• Save
Modeling alternative forest management scenarios across landscapes in the Pacific Northwest
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Modeling alternative forest management scenarios across landscapes in the Pacific Northwest

on

  • 1,446 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,446
Views on SlideShare
1,440
Embed Views
6

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

3 Embeds 6

http://www.slideshare.net 4
http://inforaindev.org 1
http://www.inforaindev.org 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Modeling alternative forest management scenarios across landscapes in the Pacific Northwest Modeling alternative forest management scenarios across landscapes in the Pacific Northwest Presentation Transcript

  • Modeling alternative forest management scenarios across landscapes in the Pacific Northwest Matthew Goslin Mike Mertens Ecotrust -- Portland, OR The Forestry 2100 project
  • Broad Question
    • What are the long-term consequences of current forestry practices?
    • vs.
    • What would be the consequences of large-scale adoption of alternative “sustainable” practices?
    • ecological benefits?
    • economic costs? would we still be able to produce enough wood?
  • Two Scenarios: Current “Business as Usual” versus Alternative
    • Longer rotations between harvests
    • Greater retention at harvest
    • Additional thinnings in between harvests (or instead of harvests)
    • Species diversity: preferential retention of minor species not maintained in plantation forestry (e.g. redcedar)
    • Wider riparian buffers
  • Forestry 2100 Pilot Study Area
  • Forest Land Ownership 250,000 ac 162,000 ac 706,000 ac 513,000 ac
  • Analytical Approach Map current vegetation Model development of individual plots Harvest Scheduler / Landscape Model Growth & Yield Model Most Similar Neighbor Imputation Projected harvest and standing volumes, age classes and forest structure across landscape by scenario Forest Inventory Sample Plots Compare scenarios
  • Sample Plot Distribution from USFS Forest Inventory Analysis Program
    • Imputation: “a statistical analysis tool for incomplete data, whereby measured values ( from plots ) are assigned to observations that lack such data ( stand polygons )” (Ohmann et. al. 2001)
    Describing Current Conditions Most Similar Neighbor Imputation Satellite imagery (Landsat TM 2001) Elevation / Aspect Forest Inventory Sample Plots Climate data (PRISM) Delineate stand polygons from imagery Plot characteristics (species basal area, mean diameter, volume) Mean values for plot locations Mean values for stand polygons
  • Imputed Stand Ages from MSN classification
  • Imputed vs. Observed Species Distribution: Sitka Spruce
  • Imputed vs. Observed Species Distribution: Noble Fir
  • Imputed vs. Observed Species Distribution: Bigleaf Maple
  • Projecting Future Conditions – Plot / Stand: Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) Harvest Scheduler / Landscape Model Growth & Yield Model Projected harvest and standing volumes, age classes and forest structure across landscape by scenario Tree growth Tree regeneration Forest Inventory Sample Plots Tree mortality Natural Processes Management Prescriptions Timing of Harvests Retention at Harvest Planting
  • Sample Stand Development Modeled by FVS: Basal Area, Tree Density and Mean Diameter Sample stand 11512: High density, high site index Douglas-fir dominated stand 5 years old at beginning of simulation
  • State of Oregon Lands: Current Practices and Prescriptions
    • Current Practices
    • structure-based landscape management by desired future condition (DFC)
    • special stewardship areas for spotted owls, marbled murrelets (no touch)
    • Inner, middle, outer riparian management zones (25 ft, 100 ft, 170 ft)
    • Model Prescriptions
    • All thins retain 35 % of max SDI (stand density index), proportional
    • General DFC: Harvest at 80 years; retain 8 trees/ac
    • Thins at 35, 55 years;
    • Older DFC: Harvest at 140 years; retain 7 trees/ac
    • Thin at 35, 55, 80 years;
  • State of Oregon Lands: Alternative Prescriptions
    • Alternative Practices
    • same framework: structure-based landscape management with special stewardship areas for spotted owls, marbled murrelets
    • greater retention in thinnings and at harvest , redcedar preference
    • Alternative Prescriptions
    • All thins retain 70 % basal area, proportional
    • General DFC: Harvest at 80 years; retain 20 % basal area
    • Thin at 35, 55 years;
    • Older DFC: Harvest at 140 years; retain 15 % basal area
    • Thin at 35, 55, 80, 110 years;
  • Private Industrial Lands: Current Practices and Prescriptions
