofspeciessuggeststhatjackpinearemoreresistanttothefungusthanarelodgepolepine.
Analysisoforiginalgeographiclocationsuggeststhatthefartherthedistanceofthesourceofclones
to ATISC, the less resistant the clones are. Two other locations in Alberta have been confirmed.
Needlerustsofsprucewasprevalentinthenorthernportionoftheprovince2014.
WhitebarkPine(Pinusalbicaulis)andlimberpine(Pinusflexis)arebothlistedasEndangeredunder
the Alberta Wildlife Act. A series of 273 monitoring plots for the invasive white pine blister rust
(Cronartium ribicola) have been established across the province to determine rust severity and
changesinrustseverityinbothspecies.In2014,200oftheseplotswerevisitedas2014wasthe
third 5‐year measurement. Results of the two previous measurements have been published. The
2014datawillbeanalysedandpublishedaswell.
90
Forum 2014
Alberta Agriculture and Forestry publishes an annual report on the forest pest and damaging
agents.Thisreportcanbefoundathttp://esrd.alberta.ca/lands‐forests/forest‐health/default.aspx.
91
Forum 2014
RapportdelaColombie‐Britannique
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
TimEbata
B.C.MinistryofForests,Lands,andNaturalResourceOperations,ResourcePracticesBranch,P.O.Box
9513,Stn.ProvGovt,(Colombie‐Britannique)V8W9C2
This report covers the highlights from the 2014 provincial aerial overview survey and some
additional activities that were conducted this year. The provincial overview survey covered
approximately89%oftheprovincialforestedlandbase(Figure1).Smokefromwildfireshampered
thecompletionofthesurveyintheOminecaregionanditwasconducteduptomid‐November.The
later surveys focused on mapping red attacked pine and did not capture any deciduous pest
damagethatiscommoninthisarea.
Mountainpinebeetlecontinuestodecline.Althoughtheareadamageddeclinedonlyslightlyintotal
areadamagedfrom2013(Figure2),theseverityofthedamagewasmostlyrecordedastrace(<1%
attack)polygonsmeaningtheactualnumberoftreeskilleddeclined.Thiscontinueddeclineverifies
thepredictedcollapseofthecurrentMPBoutbreak.ThethreatofthebeetlemovingintotheYukon
and NWT was poorly documented this year due to the inaccessibility of areas with extensive
suspected MPB attack. Some of these infestations were checked using low level helicopter flights
whichrevealedtheywereeitherporcupineorlodgepolepinebeetlekilledtreesandnotMPB.MPB
continuestobemanagedinsoutheasternB.C.butthenumbershaveeitherdeclinedorarestatic
comparedtolastyear.
Other bark beetles of note in B.C. are the Douglas‐fir beetle and the spruce beetle. Both beetle
specieshaveincreasedinareaattackedsince2013withsprucebeetleshowingthegreatestgrowth.
Douglas‐firbeetlemanagementisconfoundedbyconstraintsplacedonharvestinginstandsbeing
managed for non‐timber resources, particularly for mule deer winter range. Interior Douglas‐fir
standsarecomplexanddifficulttomanage.
Major defoliators in the province are the western spruce budworm, 2‐year cycle budworm,
serpentine (aspen) leaf miner, and the North American strain of European gypsy moth. Western
spruce budworm infested stands in the Cariboo and Thompson Okanagan regions were treated
withasingleapplicationofBtk(Foray48B).Defoliationdeclineddramaticallythissummeranda
treatment is unlikely to occur in 2015. Gypsy moth pheromone trapping in the summer of 2014
resultedin220malemothsbeingcaught(vs.only13beingcaughtin2013).Mostofthemothswere
caught in Surrey and Delta. A 5,000 ha aerial spray program is being proposed for spring 2015
(Figure 3). This is the third largest aerial spray operation ever conducted in B.C. for gypsy moth
eradication.Two‐yearcyclebudwormdefoliationwashigherinthesouthernhalfofitsrangewith
164,979haofdefoliationbeingmapped.Itisexpectedtodeclineinthesouthandincreaseinthe
northern half as the continued pattern of alternating peak years continues. The highest recorded
defoliation was caused by the Serpentine (aspen) leaf miner which defoliated 3.6 million ha of
aspenacrosstheprovince.
Other disturbances mapped included foliar diseases (Venturia poplar shoot blight, dothistroma
needle blight and larch needle blight being the most prolific), the Mount Polley tailings pond
rupture,andextensivecedarflagging/topkillthroughoutthe InteriorCedarHemlocksubzonein
southernB.C.
92
Forum 2014
Twoforesthealthprojectsofnoteinvolvedapoplardiseaseandabarkbeetle.Thefirstisanupdate
ontheSeptoriamusivastudybeingledbyDr.RichardHamblin’sgenomicslabatUBCandworking
with FLNR forest health specialists, Dr. Harry Kope and Stefan Zeglen. The poplar foliar blight is
nativetoEasternCanadabuthasbeenaccidentallyintroducedintoB.C.viainfectedhybridpoplar
cuttings being used for poplar plantations supplying the tissue paper industry. Initial sampling
showed the disease is in the province but restricted to the Fraser Valley. Concerns for disease
transmission to native black cottonwood lead the team to examine black cottonwood in adjacent
natural stands. Survey results showed that only a very low rate of infection occurred on native
poplars. Another study conducted by Dr. Lorraine Maclauchlan, regional entomologist in the
ThompsonOkanaganregion,re‐examinedaerialsurveyedstripplotsinhighelevationsubalpinefir
standstodocumentthemortalityrateofthematurefirwiththeprimarymortalityagentbeingthe
western balsam bark beetle. The initial survey was conducted 14 years ago and the researchers
were able to relocate the same strip lines and tally the condition of all fir trees within the strips.
Over the 14 years, the average attrition rate was about 1% of the mature volume was killed per
year with the standing dead volume in these stands were >31% of the total stand volume. This
information will be directly included into the estimates of timber loss applied to these high
elevationstandsfoundthroughoutthesoutherninterior.Withthedecimationofthearea’stimber
supplybythemountainpinebeetle,obtainingmoreaccurateestimatesoflossratesinsubalpinefir
isnowveryimportant.
Finally,the provincehasrevisedandupdatedthepopularpestidentificationbook“Fieldguideof
forest damage in British Columbia, 3rd Edition.” The hardcopy can be ordered from B.C.’s Crown
Publications:https://www.crownpub.bc.ca/Product/Details/7610003512_S.
93
Forum 2014
SéanceXI:Pathologieforestière
94
Forum 2014
Heterobasidionirregulare,l’agentpathogènedelamaladiedesracines:envahisseur,agent
deproliférationoutoutsimplementimportant?
