SPATIAL HETEROGENEITY SUB-GROUP UPDATE THURSDAY 23 RD JANUARY 2014 YVETTE DICKINSON.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Fire Regimes and Successional Dynamics of Yellow Pine (Pinus) Stands in the Central Appalachian Mountains Henri D. Grissino-Mayer¹, Charles W. Lafon²,
Advertisements

SIMulating Patterns and Processes at Landscape scaLEs HISTORIC RANGE of VARIABILITY.
Structure and Composition of Edges in Boreal Forest Qinglin Li.
Uneven-aged beech stand, Germany. Uneven-aged mixed-hardwood stand, Michigan.
The West Cascades Park City The West Cascades NaFISNationwide Forest Imputation Study.
Harold S.J. Zald and Andrew N. Gray USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR Tree Regeneration.
EDGE. Ecological and physical processes near beach- front and clearcut boundaries.
Physical Evidence used to Establish Reference Conditions for the Southwest Jemez CFLR Project In order to set goals that underlie restoration treatments,
Evolution of Biodiversity
Forest Project Protocol v3.1 Use of FIA Data John Nickerson FIA Conference February 2010.
Mixed Conifer Forests. * ~8,000-10,000 ft elevation * inches of precipitation/annually * very complex and heterogeneous in structure, composition,
FIELD METHODS Strategy for Monitoring Post-fire Rehabilitation Treatments Troy Wirth and David Pyke USGS – Biological Resources Division Forest and Rangeland.
Science & Monitoring Team Meeting Sept 23rd. Agenda Introductions Overview of CPRW & CO Conservation Exchange Review draft charter/workplan Watershed.
Dependence of PM on Elevation Background and Rationale Influence of the Seasonal Variation in Mixing Heights on the PM Elevation Dependence Vertical Profile.
Topographic Maps A Topographic map, or contour map is used to show the shape of the Earth’s surface. Elevation is the height above or below sea level.
TOPOGRAPHICAL MAPS.
o What were we looking at? o The Pit Crew studied soil patterns throughout the landscape.
Spatial Data Analysis The accurate description of data related to a process operating in space, the exploration of patterns and relationships in such data,
Effect of silvicultural and prescribed fire treatments on coarse woody debris dynamics in a sierran old growth mixed-conifer forest. Jim Innes and Malcolm.
9/17/071 Community Properties Reading assignment: Chapter 9 in GSF.
CHAPTER 3 Community Sampling and Measurements From: McCune, B. & J. B. Grace Analysis of Ecological Communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach,
Elevation Distribution of Vaccinium Myrtillus in Spruce-Fir and Lodge Pole Forests. By: Nicholas Condello Schwinger 7/ 17/2013.
 Discuss silvicultural principles related to restoration/fuels treatments  Compare conditions from the 1900 Cheesman Lake reconstruction to current.
A Scientific Basis for Ecological Restoration and Management of Ponderosa Pine and Dry Mixed-Conifer Forests of the Colorado Front Range Context Need for.
Comparing Pre-settlement, Pre-treatment and Post-treatment Stand Structure at Lonetree Restoration Site: Incorporating GIS into Restoration By Christine.
CFLRP MONITORING Pike & San Isabel National Forests & Cimarron & Comanche National Grasslands 2013 FIELD TRIP September 13, 2013 Front Range Round Table.
Using Birds to Guide Post-fire Management in the Plumas & Lassen National Forests Ryan D. Burnett, Nathaniel Seavy, and Diana Humple 4/21/2011.
Colorado Front Range Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Project : Initial Pre and Post-Treatment Stand Structure Analysis for the Pike and San.
Jenna Forsyth 12/07/09 Chester Morse Lake, Cedar River Watershed, WA Photo Courtesy of
UPPER MONUMENT CREEK LANDSCAPE RESTORATION Allan Hahn – District Ranger Mike Picard – ID Team Leader.
June 30, 2015 Land Use Meeting Heather Gutherless Jefferson County Planning & Zoning
Proposed Action Purpose and Need A proposal to authorize, recommend, or implement an action in response to the need identified in the Purpose and Need.
The Vegetation Module Seth Bigelow, Malcolm North Sierra Nevada Research Center, USDA-FS Pacific SW Research Stn, UC Davis Dept of Plant Sciences.