    • Current Practices
    • short rotations
    • minimal retention
    • plantings predominantly Douglas-fir (80 %)
    • Model Prescription
    • Harvest at 40 years; retain 4 trees/ac
  • Private Industrial Lands: Alternative Prescriptions
    • Alternative Practices
    • lengthen rotations and increase retention
    • commercial thin for additional harvest volume prior to final harvest
    • Alternative Prescription (initial)
    • Harvest at 60 years; retain 15 % basal area
    • Thin at 35 years; 70 % basal area retained, proportional
    • Alternative Prescription (final)
    • -- mitigating for a non-spatial growth and yield model
    • 85 % of area with minimal retention
    • Harvest at 60 years; retain 4 trees/ac
    • Thin at 35 years; 70 % basal area retained
    • 15 % of area with minimal intervention
    • Thin at 35, 60 years and ongoing intervals, 70 % basal area retained, no final harvest
  • Modeled Sample Stand 11512: Private Industrial – “Business as Usual” Prescription Basal area by species Standing and harvested volume
  • Modeled Sample Stand 11512: Private Industrial – Alternative Prescription 1 (85% of area) Basal area by species Standing and harvested volume
  • Modeled Sample Stand 11512: Private Industrial – Alternative Prescription 2 (15% of area) Basal area by species Standing and harvested volume
  • US Forest Service Lands: Current Practices and Prescriptions
    • Current Practices (Siuslaw National Forest)
    • Primary goal is to accelerate development of older forest structure -- growth of large trees and understory re-initiation
    • Intervention not conducted in stands > 80 years
    • Wide riparian buffers (100 ft no touch)
    • Model Prescriptions
    • Heavy thin (average slopes, bottomlands):
    • Heavy thin at 40 years; retain 40 trees/ac, thin from below
    • No final harvest
    • Light thins (steep slopes, ridgetops):
    • Light thin at 35 years; retain 90 trees/ac, thin from below
    • Heavier thin at 60 years; retain 40 trees/ac, thin from below
    • No final harvest
  • US Forest Service Lands: Alternative Prescriptions
    • Alternative Practices
    • No final harvest (same as USFS)
    • Continual light thinnings with no age limit on interventions
    • Redcedar preferentially retained
    • Alternative Prescription
    • Thin at 35 years, continuing at 20 year intervals;
    • 70 % basal area retained, proportional
    • Redcedar retained in early thins
  • Projecting Future Conditions – Landscape Harvest Scheduler / Landscape Model Growth & Yield Model Projected harvest and standing volumes, age classes and forest structure across landscape by scenario Even flow objective Adjacency constraints Overlay landscape with ownership bounds and management intent (GIS) Allocate prescriptions to stands Forest Inventory Sample Plots
  • Even-flow Harvest Scheduling
    • Sessions et. al. (2000) model uses simulated annealing to optimize harvests across time
    • We use 5 offsets (different timing options) for each prescription
  • State Land: Annual Harvest Volumes
  • State Land: Standing Volume and Average Stand Age
  • Private Industrial Land: Annual Harvest Volumes
  • Private Industrial: Standing Volume and Average Stand Age
  • Federal Land: Annual Harvest Volumes
  • Federal Land: Standing Volume and Average Stand Age
  • Conclusions
    • While longer harvest rotations and/or greater retention lead to lower harvest volumes in the immediate future,
    • there is the potential for equal or greater harvest volumes in the future (35-70 years) coupled with
    • an immediate and persistent increase in standing volume of forest across the landscape.
  • Project status and where are we going from here?
    • Status
    • Vegetation mapping of coastal Oregon and Washington has been completed
    • Growth and yield modeling has been conducted for western Oregon and Washington
    • Further work
    • Validation of current results
    • Harvest scheduling for the remainder of the larger study area
    • Generate additional ecological indicators (species and structural diversity)
    • Evaluate additional economic and ecological values (carbon storage, salmon habitat, recreation opportunities)
  • Acknowledgements
    • Support: The M. J. Murdock Charitable Trust
    • Cooperators:
    • John Sessions, Sean Gordon (Interforest Consulting Group/Oregon State University)
    • Michele Dailey, Bettina von Hagen (Ecotrust)
    • Assistance with
    • Forest Inventory Analysis Program: Dale Weyermann, Glenn Christensen (USFS)
    • Most Similar Neighbor Analysis: Melinda Moeur, Nicholas Crookston, Janet Ohmann (USFS)
    • State of Oregon Forest Plans: Pam Overhulser