GlenR.Stanosz
UniversityofWisconsin‐Madison,DepartmentofForestandWildlifeEcology,Madison,Wisconsin
53706,USA
L’agent pathogène de la maladie des racines de conifères, Heterobasidion irregulare, a été signalé
dansaumoins60lieuxdistinctsauWisconsin.Bienquel’invasionducentre‐nordetdunord‐estde
l’AmériqueduNordparH.irregulareaitsansdouteeulieuilyadeçaplusieurssiècles,sonpremier
dépistageauWisconsinilyaseulement21anssembleindiquerquesaprésencesoitplusrécente
dans cet État où les peuplements les plus touchés sont les plantations de pin rouge. Les coupes
d’éclaircie exécutées à des intervalles réguliers produisent des souches fraîchement coupées qui
deviennent infectées et les greffes fréquentes de racines facilitent la transmission d’un arbre à
l’autre.L’importanceduH.irregulareestliéeàlavaleurdelaressourcemenacée,auxconséquences
de la maladie et aux pratiques qui peuvent éviter les pertes. Dans la région du centre‐nord des
États‐Unis, la majorité des pins rouges consiste en des plantations très productives dont le coût
d’établissementesttrèsélevé.Commelaplupartdecesplantationssesituentmaintenantdansles
classesd’âgeoùs’effectuentlescoupesd’éclaircie,lesinfestationsdeviendrontvraisemblablement
plus fréquentes. La perte de la valeur attribuable à la mortalité augmente en fonction de la
croissance des arbres qui passent de la taille de bois à pâte à celle des perches et des billes de
sciage, ce qui amène les foyers de la maladie des racines à prendre de l’ampleur. L’infection des
souches, le nombre de foyers et, par conséquent, les dommages peuvent être réduits
considérablement par l’application de traitements chimiques ou biologiques protecteurs sur les
souchesfraîchementcoupées.
95
Forum 2014
SéanceXII:Laforesterieurbaine
96
Forum 2014
EngagementduServicecanadiendesforêtsenverslesforêtsurbaines:science,
politiqueetprisedeposition
KenFarr1etPaulWay2
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Directiondel’intégrationdesscienceset
despolitiques,580rueBooth,Ottawa(Ontario)K1A0E4
2RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Directiondelapolitique,del’économieet
del’industrie,580rueBooth,Ottawa(Ontario)K1A0E4
Le Service canadien des forêts de Ressources naturelles Canada (SCF‐RNCan) fournit depuis de
nombreusesannéesdesdonnéesscientifiques,desoutilsetuneexpertiseenmatièredepolitique
afindes’attaquerauxespècesindigènesetauxespècesenvahissantesexotiques–lesravageurset
les pathogènes – ayant des incidences sur les forêts urbaines du Canada. D’un point de vue
politique,dansquellemesurecesactivitéspeuvent‐ellesoudevraient‐ellesêtreconsidéréescomme
science de la foresterie urbaine (par opposition à une intervention stratégique contre la
perturbation des forêts, indépendamment du lieu)? Cette question constitue un sujet d’intérêt de
plusenplusimportant.LeSCF‐RNCans’estengagéàrenforcersaprésenceauprès desCanadiens
quiviventdanslescollectivitésurbainesetàoffrirunleadershipscientifiqueetpolitiquesurdes
sujetsportantsurlesforêtsurbainesdansl’ensembleduCanada.Nousallonsprésenteruneanalyse
de la présence actuelle du SCF‐RNCan dans la foresterie urbaine, de la possibilité d’un nouvel
engagement et des conséquences pour la science au SCF‐RNCan et pour l’avancement des
politiques.
97
Forum 2014
SéanceXIII:Miseàjourdel’ACIA
98
Forum 2014
Miseàjoursurlasurveillancephytosanitairedel’ACIA
MireilleMarcotte
Agencecanadienned'inspectiondesaliments,Unitédesurveillancephytosanitaire
1400cheminMerivale,Tour1,Ottawa(Ontario)K1A0Y9
Le programme d'enquête nationale de la protection des végétaux de l’Agence canadienne
d’inspectiondesalimentsfournitdel'informationàl'appuidetouslesprogrammesréglementaires
touchant l'importation, l'exportation et le commerce intérieur et permet de décider
rationnellement des mesures réglementaires à prendre. Les enquêtes phytosanitaires sont
nécessairespourpermettrelemaintiendustatutdezoneexemptedephytoravageurs,détecterles
nouvelles populations de phytoravageurs et délimiter les zones infestées par des phytoravageurs
dont l'aire de distribution est restreinte au Canada. Les enquêtes phytosanitaires sont également
partie intégrante des programmes de lutte et d'éradication. L'information recueillie par les
enquêtesestàlabasedetouslesprogrammesréglementairestouchantl'importation,l'exportation
etlecommerceintérieur.Lespointssaillantsdesenquêtesphytosanitaires2014,demêmequeles
initiativesclésdesensibilisationmisesdel’avantparl’Unité desenquêtesphytosanitaires,seront
présentés.
99
Forum 2014
L’importancedelaConventioninternationalepourlaprotectiondesvégétauxetde
sesnormes
Marie‐ClaudeForest(présentéparCameronDuff)
Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments,Divisiondelaprotectiondesvégétaux
59PromenadeCamelot,Ottawa(Ontario)K1A0Y9
LaConventioninternationalepourlaprotectiondesvégétaux(CIPV)estunaccordphytosanitaire
internationaldontlebutestdeprotégerlesplantescultivéesetsauvages,tellesquelesforêts,en
prévenantl’introductionetlapropagationdesravageurs.LaConventions’appliqueégalementaux
véhicules, aux aéronefs et aux navires, ainsi qu’aux conteneurs, aux lieux d’entreposage, au sol et
aux autres objets ou matériaux pouvant héberger ou propager des ravageurs susceptibles de
constituer une menace pour les forêts. Le processus d’établissement des normes de la CIPV sera
expliquéetunaccentparticulierseramissurladémarcheentrepriseenvuedepréciserlaposition
du Canada, en particulier lorsque l’apport du secteur forestier est nécessaire et s’avère le plus
efficace. Enfin, les normes internationales pour les mesures phytosanitaires (NIMP) actuelles et
celles en cours d’élaboration visant à prévenir l’introduction et la propagation des ravageurs
forestiersserontprésentéesbrièvement.
100
Forum 2014
ProtégerlesressourcesvégétalestoutenfacilitantlecommerceenAmériquedu
Nord
RebeccaLee
NorthAmericanPlantProtectionOrganization,1431MerivaleRoad,Ottawa(Ontario)K1A0Y9
L’Organisation nord‐américaine pour la protection des plantes (NAPPO) offre un forum pour les
secteurs public et privé au Canada, aux É.‐U. et au Mexique afin de collaborer à l’élaboration de
normes scientifiques pour protéger les ressources agricoles, forestières et autres ressources
végétalesdesphytoravageursréglementés,enfacilitantlecommerce.Lesnormesrégionalesaident
àdéterminerlesrisquesd’introductionetdedisséminationdesravageursprépondérants,etelles
ontfournidesprocéduresharmoniséesavecladétectionetlagestiondecesravageurs,entenant
comptedelafaisabilitédesoptions.LaNAPPOcomptesuruneséried’intervenantscomprenantdes
organismes de réglementation, des scientifiques, des universitaires, des producteurs et des
associations nationales industrielles pour accomplir cette mission. La participation de ces
intervenants dans la préparation des documents de la NAPPO encourage le partage de
l’information, offre les connaissances pratiques des producteurs et soulève des questions
environnementales. Cela mène au développement des normes et des documents de travail mis à
jour,pertinentsetscientifiques.LaNAPPOaégalementpréparédesprotocolesdediagnosticetde
surveillance, ainsi que des documents sur la science et la technologie comme une Analyse des
traitementsthermiquesduboisetdesemballagesenbois.DenombreusesnormesdelaNAPPOont
étéprésentéesàlaConventioninternationalepourlaprotectiondesvégétauxdel’Organisationdes
Nations Unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture. Ces normes sont le fondement des Normes
internationales pour les mesures phytosanitaires (NIMP), maintenant appliquées mondialement.
