2017 Forest Health Report Board of Forestry September 5 th , 2018 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
2017 forest health report
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

2017 Forest Health Report Board of Forestry September 5 th , 2018 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 06, 2023 102 likes •496 views

2017 Forest Health Report Board of Forestry September 5 th , 2018 AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 1 of 38 Forest Health introduction Marganne Allen Wyatt Williams Sarah Navarro Manager Invasive Species Specialist Forest Pathologist

slide-1
SLIDE 1

2017 Forest Health Report Board of Forestry September 5th, 2018

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 1 of 38

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Forest Health introduction

Sarah Navarro Forest Pathologist Marganne Allen Manager Wyatt Williams Invasive Species Specialist Christine Buhl Forest Entomologist Danny Norlander Survey & Monitoring

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 2 of 38

slide-3
SLIDE 3

ODF Forest Health Unit

Mission To maintain or improve the health and value of Oregon’s non-federal forests

Goals

  • Detect, monitor,

evaluate forest health

  • Provide information and

consultation

  • Implement control

strategies

Authority: ORS 527.310 to 527.370

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 3 of 38

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Forest Health in Oregon: State of the State 2018

Andrew Gray and Stella Cousins USFS PNW Research Station & UC Berkeley

Timing and Cause of Mortality

(From: Forest Inventory and Analysis Program)

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 4 of 38

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Aerial survey in Oregon

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 5 of 38

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Aerial survey

  • What is the Aerial Detection Survey (ADS)?
  • A systematic observation of insect and disease caused

damage in Oregon’s forests

  • Part of a nationwide survey program
  • Why does ODF conduct the ADS?
  • It is in statute: ORS 527.315 (part of Integrated Pest

Management) and ORS 527.335 (Investigations by State Forester concerning pests)

  • An economical method to assess forest health issues

across Oregon each year

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 6 of 38

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Aerial survey history

  • First forest health survey:

Canada, 1920

  • First survey in the U.S.:

Idaho, 1930

  • First survey in the PNW:

Washington, 1931

  • First survey in Oregon:

1944

  • First ODF survey:

1948, annual since

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 7 of 38

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Aerial survey in Oregon

  • Cooperative effort

between ODF and USDA FS personnel.

  • Currently covers

approximately 30 million acres of forested land (45% of total area).

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 8 of 38

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Surveys conducted

  • Swiss needlecast
  • Young Conifer Mortality/NW Oregon Survey
  • General overview of entire state
  • Sudden Oak Death
  • Special surveys:
  • Oak looper (foliar pest)
  • Gorse (invasive plant)
  • Ice or wind damage
  • Others as needed

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 9 of 38

slide-10
SLIDE 10

How is this data collected?

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 10 of 38

slide-11
SLIDE 11

How is this data collected?

  • An observer on each side scans for

damage/mortality

  • Single or multiple trees are identified and drawn on

the tablet as a point or polygon

  • Info recorded:
  • Georeferenced location of damage
  • Extent (single tree or larger area of trees?)
  • Intensity (e.g., mortality or % damaged)
  • Host tree species
  • Damage agent (insects, diseases, vertebrates, abiotic and

fire damage, etc.)

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 11 of 38

slide-12
SLIDE 12

How is this data collected?

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 12 of 38

slide-13
SLIDE 13

How is this data collected?

  • Young conifer mortality
  • Douglas-fir
  • 1 tree
  • Swiss needlecast
  • Douglas-fir
  • Polygon of multiple acres

Bear - 1

SNC - High SNC - High SNC – Moderate

  • Swiss needlecast
  • Douglas-fir
  • Polygon of multiple acres

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 13 of 38

slide-14
SLIDE 14

How are unknowns addressed?

  • Ground checks and adjustment to data
  • Initiated outbreaks or precursors to an outbreak (e.g. storm

damage) are verified and management guidance provided

De Defoli liator Hail il damage

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 14 of 38

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Data QC

  • Regular calibration &

conformity sessions

  • Discussion amongst

technical specialists

  • Research comparison
  • f aerial vs. ground

results

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 15 of 38

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Current status of technology

Year 2 of using new software (DMSM) and hardware (Samsung tablets) Pros:

  • Less expensive, easy to use hardware
  • More efficient software, can be used for other

applications (ground surveys)

  • Nationwide survey program now using the same system
  • Automated synchronization with a central database

Cons:

  • Accuracy at the cost of precision (survey metric)
  • Concerns about changes in protocol, linkages between

past/new data

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 16 of 38

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Caveats to survey

  • Delays with contracts and aircraft access
  • Fire:
  • Temporary Flight Restrictions
  • Skipped areas
  • Visibility
  • Fire perimeter prone to future damage
  • Staff called to fire
  • Poor visibility:
  • Weather
  • Light conditions
  • Topography
  • Difficulty of data collection:
  • Speed vs. accuracy
  • Observer fatigue
  • Human error
  • Lack of trained staff

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 17 of 38

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Data use and interpretation

  • Available online (ODF FH page) and in Forest Health

Highlights

  • Data provides a snapshot in time
  • Appropriate at the watershed scale, not stand level

DISCLAIMER: “Geolocation, agent identification and damage quantity data are based on aerial surveyor estimations drawn from visual observation of damage areas and knowledge of local damage agents and forest health. This data is presented as informational and does not claim 100% accuracy.”

