Integr Integrating social & ec ating social & ecological - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Integr Integrating social & ec ating social & ecological needs w ological needs when hen managing endemic species: managing endemic species: A C A Case S ase Stud tudy of C y of Cambria ambria’s s Pinus Pinus radiata adiata forest orest Dr. Sarah Bisbing, Kevin Hurt, & Matt Terzes * California Polytechnic State University Photo%Credit:%California%Coastline%Records%Project4

Mortiz%&%Agudo%2013,%Science4

Johnstone%&%Dawson%20104 O’Brien%20114

hGp://calJadapt.org4

Projected)Number)of)Extreme)Heat)Days6 hGp://calJadapt.org4

hGp://calJadapt.org4

Wildfire)Area)Increases6 Present4 Future4 5%to%10%x%the%area%by%2100!4

Future)of)Monterey)pine?6

20024 20034 20044 20054 20074 20084 Photos%Courtesy%of%Don%Canestro4

20104 20114 20124 20134 20144 20154 Photos%Courtesy%of%Don%Canestro4

20024 20154 Rogers%20024

Assessing)the)Path)Forward:6 • Primary%concerns%&%objectives%of%community?4 • Wildfire%mitigation%and%safety4 • Preservation%of%unique,%endemic%conifer4 • Increased%understanding%of%understudied%species4

Proposed)Treatment:6 • Reduce%fire%hazard4 • Low%thinning%&%fuelbreaks4 • Improve%forest%health4 • Sanitation%harvest4 • Improve%safety4 • Salvage%harvest4 Cambria%Forest%Management%Plan%2002,%THP%20164

Prescriptions)balancing.).).6 Socially4 Ecological4 Acceptance4 Reality4 Economically4 Feasible4 .).).)bounded)by)ecological,)social,)and)economic)principles.6

Scale)of)Management6 Stand4 Landscape%Context4

Ecological)Silviculture6 Evaluate)prescriptions)and)impact)here6 Management)goals)&)objectives6 Develop) prescriptions)6 Urban%et%al%19874

Steps)in)Silvicultural)Planning6 1.%Determine%landowner’s%objectives4 2.%Evaluate%stand4 3.%Identify%options4 4.%Quantify%likely%outcomes%of%each4 4 Nyland%20024

Objectives)=)Silvicultural)Treatment6

Low)Thinning) (fire%hazard)%4

Low)Thinning) ( fire%hazard) 6

Sanitation) (health) )6

Sanitation) (health)4

Salvage) (safety%&%fire)4

Salvage) (safety%&%fire)4 6

Assessing)Knowledge)Gaps:6 What%are%the%primary%drivers%of%mortality?4 • How%does%climate%influence%paGerns%of%mortality%and% • regeneration?4 4 How%will%treatment%influence%forest%dynamics,% • regeneration,%and%health?4

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 30%)Sampling:6 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 6 ! ! ! ! ! Covell%–%75%plots4 ! ! ! ! ! ! Fiscalini%–%19%plots4 Rancho%Marino%–%26%plots4 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Cambria Monterey Pine ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Mortality Assessment ! ! ! ! Cambria Subsample (30%) ! Canestro Transects Proposed Properties Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Cambria)Forest)Health)LongUterm)Plots6 FRP%for%saplings%&%seedlings4 8m%radius%4 FRP%for%Large%Trees4 17.8m%radius4 Duff%Depth%at%4 4.5m%and%9m4 Nested%Veg%Plot%–%3.6m4 Brown’s%Fuels%&%Canopy%Transect4 Random%Compass%Direction%at%9m4 **Tag%ALL%respective%trees%in%each%FRP4

Tree)Status6 Stage6 Green%Phase4 14 Flagging4 1.54 Red%Phase4 24 Grey%Phase4 34 Tree%Fall%Phase4 44 Live)Crown6 Code6 Healthy%(0J10%% 14 dieback)4 Moderate%(11J50%)4 24 High%(50+%)4 34 Dead4 44

Damage) Code6 Agent6 Beetles4 014 Dwarf% 024 Mistletoe4 Western%Gall% 414 Rust4 Pitch%Canker4 464

No pitch Pitch 100% 90% Percent of Average Tress Per Hectare at Fiscalini Preserve 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0-2.5 2.6-5 5.1-10 10.1-15 15.1-20 20.1-25 25.1-30 30.1-40 40.1-50 50.1-60 60.1-70 70.1-80 80.1-90 ! 90.1-100 Total DBH Class (cm)

No pitch Pitch 100% 90% Percent of Average Trees Per Hectare at Rancho Marino 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% DBH Class (cm)

Green Flagging Red Grey Snag 100% 90% Percent of Avergage Trees Per Hectare at Fiscalini Preserve 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0-2.5 2.6-5 5.1-10 10.1-15 15.1-20 20.1-30 30.1-40 40.1-50 50.1-60 60.1-70 70.1-80 80.1-90 ! 90.1-100 Total DBH Class (cm)

Green Flagging Red Grey Snag 100% 90% Percent of Average Trees Per Hectare at Rancho Marino 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% DBH Class (cm)

Mortality6 Mortality)6 Property6 Pitch)Canker6 ( 63cm/25in + )4 ( All%classes )4 20154 20164 20154 20164 20154 20164 Covell% 18%4 J4 56%4 J4 28%4 J4 Ranch4 Rancho% 22%4 22%4 56%4 64%4 21%4 30%4 Marino4 Fiscalini4 9%4 8%4 27%4 30%4 15%4 17%*4 Preserve4 *Trees%removed%in%20164

Sampling Team Sampling Team

Collabor ollaborations & Support ations & Support

Questions? Questions? Email Email: sbisbing@calpoly.edu Twitter: witter: @SarahBisbing Website: sarahbisbing.com

Green Flagging Red Grey Snags 100% 90% 80% Percent of Trees on Covell Ranch (848 acres) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0-5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-40 40-50 Total No. Trees DBH Class (inches)

No pitch Pitch 100% 90% 80% Percent of Trees on Covell Ranch (848 acres) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0-5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-40 40-50 Total No. Trees DBH Class (inches)