L’exemple le plus reconnu a été la NIMP 15 : la réglementation sur les matériaux d’emballage en
boispourlecommerceinternational.
101
Forum 2014
SéanceXIV:Tordeusedesbourgeonsde
l’épinette
102
Forum 2014
Nouvellesdufront:cequenousapprenonssurlesapprochesdeluttecontrela
tordeuse
JacquesRégnière1,ArianeBéchard1,JohanneDelisle1,AlainLabrecque1,RobertJohns2,
VéroniqueMartel1,KeesvanFrankenhuyzen3,LucieRoyer1,DeepaPureswaran1
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesLaurentides
1055,rueduP.E.P.S.,C.P.10380,succ.Sainte‐Foy,Québec(Québec)G1V4C7
2RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedel’Atlantique
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000,Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5P7
3RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesGrandsLacs
1219QueenStreetEast,SaultSte.Marie(Ontario)P6A2E5
Depuis2008,nousavonsprofitédelanouvelleépidémiedetordeusedesbourgeonsdel’épinette
(TBE)dansl’estduCanadapourobserverlesprocessusdémographiquessous‐jacentsaupassage
des populations de l’état endémique à l’état épidémique. Nous avons démontré l’existence d’une
relation de densité dépendance dans le succès d’accouplement et d’un effet Allee démographique
causé par l’impact des ennemis naturels dans les populations faibles. Ces résultats suggèrent
l’existence d’un seuil de densité en deçà duquel une population de TBE ne peut croître sans un
apportextérieurparlamigration.Nousavonsaussiprofitédel’occasionpourtesterl’efficacitéde
plusieurstypesdetraitements(Bt,Mimic,phéromone)dansdespopulationsfaiblesdeTBE.Toute
cette nouvelle information nous permet d’envisager une stratégie d’intervention hâtive visant à
enrayer, ou du moins à retarder, le développement d’une épidémie. De quoi aurait l’air une telle
stratégie?Est‐ceuneutopieouunepossibilitéréelle?
103
Forum 2014
Unbio‐indicateurduvolmigratoirechezlatordeuse
JohanneDelisle1,LorèneGachet2etMarcRhainds3
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesLaurentides
1055,rueduP.E.P.S.,C.P.10380,succ.Sainte‐Foy,Québec(Québec)G1V4C7
2InstitutUniversitaireettechnologiquedeLyon1
3,ruedel’Émetteur,Villeurbanne69622,France
3RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedel’Atlantique
1350RegentStreet,C.P.4000,Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5P7
La larve de l’acarien rouge, Leptus triati, est un ectoparasite des papillons de la tordeuse (TBE).
Cetteassociationaétéutiliséecommebio‐indicateurduvolmigratoiredelaTBE,encomparantle
parasitisme entre les populations croissantes du Bas Saint‐Laurent (BSL) et trois populations
endémiques : Armagh et Épaule, (Québec) et Juniper, (Nouveau‐Brunswick). Le parasitisme a été
estiméàpartirdepapillonscapturésdansdespiègeslumineux.En2011et2013,leparasitismea
atteintenviron12%dansleBSLalorsqu’ilétaitpresqueabsent,àQuébec.Cependant,danslanuit
du15au16juillet2013(picdevoldansleBSL),uneinvasiondeTBEaétéobservéeàArmaghet
JunipermaisnonàÉpaule.Àlasuitedecetteimmigration,leparasitismeàArmaghetàJunipera
soudainement augmenté à 12 %, tel qu’observé dans le BSL. À l’opposé, en 2012 et 2014, le
parasitisme était <2 % presque partout au Québec, suggérant que le cycle de vie de L. triati est
bisannuel.L’impactdecetteinvasionsurladynamiquedelapopulationàArmaghseradiscuté.
104
Forum 2014
EssaisdeconfusionsexuellecontrelatordeuseauQuébec:édition2014
JohanneDelisle1,JacquesRégnière1etAlainDupont2
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesLaurentides
1055,rueduP.E.P.S.,C.P.10380,succ.Sainte‐Foy,Québec(Québec)G1V4C7
2Sociétédeprotectiondesforêtscontrelesinsectesetlesmaladies(SOPFIM),1780,rueSemple,Québec
(Québec)G1N4B8
Àlasuitedesrésultatsmitigésobtenuslorsdesessaisdeconfusionsexuelleréalisésen2008surla
Côte‐Nordeten2013danslavalléedelaMatapédia(BasSaint‐Laurent,BSL),denouveauxessais
ontétémenésen2014,àenviron60kmausud‐ouestdesessaisde2013,dansleBSL.Autotal,dix
placettesexpérimentalesde1km²(cinqtraitéesetcinqtémoins)ontétéchoisiespourcouvrirune
vasteétenduededensitéslarvaires(0,04à0,32L4/bourgeon).Telqu’observéen2008et2013,les
essaisde2014sesontrévéléstrèsefficacespourréduirelescapturesdanslespiègesàphéromone
etlesuccèsd’accouplementdefemellesviergesencages,etceindépendammentdeladensitédes
populations. Par contre, la ponte (rapports œufs ou L2/papillon) était identique dans les
populations témoins et traitées, confirmant à nouveau l’inefficacité de l’application de la
phéromone dans la réduction de la densité de la prochaine génération. Dans cette présentation,
nousdiscuteronsdel’avenirdecetteapproched’interventionhâtivecontrelaTBE.
105
Forum 2014
Implicationdupublicetpartenariat:développeruneapprocheproactivepour
discuterdesenjeuxreliésàlagestiondelatordeusedesbourgeonsdel'épinette
VéroniqueMartel
RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesLaurentides
1055,rueduP.E.P.S.,C.P.10380,Québec(Québec)G1V4C7
Lesprogrammesd’arrosageassociésàlaTBEontcausédelacontroverseparlepasséàcausede
l’utilisation d’insecticides chimiques. Cette controverse est bien résumée dans des livres comme
‘Silent Spring’ (Rachel Carson) ou ‘Budworm Battles’ (Elizabeth May). Bien que les insecticides à
largesspectresaientétébannisenfaveurd’alternativesmoinstoxiques,laconfiancedupublicest
toujours manquante. Il est donc important d’établir une bonne communication avec les
communautés locales afin de fournir une compréhension scientifique des mécanismes d’action et
les impacts potentiels de ces produits. Une stratégie de communication a été implantée au
Nouveau‐BrunswickdanslecadreduprojetACOAsurl’interventionhâtive.Lesprincipesdecette
stratégieproactivesontd’avoirdesscientifiquesquimènentlarechercheetlacommunicationpour
touteslesquestionsscientifiques,etdes’assurerquetouteslesquestionsetinquiétudesdupublic
sont répondus aussi rapidement et directement que possible. Un projet de science‐citoyenne est
égalementimplantéafind’augmenterlaconnaissanceetl’engagementdupublicsurlagestiondela
TBEetdefournird’importantesdonnées.