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 18 of 38

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Current findings

*Acres with not of damage/mortality *Many diseases (e.g., root disease) and some other agents not captured in aerial survey

786,000 acres I&D

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 19 of 38

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Current findings

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 20 of 38

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Potential improvements/adjustments

  • Assessment of the needs of the clients and data users
  • Nationwide survey underway
  • Conversations with users

…to be mindful of budget and staff utilization:

  • Reduce area surveyed (alternate years, wider grid lines,

subsampling)

  • Increase number of trained staff that can survey (Training)
  • More ground support to verify aerial observations (Training)
  • Improved communication among various participants (ODF,

USFS, protection and aircraft personnel)

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 21 of 38

slide-22
SLIDE 22

The Oregon Bee Project

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 22 of 38

slide-23
SLIDE 23

What prompted concern?

  • Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD): starting in 2006,

estimated 10 million beehives were lost

  • Global decline of native pollinators and native bee

kills…

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 23 of 38

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Native bee kills (Wilsonville example)

  • ~50,000 bumble bees killed
  • Major public outrage
  • Started larger movement to ban neonicotinoids

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 24 of 38

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Why do we need bees?

  • $600 million in

Oregon from crop pollination by natives alone

  • Pollination ecosystem

services for rural and urban plants

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 25 of 38

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Federal initiatives

1) Baseline honeybee data, reduce winter losses 2) Increase eastern monarch populations 3) Enhance and restore pollinator habitat 1) Improved pollinator pesticide regulation and reporting 2) Call for state-led best management and action plans

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 26 of 38

slide-27
SLIDE 27

State initiatives

2015 Oregon House Bills 3361: Best Management Practices 3362: Education & Public Pesticide Safety Plan

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 27 of 38

slide-28
SLIDE 28

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 28 of 38

slide-29
SLIDE 29

The Oregon Bee Project

Mission: Bringing together Oregonians around a science-based strategy for protecting and promoting wild and managed bees through education, pollinator-friendly practices, and research. Objectives:

  • Engage the public in understanding bee ecology and

requirements

  • Collect baseline bee population data (researchers and citizen

scientists)

  • Research bee health (toxicology, diseases, ecology)
  • BMP training on bee-friendly pesticide application
  • Showcase and incentivize bee-friendly practices

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 29 of 38

slide-30
SLIDE 30

OBP Progress

SHOWCASE ENGAGEMENT PESTICIDE TRAINING DIAGNOTICS AND RESEARCH

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 30 of 38

slide-31
SLIDE 31

OREGON is a great place for bees: Specialty crops

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 31 of 38

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Williams et al. 2014 Grass seed McMinnville, OR

OREGON is a great place for bees: Specialty crops

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 32 of 38

slide-33
SLIDE 33

ALKALI BEES: WORLD’S ONLY MANAGED GROUND NESTING BEE

OREGON is a great place for bees: Native pollinators

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 33 of 38

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Pollinators in forests?

Forests provide (overlooked) habitat for native bees 1) Forage plants (Oregon grape, salal, rhododendron) 2) Bare soil for ground nests and hibernation 3) Woody debris and stumps for nests and material

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 34 of 38

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Hampton Associates pollinator habitat plots and native bee population monitoring in actively managed stands

Pollinators in forests?

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 35 of 38

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Promote forest bees

  • 1. Diverse forage (colors, shapes, bloom times, etc.)
  • 2. Forage in contiguous patches or strips
  • 3. Allow forage to grow along edges of stands and roadsides
  • 4. Apply pesticides when bees are less active (cold days,

evenings, offseason)

  • 5. Avoid pesticide drift or leakage into water sources (puddles,

irrigation ditches, etc.)

  • 6. Do not sanitize sites (leave some stumps, downed trees,

CWD, pithy stems)

  • 7. Remove aggressive or invasive plants that outcompete native

forage

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 36 of 38

slide-37
SLIDE 37

https://www.oregonbeeproject.org/

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 37 of 38

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Questions?

More information and data provided by ODF Forest Health:

http://tinyurl.com/odf-foresthealth

AGENDA ITEM A Attachment 05 Page 38 of 38