Spatial Statistics Jonathan Bossenbroek, PhD Dept of Env. Sciences Lake Erie Center University of Toledo.
Tree distribution patterns in the southwest Jemez Mountains Kamal Humagain 1, Robert Cox 1, and James Cain 2 1 Texas Tech University 2 New Mexico State.
4 Forest Restoration Initiative Overview of Vegetation Data, Modeling and Strategies Used to Develop the Proposed Action Neil McCusker Silviculturist 4FRI.
STRATIFICATION PLOT PLACEMENT CONTROLS Strategy for Monitoring Post-fire Rehabilitation Treatments Troy Wirth and David Pyke USGS – Biological Resources.
Ecological rationale for determining buffer width Forest Ecosystem Management and Assessment Team (FEMAT) Report.
The impacts of land mosaics and human activity on ecosystem productivity Jeanette Eckert.
Effects of Forest Management Practices on Carbon Storage Coeli M. Hoover USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station Forest PLUS, Washington DC December.
Coarse Woody Debris Missouri Ozark Forest Ecosystem Project Missouri Ozark Forest Ecosystem Project Randy G. Jensen Stephen R. Shifley Brian L. Brookshire.
Extent and Mask Extent of original data Extent of analysis area Mask – areas of interest Remember all rasters are rectangles.
Forest floor invasion results, 2002 Questions we asked: 1. Last year we found woody stem density was 65% lower in Vinca areas than on the natural forest.
1. Measuring Soil Quality Soil quality integrates the physical, chemical, and biological components of soil and their interactions. Therefore, to capture.
Causes and Consequences of Spatial Heterogeneity Ecolog(ists) use(s) the concept of a landscape in two ways. The first, which considers a landscape as.
August 1999PM Data Analysis Workbook: Characterizing PM23 Spatial Patterns Urban spatial patterns: explore PM concentrations in urban settings. Urban/Rural.
 Tier 1: Monitoring that will be done regardless of funding received:  Forest Service Preference is to focus on vegetation, e.g. Stand Structure including.
Carbon Sequestration and Fire Risk in a East-Side Pine Forest Martin Ritchie Research Forester Pacific Southwest Research Station.
Defining Landscapes Forman and Godron (1986): A
Goal: to understand carbon dynamics in montane forest regions by developing new methods for estimating carbon exchange at local to regional scales. Activities:
Introduction to Models Lecture 8 February 22, 2005.
Harold S.J. Zald and Andrew N. Gray USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR Tree Regeneration.
Front Range Roundtable Quarterly Meeting Jill Alexander Wildfire Mitigation Specialist Douglas County Building Division.
SIMulating Patterns and Processes at Landscape scaLEs HISTORIC RANGE of VARIABILITY.
The Effect of Fuel Treatments on the Invasion of Nonnative Plants Kyle E. Merriam 1, Jon E. Keeley 1, and Jan L. Beyers 2. [1] USGS Western Ecological.
August 1999PM Data Analysis Workbook: Characterizing PM23 Spatial Patterns Urban spatial patterns: explore PM concentrations in urban settings. Urban/Rural.
Spatial Analysis Variogram
4FRI Biophysical Monitoring Indicators: Assigning Metrics of Success (or Failure) 4FRI Landscape Strategy & Science and Monitoring Working Groups –
Utilizing Landsat TM and Forest Service Aerial Survey Data for Mapping Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak in Medicine Bow National Forest, WY UW Undergraduate.
Within-stand Interactions of Forest Structure and Microclimate Variability in an Old-Growth, Mixed-Conifer Forest Siyan Ma Co-authors: Malcolm North, Jiquan.
Why Quantify Landscape Pattern?
Quantifying Scale and Pattern Lecture 7 February 15, 2005
Funding: National Park Service, U.S.G.S.
Figure 1. Spatial distribution of pinyon-juniper and ponderosa pine forests is shown for the southwestern United States. Red dots indicate location of.
Species Diversity Comparison North and South Slopes
Large-scale Ecology Interacting ecosystems
Vegetation Dynamics of the NE and NW slopes of Betasso Preserve
MMG Homeowner Landscape Scale Inputs to Forsythe II Project (page 1)
Commissioned by Seattle Public Utilities, Seattle, WA
Angela Gee, US Forest Service July 22, 2019
Presentation transcript:

SPATIAL HETEROGENEITY SUB-GROUP UPDATE THURSDAY 23 RD JANUARY 2014 YVETTE DICKINSON

OUR CHARGE… Make recommendations to LR team regarding desired conditions and monitoring methods for forest spatial heterogeneity across scales.

DESIRED CONDITIONS PROCESS Developed DC’s within-stand (“groupy-clumpy”) and landscape heterogeneity separately Desired conditions: Literature review and expert opinion Undesirable conditions? Likely drivers of patterns? Likely consequences of patterns? Desired conditions? CFRI whitepaper currently being drafted Cross-pollination with GTR

LANDSCAPE SCALE Define landscape as HUC-12 watershed(s) surrounding treatment

LANDSCAPE SCALE Generally, treatments should create openings, groups of trees and single isolated trees within stands. The proportion and size of these openings, groups and single-trees should vary within and among stands resulting in the desired conditions identified at the landscape-scale (see 4.4 Desired landscape-scale forest patterns). On low productivity sites (generally drier sites at lower elevations and/or south facing slopes) there should be a greater prevalence of openings and single-isolated trees. On relatively high productivity sites (generally with higher moister availability at higher elevations and/or north facing slopes) there should be a greater prevalence of larger tree groups with fewer openings and isolated trees. Because they are relatively rare, older, scarred and character trees should be protected by leaving them as isolated single trees or, if within tree groups, protected by removing surrounding ladder fuels. On lower productivity sites (drier sites at lower elevations and/or south-facing slopes) treatments should favor ponderosa pine and preferentially remove Douglas-fir; however, on more productive sites (with higher moisture availability at higher elevations and/or north-facing slopes) a greater variety of species should be maintained. Where present, aspen should be maintained within the stand, and openings around aspen should be created where distinct aspen groves are identified. The proportion of trees in groups should vary stand to stand, ranging from 0 to 80% of trees in groups. However, the majority of stands across the landscape should have 30 to 60% of trees in groups. These groups may range in size from 2 to 20 trees with larger groups on more productive sites; however, on most sites the median group size should be small (2-3 trees). Groups of trees may be either even or uneven-aged; however, more productive sites (sites with higher moisture availability at higher elevations and/or north-facing slopes) are likely to have greater proportions of uneven-aged groups. Both even and uneven-aged stands exist across the landscape; however, there is a predominance of uneven-aged stands with a range of tree sizes, ages and shapes.

WITHIN-STAND SCALE Higher tree densities within patches on north aspects than on south aspects; at higher elevations with mixed conifer than lower elevations with ponderosa; and in draws than on ridges. Larger patches (forested or open) should occur on north facing slopes compared to south facing slope (perhaps the whole slope in contrast to partial disturbance). Steep topography tends to facilitate fire movement into the canopy; therefore, we expect that larger patches (forested or open) should occur on steep topography. However, where the topography is highly dissected, substantial topographic breaks should restrict patch size. Larger patches (forested or open) at higher elevations with mixed conifer forest types ( ’s acres) than smaller patch sizes at lower elevations ponderosa forest types. Generally a negative exponential pattern of patch sizes within HUC-12 watersheds with many patches ( 10 ha) which occupy >50% of total area. Patches (forested or open) should generally follow topographic and environmental gradients; and not arbitrary management boundaries (e.g. property boundaries). It is expected that aspen will benefit from decreases in coniferous canopy cover across the landscape. Furthermore, where apsen is present it should be protected. Needs more attention. See comment on previous page.

MONITORING METHODS

WITHIN-STAND SCALE MONITORING Tested proposed aerial-imagery methods previously presented on Phantom Creek 1 & 3, and Ryan Quinlan (Kristen Pelz and Josh Howie) Protocol for aerial-imagery methods “in press” (Kristen Pelz) Exploration of possible field methods using point sampling (Jeff Cadry) Subgroup recommendations: Implement aerial image analysis methods for monitoring (3-year cycle) Analyze the variation among CSE plots as a non-spatial indicator of heterogeneity in short-term Continue to explore other field based methods for short-term indicators (Modified Pielou’s index?)

WITHIN-STAND SCALE MONITORING: OUTCOMES OF TESTING Outcomes from Phantom Creek (1& 3) and Ryan Quinlan monitoring: The percent of canopy cover in the stand declined with treatment in all stands. Canopy cover in the Phantom Creek treatments decreased by 26.5% on average from 59.13% to 32.6%. Likewise, the canopy cover in the Ryan Quinlan treatments decreased by approximately 21% from 35.1% to 14.1%. The largest patch index (LPI, percent of the area covered by the single largest canopy patch) also declined in all treatments (except Phantom C where LPI did not change); however, the decrease in LPI was far greater for some treatment areas than others. For example, Phantom Creek 1A had a reduction in LPI from 61% to <1%. In contrast, the pre-treatment LPI for the Ryan Quinlan units was generally much smaller (<15%) than in the Phantom Creek units so LPI reduction was necessarily smaller.

WITHIN-STAND SCALE MONITORING: OUTCOMES OF TESTING Mean canopy patch size decreased on all treatment units. The diversity of canopy patch sizes (as shown by range, standard deviation and coefficient of variation of patch size) decreased on all treatment units except in Phantom Creek 3. This decline in diversity of patch size is undesirable; however, both Phantom Creek and Ryan Quinlan were early FR-CFLRP treatments and more recent treatments are likely to address this. The mean distance between neighboring patches stayed the same or slightly increased in all treatments; however, the range of distances between nearest patches increased in all treatment units (except Phantom Creek 3).

LANDSCAPE SCALE MONITORING The plan: Data collected over summer to be used to train LANDSAT data and create forest cover map (~30m pixels) (Mark Klein, Tyler Rowe and Yvette Dickinson) Patch-analysis of forest cover (similar indices to within- stand scale analysis)