106
Forum 2014
«Stratégied’interventionhâtive»contrelatordeuseauCanadaatlantique:passer
delathéorieàlapratique
RobJohns1etDaveMacLean2
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedel’Atlantique,1350
RegentStreet,C.P.4000,Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5P7
2UniversityofNewBrunswick,FacultyofForestryandEnvironmentalManagement,3BaileyDrive,
Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5A3
Durant la dernière décennie, il y a eu un changement graduel dans notre compréhension de la
dynamique de population de la tordeuse des bourgeons de l’épinette qui nous a amené à
reconsidérer notre approche stratégique afin de contrôler les épidémies de tordeuses. Cette
«Stratégie d’intervention hâtive» (SIH) vise à cibler les populations relativement basses
(«épicentres») comme moyen d’arrêter ou de ralentir la progression de l’épidémie. Cependant,
bienquelabasethéoriquedelaSIHsesolidifie,plusieursquestionsdemeurentconcernantlafaçon
dont cette stratégie peut réellement être implantée. Je discuterai quelques‐unes des questions
centralesposéesdanslecadreduprojetduFondsd’Innovationdel’Atlantiquevisantàdévelopper
cettestratégie,etjefourniraiunbrefaperçudesrésultatsdenotrepremièreannée.
107
Forum 2014
RÉSUMÉSDESAFFICHES
108
Forum 2014
Desbasesdedonnéesensoutienàl’analysederisquedesravageurs
PierreDesRochers
RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesLaurentides
1055,rueduP.E.P.S.,C.P.10380,Succ.Sainte‐Foy,Québec(Québec)G1V4C7
Cetteafficheprésentedelabasededonnéessurlesravageursprésentsàl’étrangersurdesarbres
canadiens ou sur des essences exotiques introduites au Canada, un travail conjoint du Centre de
foresterie des Laurentides (P. DesRochers) et du Centre de foresterie du Pacifique (E. Allen). Le
personnelscientifiquedecedeuxcentresaluetrésuméplusde900documentsscientifiquespour
en extraire l’information sur les ravageurs attaquant à l’étranger les essences d’arbres canadiens
plantésàl’étrangerousurlesessencesd’arbresexotiquesplantésenmilieuurbainauCanada.Une
autre base de données sur les arbres plantés dans des villes canadiennes importantes est en
développement.Cesdeuxbasesdedonnéesserontdisponiblesenligneen2015‐2016.
109
Forum 2014
Lecouvertforestierpermanent:unestratégiedelutteantiparasitaire
AdrienN.Djomo
DepartmentofGeography,Mackintosh‐CorryHall
68UniversityAvenue,Queen’sUniversity,Kingston,(Ontario)K7L3N6
Lesforêtsoffrentunediversitébiologiqueconsidérabletelle queleschampignons,lesinsectes,la
faunesauvageetlesplantesquiinteragissentdirectementouindirectementaveclesarbresetleur
environnementafindepréserverlasantédesécosystèmesforestiers.Lessystèmessylvicolesetle
couvert forestier permanent représentent une solution de rechange en matière de lutte
antiparasitairequidevraitnécessiterquel’onutilisemoinsdeproduitschimiques,voireaucun,et
quidevraitaméliorerlasantédesécosystèmesforestiers.Noussoutenons,danscetarticle,quele
couvert forestier permanent accroît la diversité des espèces d’arbres ainsi que la diversité
biologiqueetqu’ilpeutêtreutilisécommeunestratégiedelutteantiparasitaireefficaceetdefaible
coût. Une récolte a été effectuée dans une forêt de 2 ha afin de montrer comment conserver un
couvertforestierdansunpeuplementforestiertoutenpréservantlesautresfonctionsdelaforêt.
Dans la présente recherche, la récolte a modifié le nombre de tiges par hectare, surtout dans les
plusgrandesclassesdediamètres.Lestravauxd’éclaircieontsupprimé15%delasurfaceterrière
et 16% du volume du peuplement forestier. La récolte a entraîné des changements dans la
distribution spatiale du peuplement forestier. Ces changements contribueront à la régénération
naturellequis’établiraàl’abrisouslesplusgrosarbresafindepréserverlasantédelaforêt.
110
Forum 2014
Voiesd’entréepotentiellesàrisqueélevépourlesravageursforestiersselonles
importationsdeboisauCanada
JenniferGagné1etKlausKoehler2
1InvasiveSpeciesCentre,1219QueenStreetEast,SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5,etAgencecanadienne
d’inspectiondesaliments,Directiondelaprotectiondesvégétauxetbiosecurité,59Promenade
Camelot,Ottawa(Ontario)K1A0Y9
2Agencecanadienned’inspectiondesaliments,Directiondelaprotectiondesvégétaux,Secteurdela
forêt,59PromenadeCamelot,Ottawa(Ontario)K1A0Y9
Le transport du bois de chauffage et des billes de bois constitue une source de propagation des
insectesetagentspathogènesdesforêtspouvanttransgresserlesfrontièresnationalesouallervers
de nouvelles régions géographiques à l’intérieur du Canada. Bien que le bois de chauffage soit
considérécommeunemarchandiseàrisqueélevépouvantfavoriserlapropagationdesravageurs
forestiers, son mouvement à l’intérieur du pays n’est pas bien documenté et les importations de
boisdechauffagecommercialsonttroppeunombreusespourpermettredecartographierlesvoies
d’entrée importantes. Par contre, il est facile de consulter les registres d’importation de billes de
bois commerciales et ceux‐ci peuvent fournir des renseignements complémentaires sur les
introductionsetlapropagationpossiblesdesespècesexotiquesenvahissantesforestières(EEEF).
Lesvoiesdetransport,comprenantl’origine,lepointd’entréeauCanadaetladestination,ontété
cartographiéesetleszoneslesplusimportantesenfonctiondupoidstotaldesimportationsontété
identifiées. Les résultats obtenus peuvent orienter le choix des meilleurs emplacements pour les
enquêtesvisantladétectiondesEEEFainsiquedéterminerlesoriginespossiblesdelapropagation
dansl’éventualitéoùunenouvelleinfestationseraitdétectée.Enoutre,lescartesdesvoiesd’entrée
constituent un bon moyen de sensibiliser davantage le public à l’industrie du transport des
marchandisesetaurisquedepropagationdesEEEFliéautransport.
