Forest management faces many challenges, most of which are increasing with the increasing pressures of humans. Luckily, as Dr. Phil Burton presented, forests do have the ability to persist under pressure, during stress, and after a disruption or disturbance, this is known as ecological resilience. Ecological resilience can be obtained through: robustness, recovery, adjustment, adaptability, and transformation of an ecosystem.

As forest management changes with increasing knowledge of ecosystem function, the challenges now become how to work with the natural resiliency and recovery of forest ecosystems to maintain sustainable forest resources. For example, after harvesting, the land is replanted with select seedlings, it also comes back with its own herbs and natural tree regeneration. Traditionally natural regeneration is unwanted, but views are changing and maybe if the forest wants to grow naturals such as aspen we should let it. The response to beetle outbreaks seems to be one of panic. Forestry companies are responding with hast to salvage the beetle killed wood because it shouldn’t be left to “waste” and it’s a fire hazard. I thought it was very interesting that it is more difficult to start fires in red dead timber than green forests due to an increase in soil moisture content because the dead trees aren’t taking up water. As Phil suggests, maybe some of this wood should be left behind to provide ecosystem diversity and variation in stand age. The more heterogeneous a forest is the more resilient it is as well. This is relatable to my project on coarse woody debris. As I dive into the literature it is quite evident that dead wood is important; there is a life after death! Phil emphasised the importance of identifying and prioritizing values when it comes to forest management. Diversity is important, and it often comes with unforeseen benefits. I would ask Phil when he thinks we will see diversity focused management in practice across the province?