Decline of Pl on D6 sites - interior BC

Decline in feasibility of Pl on mesic-rich (D6) sites throughout the interior. This is driven by a shift to climate of ICH units from SE, Salmon Arm area. Declining feasibility partially depends on which site series are projected.
E.g. Near Prince George: SBSdw3, two-panel map shows Pl feasibility is lost in this area on D6 sites

**SBSdw3/08** (Pl is maintained) – **Projections diverge** between increasing (to E2) and loss of feasibility. Depends on which site series are chosen (within the same subzone, some site series have Pl, others do not). Some issues with the site series being chosen, see below.
BGC futures = ICH xm1, mw3, dw4, dw3
xm1/110 (E3) /111 (0) /112 (0) /Fm (Fm is not on ByBEC) – see issue #32
dw4/110 (E2) /111 (0) /112 (0)
dw3/06 (E2) /08 (E2) /09 (not on ByBEC) – see issue #32
mw3/06 (E2) /08 (E2) /09 (not on ByBEC)

**SBSdw3/09** (Pl feasibility lost)
Climate Drivers (Sub-boreal Interior) from CMIP6-BC:
- Summer temp is increasing
- Spring and autumn precip is increasing (10-25% by end of century)
- Summer/winter becoming slightly wetter

Future BGCs are ICH units from the southeast, centered around Salmon Arm (Trail to Clearwater). Warmer and slightly wetter, especially in spring/autumn. I would expect that Pl would remain feasible on D6 sites?

Start by comparing the SBSdw3 D6 examples and the listed future BGC projections in issue #33, then review the related site-series concerns in issue #32. Check why Pl feasibility is lost or diverges for the cited site series and compare the result with the described climate drivers. Done means the cause is identified and the expected feasibility outcome or required correction is clearly documented.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.