111
Forum 2014
Lecharançonduhêtre,Orchestesfagi–écologieetgestion
N.K.Hillier1,E.Czerwinski2,C.MacKay3,J.Meating4,E.Moise5,A.Morrison5,R.Johns5,
S.Pawlowski1,P.J.Silk5etJ.Sweeney5
1AcadiaUniversity,33WestwoodAvenue,Wolfville(NovaScotia)B4P2R6
2ForestTreeProtection,171BerkleyDrive,NewMaryland,(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3C1C2
3ForestProtectionLimited,2502Route102Highway,Lincoln,(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B7E6
4BioForestTechnologiesInc.,59IndustrialParkCrescent,SaultSte.Marie(Ontario)P6B5P3
5RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedel’Atlantique
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000,Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5P7
Le charançon du hêtre, Orchestes fagi, est une peste très répandue du hêtre commun, Fagus
sylvaticaL.,enEurope.En2011,O.fagifutdécouvertenAmériqueduNord,àHalifax,causantdes
dommages majeurs au feuillage du hêtre à grandes feuilles, Fagus grandifolia. Afin de déterminer
l'impact de cette espèce invasive, nous avons investigué les substrats d`hibernation, l'écologie
chimiqueetledéveloppementd'outils(pièges,appâts)servantàl'inventaire,destestsdeplantes‐
hôtes, l'efficacité d'injection de TreeAzin dans la tige comme contrôle, ainsi que l'impact du
charançon sur la croissance et le taux de mortalité du hêtre. Jusqu'à présent, nos recherches ont
déterminées que: 1) les densités d'O. fagi adultes hibernant étaient très élevés sur les troncs du
hêtre,d'érablerougeetd'épinetterouge,suggérantqueleboisdechauffageposeunrisqueélevéde
mouvement anthropogénique du charançon; 2) les antennes d'O. fagi répondent aux volatiles de
feuillesvertesmaislorsdetestsdechoix,lesadultesnes'orientèrentpassurleurscongénèresetni
surlescomposésdeplantes‐hôtes;3)lespiègescollantsjaunescapturèrentunnombreplusélevé
de charançons que les pièges du charançon du cotonnier non‐collant mais l'appâtage des pièges
avec des volatiles d'hôte et/ou des phéromones n'ont pas affecté l'efficacité moyenne; et 4)
l'injectiondeTreeAzindansleshêtresaempêchéleslarvesd'atteindrelestagedepulpemaisn'a
pasréduitlenombredefeuillesayantdesmines.
112
Forum 2014
Plantes‐hôtespréféréespourl’alimentationducharançonduhêtre,uninsecte
envahissantdansleCanadaatlantique
E.R.D.Moise1,R.C.Johns1,G.Forbes1,A.Morrison1,K.Hillier2,andJ.Sweeney1
1RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedel’Atlantique
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000,Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5P7
2AcadiaUniversity,33WestwoodAvenue,Wolfville(NovaScotia)B4P2R6
Le charançon du hêtre (Orchestes fagi L.), un insecte exotique, a occasionné des dommages
importants aux hêtres à grandes feuilles (Fagus grandifolia) du Canada atlantique. Bien que ce
comportementalimentairesoitconformeàsonrôled’organismenuisibleduhêtre(Fagussylvatica)
danssonairederépartitioneuropéenne,despreuvesindiquantqu’ilsenourritdeplusieursautres
plantes‐hôtes indigènes permettent de penser que son incidence en Amérique du Nord pourrait
s’étendre au‐delà d’une seule espèce de plante. Nous avons utilisé plusieurs études axées sur
l’observationencombinaisonavecdesessaisd’alimentationsanschoixpourévaluerlesdommages
causés par l’alimentation du charançon sur divers hôtes potentiels (y compris le hêtre) dans son
aire d’introduction. Fait étonnant, les dommages causés par son alimentation affectaient presque
exclusivement le hêtre, ce qui est possiblement lié à une inégalité nutritionnelle ou à
l’asynchronisme phénologique de l’hôte avec les plantes indigènes. De façon générale, bien que
selonnosobservationslescharançonsutilisentleshôtessecondairesdansd’autrescirconstances,
tellesquecommesitesd’hivernage,leurdépendancetotaleauhêtrecommeressourcealimentaire
permetdepenserquesonincidencesurleshôtessecondairesseranégligeable.
113
Forum 2014
L’ipsénol,lemonochamoletl’α‐pinène:unecombinaisondepiègesappâtéspour
lesespècesdeMonochamus(cérambycidés)auCanadaetauxÉtats‐Unis
D.R.Miller1,J.D.Allison2,C.M.Crowe1,D.Dickinson3,A.Eglitis3,R.W.Hofstetter4,
A.S.Munson5,T.M.Poland6,L.S.Reid7,B.E.Steed8etJ.D.Sweeney9
1USDAForestService,SouthernResearchStation,320GreenStreet,Athens,Georgia30602‐2044,USA
2RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,CentredeforesteriedesGrandsLacs
1219QueenStreetEast,SaultSte.Marie(Ontario)P6A2E5
3USDAForestService,FHPRegion10,DeschutesNationalForest,63095DeschutesMarketRoad,Bend,
Oregon97701,USA
4NorthernArizonaUniversity,SchoolofForestry
200EastPineKnollDrive,P.O.Box15018,Flagstaff,Arizona86011,USA
5USDAForestService,FHPRegion4,4746S.1900E.,Ogden,Utah84403,USA
6USDAForestService,NorthernResearchStation
3101TechnologyBoulevard,SuiteF,Lansing,Michigan48910,USA
7SouthCarolinaForestryCommission,5500BroadRiverRoad,Columbia,SouthCarolina29212,USA
8USDAForestService,FHPRegion1,P.O.Box7669,Missoula,Montana59807,USA
9RessourcesnaturellesCanada,Servicecanadiendesforêts,Centredeforesteriedel’Atlantique
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000,Fredericton(Nouveau‐Brunswick)E3B5P7
Les cérambycidés, Monochamus spp. (Coleoptera : Cerambycidae), sont fortement attirés par les
substancesvolatilesdégagéesparlespinsainsiqueparlesphéromonesdesscolytesdugenreIps
quisontassociésauxmêmeshôtes.LaphéromonegénériqueduMonochamus,«lemonochamol»,
est attrayante pour plusieurs espèces de Monochamus dans l’est des États‐Unis, en particulier
lorsqu’elle est combinée avec de l’α‐pinène. Notre objectif consistait à déterminer l’interaction
entre l’ipsénol et le monochamol sur l’attraction des espèces de Monochamus dans des pièges
appâtés avec de l’α‐pinène. Nous avons comparé la capture moyenne d’espèces de Monochamus
dansdemultiplespièges‐entonnoirsavecquatredifférentsappâts:1)l’α‐pinèneseul;2)l’α‐pinène
+l’ipsénol;3)l’α‐pinène+lemonochamol;et4)lestroiscomposants.L’essaiaétéreproduitdans
onze sites à travers le Canada et les États‐Unis de 2012 à 2014. Sept espèces de Monochamus
différentes ont été piégées : M. carolinensis, M. clamator, M. mutator, M. notatus, M. obtusus, M. s.
scutellatusetlecomplexeM.titillator.Lespiègesappâtésaveclacombinaisond’α‐pinène+ipsénol
+monochamolontattirélaplusgrandequantitédecérambycidésdans16des19sites‐années,et
ce,avecunecapturemoyenneconsidérablementplusimportantedans11des19sites‐années.Ces
résultatsindiquentquelacombinaisondestroisappâtsseraittrèsefficacepourlasurveillancedes
espècesdeMonochamusenAmériqueduNord.
114
Forum 2014
LISTEDESPARTICIPANTS
(Disponibleenanglaisseulement)
115
Forum 2014
NaimaAitOumejjout
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
59CamelotDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐7274
naima.aitoumejjout@inspection.gc.ca
JeremyAllison
NRCan,CFS
GreatLakesForestryCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5519
jeremy.allison@nrcan‐rncan.gc.ca
PeterAmirault
ForestProtectionLimited
FrederictonInternationalAirport
2502Route102Hwy
Lincoln,NBE3B7E6
Tel.:506‐446‐6930
pamirault@forestprotectionlimited.com
MarkArdis
G.D.G.EnvironnementLtée
430Saint‐Laurent
Trois‐Rivières,QCG8T6H3
Tel.:819‐373‐3097
gdg.environnement@gdg.ca
ChristianeArsenault
NRCan,CFS
StrategicAnalysisandPolicy
DevelopmentDivision
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐947‐3465
christiane.arsenault@nrcan.gc.ca
JohnAstorino
ForestProtectionLimited
FrederictonInternationalAirport
2502Route102Hwy
Lincoln,NBE3B7E6
Tel.:506‐446‐6930
smunn@forestprotectionlimited.com
DebbyBarsi
NRCan,CFS
ForestScienceDivision
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐947‐8988
debby.barsi@nrcan.gc.ca
KathyBeaton
NRCan,CFS
AtlanticForestryCentre
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000
Fredericton,NBE3B5P7
Tel.:506‐452‐3193
kathy.beaton@nrcan.gc.ca
JudiBeck
NRCan,CFS
PacificForestryCentre
506WestBurnsideRoad
Victoria,BCV8Z1M5
Tel.:250‐298‐2304
judi.beck@nrcan.gc.ca
AlainBélanger
SOPFIM
1780SempleStreet
Québec,QCG1N4B8
Tel.:418‐681‐3381
a.belanger@sopfim.qc.ca
JeanBérubé
NRCan,CFS
LaurentianForestryCentre
1055duP.E.P.S.
P.O.Box10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy
Québec,QCG1V4C7
Tel.:418‐648‐7174
jean.berube@rncan.gc.ca
GuillaumeBilodeau
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
3851FallowfieldRoad
P.O.Box11300
Nepean,ONK2H8P9
Tel.:343‐212‐0283
guillaume.bilodeau@inspection.gc.ca
SimonBridge
NRCan,CFS
ForestKnowledgeandInformation
ManagementDivision
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐947‐9034
simon.bridge@nrcan.gc.ca
JoséeBrizard
SouthNationConservation
38VictoriaStreet,P.O.Box29
Finch,ONK0C1K0
Tel.:613‐984‐2948Ext.231
jbrizard@nation.on.ca
RhondaBurke
NRCan,CFS
StrategicAnalysisandPolicy
DevelopmentDivision
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐947‐9047
rhonda.burke@nrcan.gc.ca
116
Forum 2014
DanielleCantin
NRCan,CFS
StrategicAnalysisandPolicy
DevelopmentDivision
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐947‐9028
danielle.cantin@nrcan.gc.ca
LiseCaron
NRCan,CFS
LaurentianForestryCentre
1055duP.E.P.S.
P.O.Box10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy
Québec,QCG1V4C7
Tel.:418‐648‐7616
lise.caron@rncan.gc.ca
NelsonCarter
EasternForestPestManagement
Limited
99CambridgeCrescent
Fredericton,NBE3B4P1
efpmltd@gmail.com
TerryCaunter
PestManagementRegulatory
Agency
2720RiversideDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0K9
Tel.:613‐736‐3779
terry.caunter@hc‐sc.gc.ca
BarryCooke
NRCan,CFS
NorthernForestryCentre
5320–122ndStreet
Edmonton,ABT6H3S5
Tel.:780‐430‐3844
barry.cooke@nrcan.gc.ca
SteveCôté
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
59CamelotDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐7368
steve.cote@inspection.gc.ca
MichaelCunningham
EngageAgroCorporation
P.O.Box3142,Stn.B
Fredericton,NBE3A5G9
Tel.:506‐451‐9712
michaelcunningham@engageagro.com
PhyllisDale
NRCan,CFS
ForestScienceDivision
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐947‐8992
phyllis.dale@nrcan.gc.ca
MartinDamus
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5281
martin.damus@inspection.gc.ca
DavidDavies
ForestProtectionLimited
FrederictonInternationalAirport
2502Route102Hwy
Lincoln,NBE3B7E6
Tel.:506‐446‐3341
ddavies@forestprotectionlimited.com
MarcelDawson
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
59CamelotDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐7265
marcel.dawson@inspection.gc.ca
BrittanyDay
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5525
brittany.day@inspection.gc.ca
JohnDedes
NRCan,CFS
GreatLakesForestryCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5673
john.dedes@nrcan.gc.ca
JohanneDelisle
NRCan,CFS
LaurentianForestryCentre
1055duP.E.P.S.
P.O.Box10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy
Québec,QCG1V4C7
Tel.:418‐648‐2526
johanne.delisle@rncan‐nrcan.gc.ca
IanDeMerchant
NRCan,CFS
AtlanticForestryCentre
1350RegentStreet
P.O.Box4000
Fredericton,NBE3B5P7
Tel.:506‐452‐3137
ian.demerchant@nrcan.gc.ca
117
Forum 2014
FuyouDeng
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5621
fuyou.deng@inspection.gc.ca
PierreDesRochers
NRCan,CFS
LaurentianForestryCentre
1055duP.E.P.S.
P.O.Box10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy
Québec,QCG1V4C7
Tel.:418‐648‐3922
pierre.desrochers@rncan.gc.ca
AdrienDjomo
Queen’sUniversity
Mackintosh‐CorryHall
Kingston,ONK7L3N6
Tel.:613‐533‐6000Ext.78810
djomoa@queensu.ca
BrianDouble
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
59CamelotDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐7246
brian.double@inspection.gc.ca
HumeDouglas
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
960CarlingAvenue
Building18,CEF,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐759‐7128
hume.douglas@inspection.gc.ca
Jean‐FrançoisDuBuc
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐6059
jean‐francois.dubuc@inspection.gc.ca
CameronDuff
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5232
cameron.duff@inspection.gc.ca
LouiseDumouchel
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5254
louise.dumouchel@inspection.gc.ca
AlainDupont
SOPFIM
1780SempleStreet
Québec,QCG1N4B8
Tel.:418‐681‐3381
a.dupont@sopfim.qc.ca
TimEbata
B.C.MinistryofForests,Landsand
NaturalResourceOperations
P.O.Box9513Stn.ProvGovt
Victoria,BCV8W9C2
Tel.:250‐387‐8739
tim.ebata@gov.bc.ca
BrianEhnes
BioForestTechnologiesInc.
59IndustrialParkCrescent
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6B5P3
Tel.:705‐942‐5824
behnes@bioforest.ca
JamesElwin
PestManagementRegulatoryAgency
TupperBuilding,Floor5
2720RiversideDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0K9
Tel.:613‐736‐3873
james.elwin@hc‐sc.gc.ca
KenFarr
NRCan,CFS
InnovationandIntegration
Division
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐947‐9007
ken.farr@nrcan.gc.ca
RobertFavrin
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5266
robert.favrin@inspection.gc.ca
DihlariFernando
InvasiveSpeciesCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5790
dfernando@invasivespeciescentre.ca
118
Forum 2014
MikeFrancis
OntarioMinistryofNatural
ResourcesandForestry
70FosterDrive,Suite400
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A6V5
Tel.:705‐945‐6763
mike.francis@ontario.ca
JacquesGagnon
NRCan,CFS
580BoothSt.
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐947‐9043
jacques.gagnon@nrcan.gc.ca
HelenGerson
CanadaBorderServicesAgency
150IsabellaStreet,Floor5
Ottawa,ONK1A0L8
Tel.:613‐954‐0216
helen.gerson@cbsa‐asfc.gc.ca
RyanGuthrie
CanadianBorderServicesAgency
150IsabellaStreet,Floor5
Ottawa,ONK1A0L8
Tel.:613‐957‐3321
ryan.guthrie@cbsa‐asfc.gc.ca
RonHall
NRCan,CFS
NorthernForestryCentre
5320–122ndStreet
Edmonton,ABT6H3S5
Tel.:780‐435‐7209
ron.hall@nrcan‐rncan.gc.ca
RichardHamelin
NRCan,CFS
LaurentianForestryCentre
1055duP.E.P.S.
P.O.Box10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy
Québec,QCG1V4C7
Tel.:418‐648‐3693
richard.hamelin@nrcan‐rncan.gc.ca
KirkHillier
AcadiaUniversity
33WestwoodAvenue
Wolfville,NSB4P2R6
Tel.:902‐585‐1314
kirk.hillier@acadiau.ca
JaniceHodge
JCHForestPestManagement
7700DeJongDrive
Coldstream,BCV1B1P3
Tel.:250‐275‐7341
jchforhealth@shaw.ca
PatrickHodge
OntarioMinistryofNaturalResources
andForestry
300WaterStreet,SouthTower,Floor4
Peterborough,ONK8J8M5
Tel.:705‐755‐3220
patrick.hodge@ontario.ca
AnthonyHopkin
NRCan,CFS
GreatLakesForestryCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5568
anthony.hopkin@nrcan.gc.ca
MichaelIrvine
OntarioMinistryofNaturalResources
andForestry
70FosterDrive
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A6V5
Tel.:705‐945‐5724
michael.irvine@ontario.ca
JoannaJames
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5252
joanna.james@inspection.gc.ca
RobJohns
NRCan,CFS
AtlanticForestryCentre
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000
Fredericton,NBE3B5P7
Tel.:506‐452‐3785
robert.johns@nrcan.gc.ca
SimonJutras‐Martin
SOPFIM
1780SempleStreet
Québec,QCG1N4B8
Tel.:418‐681‐3381
s.jutras@sopfim.qc.ca
AmyKehoe
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5275
amy.kehoe@inspection.gc.ca
119
Forum 2014
TroyKimoto
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
4321StillCreekDrive
Burnaby,BCV5C6S7
Tel.:604‐292‐5651
troy.kimoto@inspection.gc.ca
ScottKirby
HealthCanada–PMRA
2720RiversideDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0K9
Tel.:613‐736‐3980
scott.kirby@hc‐sc.gc.ca
KlausKoehler
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
59CamelotDrive,Building59,CEF
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐7385
klaus.koehler@inspection.gc.ca
DaveKreutzweiser
NRCan,CFS
GreatLakesForestryCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5648
dave.kreutzweiser@nrcan.gc.ca
IsabelleLapointe
SOPFIM
1780SempleStreet
Québec,QCG1N4B8
Tel.:418‐681‐3381
i.lapointe@sopfim.qc.ca
DanLavigne
NewfoundlandandLabrador
DepartmentofNaturalResources
4HeraldAvenue,P.O.Box2006
CornerBrook,NLA2H6J8
Tel.:709‐637‐2424
danlavigne@gov.nl.ca
RebeccaLee
NorthAmericanPlantProtection
Organization
1431MerivaleRoad,Floor3
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐8176
rebecca.lee@nappo.org
ShiyouLi
NRCan,CFS
ForestScienceDivision
960CarlingAvenue,Building57
Ottawa,ONK1A0C6
Tel.:613‐694‐2459
shiyou.li@nrcan.gc.ca
ShaminaMaccum
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
59CamelotDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐7271
shamina.maccum@inspection.gc.ca
DerekMacFarlane
NRCan,CFS
AtlanticForestryCentre
1350RegentStreet,P.O.Box4000
Fredericton,NBE3B5P7
Tel.:506‐452‐3508
derek.macfarlane@nrcan.gc.ca
MireilleMarcotte
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5313
mireille.marcotte@inspection.gc.ca
VeroniqueMartel
NRCan,CFS
LaurentianForestryCentre
1055duP.E.P.S.
P.O.Box10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy
Québec,QCG1V4C7
Tel.:418‐640‐2625
veronique.martel@rncan.gc.ca
JoelMartineau
SouthNationConservation
38VictoriaStreet,P.O.Box29
Finch,ONK0C1K0
613‐984‐2948Ext.371
jmartineau@nation.on.ca
RobertMasella
AEFGlobalInc.
201MgrBourgetStreet
Lévis,QCG6V6Z3
rmasella@aefglobal.com
RoryMcIntosh
SaskatchewanMinistryofEnvironment
Box3003,McIntoshMall
PrinceAlbert,SKS6V6G1
Tel.:306‐953‐3617
rory.mcintosh@gov.sk.ca
120
Forum 2014
JoeMeating
BioForestTechnologiesInc.
59IndustrialParkCrescent
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6B5P3
Tel.:705‐942‐5824
jmeating@bioforest.ca
LiamMiller
NRCan,CFS
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:613‐995‐2347
liam.miller@nrcan.gc.ca
LouisMorneau
MinistèredesForêts,delaFauneetdes
ParcsduQuébec
2700EinsteinStreet,SuiteD.2.370A
Québec,QCG1P3W8
Tel.:418‐643‐9679Ext.4742
louis.morneau@mrn.gouv.qc.ca
PatrickNantel
ParksCanada
30VictoriaStreet
Gatineau,QCJ8X0B3
Tel.:819‐420‐9169
patrick.nantel@pc.gc.ca
VinceNealis
NRCan,CFS
PacificForestryCentre
506WestBurnsideRoad
Victoria,BCV8Z1M5
Tel.:250‐298‐2361
vince.nealis@nrcan.gc.ca
StephenNicholson
ValentBioSciencesCanadaLtd.
2704OrserRoad
Elginburg,ONKOHIMO
Tel.:613‐376‐1070
stephen.nicholson@valent.com
DavidNisbet
InvasiveSpeciesCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5790
dnisbet@invasivespeciescentre.ca
JakubOlesinski
GovernmentoftheNorthwest
Territories
173HayRiver,DeneReserve
Box4354
HayRiver,NTX0E1G3
Tel.:867874‐2009
jakub_olesinski@gov.nt.ca
StephanieParzei
CanadianInstituteofForestry
P.O.Box99
Mattawa,ONP0H1V0
Tel.:705‐744‐1715
KristinaPauk
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
59CamelotDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐7158
kristina.pauk@inspection.gc.ca
GinaPenny
NovaScotiaDepartmentofNatural
Resources
23CreightonRoad
Shubenacadie,NSB0N2H0
Tel.:902‐758‐7212
gina.penny@novascotia.ca
SimonePetriw
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5960
simone.petriw@inspection.gc.ca
StanPhippen
NRCan,CFS
GreatLakesForestryCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5565
stan.phippen@nrcan.gc.ca
ThierryPoiré
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5155
thierry.poire@inspection.gc.ca
JasonPollard
CityofOttawa
100ConstellationCrescent
Ottawa,ONK2G6J8
Tel.:613‐580‐2424Ext.16012
jason.pollard@ottawa.ca
121
Forum 2014
RobertJ.Rabaglia
USDAForestService,Forest
HealthProtection
1400IndependenceAve,SW
Washington,DC20250,USA
Tel.:703‐605‐5338
brabaglia@fs.fed.us
CheyeneRamsey
SouthNationConservation
38VictoriaSt.,P.O.Box29
Finch,ONK0C1K0
613‐984‐2948Ext.295
cramsey@nation.on.ca
TodRamsfield
NRCan,CFS
NorthernForestryCentre
5320–122ndStreet
Edmonton,ABT6H3S5
Tel.:780‐435‐7394
tod.ramsfield@nrcan.gc.ca
JacquesRégnière
NRCan,CFS
LaurentianForestryCentre
1055duP.E.P.S.
P.O.Box10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy
Québec,QCG1V4C7
Tel.:418‐648‐5257
jacques.regniere@rncan.gc.ca
JozefRic
CityofToronto
Parks,ForestryandRecreation
18DyasRoad
Toronto,ONM3B1V5
Tel.:416‐392‐1436
jric@toronto.ca
StefanRichard
SylvarTechnologiesInc.
1350RegentStreet
Fredericton,NBE3C2G6
Tel.:506‐460‐6605
srichard@sylvar.ca
ChristopherRiley
AgriforBiotechnicalServicesLtd.
151‐221QueenStreet
Fredericton,NBE3B7J2
Tel.:506‐472‐4548
chris.riley@agriforbiotech.com
AlexandreRocheleau
G.D.G.EnvironnementLtée
430Saint‐Laurent
Trois‐Rivières,QCG8T6H3
Tel.:819‐373‐3097
alexandre.rocheleau@gdg.ca
MichaelRosen
TreeCanada
470SomersetStreetWest,Unit1
Ottawa,ONK1R5J8
Tel.:613‐567‐5545
mrosen@treecanada.ca
FionaRoss
ManitobaConservation
ForestryBranch
200SaulteauxCrescent,Box70
Winnipeg,MBR3J3W3
Tel.:204‐793‐2987
fiona.ross@gov.mb.ca
DanRowlinson
OntarioMinistryofNaturalResources
andForestry
1235QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐946‐7445
dan.rowlinson@ontario.ca
EricaSamis
GovernmentofAlberta
SustainableResourceDevelopment
GreatWestLifeBuilding,Floor8
9920–108Street
Edmonton,ABT5K2M4
erica.samis@gov.ab.ca
TaylorScarr
OntarioMinistryofNatural
ResourcesandForestry
RobertaBondarPlace
70FosterDrive
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A6V5
Tel.:705‐945‐5723
taylor.scarr@ontario.ca
MikeSlivitsky
NRCan,CFS
ForestScienceDivision
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
Tel.:(613)947‐9679
michael.slivitzky@nrcan.gc.ca
GlenStanosz
UniversityofWisconsin–Madison
DepartmentofForestandWildlife
Ecology
Madison,WI53706,USA
Tel.:608‐265‐2863
gstanosz@wisc.edu
122
Forum 2014
Jean‐LucSt‐Germain
NRCan,CFS
LaurentianForestryCentre
1055duP.E.P.S.
P.O.Box10380,Stn.Sainte‐Foy
Québec,QCG1V4C7
Tel.:418‐648‐7152
jean‐luc.st‐germain@rncan.gc.ca
BrianStrom
USDAForestService
SouthernResearchStation
2500ShreveportHighway
Pineville,LA71360,USA
Tel.:318‐473‐7235
brianstrom@fs.fed.us
RonaSturrock
NRCan,CFS
PacificForestryCentre
506WestBurnsideRoad
Victoria,BCV8Z1M5
Tel.:250‐298‐2376
rona.sturrock@nrcan.gc.ca
JonSweeney
NRCan,CFS
AtlanticForestryCentre
1350RegentStreet
P.O.Box4000
Fredericton,NBE3B5P7
Tel.:506‐452‐3499
jon.sweeney@nrcan.gc.ca
PierreTherrien
MinistèredesForêts,delaFauneet
desParcsduQuébec
2700EinsteinStreet
Québec,QCG1P3W8
Tel.:418‐643‐9679Ext.4753
pierre.therrien@mffp.gouv.qc.ca
GrahamThurston
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐5437
graham.s.thurston@inspection.gc.ca
RichardTrudel
SOPFIM
1780SempleStreet
Québec,QCG1N4B8
Tel.:418‐681‐3381
r.trudel@sopfim.qc.ca
LenaVanSeggelen
InvasiveSpeciesCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5790
lvanseggelen@invasivespeciescentre.ca
LindsayVyvey
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
1400MerivaleRoad
Tower1,Floor1
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐6586
lindsay.vyvey@inspection.gc.ca
DavidWakarchuk
SynergySemiochemicalsCorp.
7061MerrittAvenue
Burnaby,BCV5J4R7
Tel.:604‐454‐1122
david@semiochemical.com
PaulWay
NRCan,CFS
StrategicAnalysisandPolicy
DevelopmentDivision
580BoothStreet
Ottawa,ONK1A0E4
613‐943‐1616
paul.way@nrcan.gc.ca
RichardWilson
OntarioMinistryofNaturalResources
andForestry
70FosterDrive,Suite400
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A3V1
Tel.:705‐541‐5106
richard.wilson@ontario.ca
KellyWithers
InvasiveSpeciesCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5790
MikeWood
CanadianFoodInspectionAgency
59CamelotDrive
Ottawa,ONK1A0Y9
Tel.:613‐773‐7630
michael.wood@inspection.gc.ca
TaylorWright
InvasiveSpeciesCentre
1219QueenStreetEast
SaultSte.Marie,ONP6A2E5
Tel.:705‐541‐5790
twright@invasivespeciescentre.ca
kwithers@invasivespeciescentre.ca
123
Forum 2014
AspenZeppa
OntarioMinistryofNatural
ResourcesandForestry
10CampusDrive
P.O.Bag2002
Kemptville,ONK0G1J0
Tel.:613‐258‐4072
aspen.zeppa@ontario.ca
124
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertising