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

Photo%Credit:%California%Coastline%Records%Project4

Integr Integrating social & ec ating social & ecological needs w

• logical 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

• rest
• Dr. Sarah Bisbing, Kevin Hurt, & Matt Terzes

*California Polytechnic State University

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

5%to%10%x%the%area%by%2100!4 Present4 Future4

Future)of)Monterey)pine?6

20084 20074 20034 20054 20044 20024

Photos%Courtesy%of%Don%Canestro4

20114 20104 20154 20144 20134 20124

Photos%Courtesy%of%Don%Canestro4

20154 20024

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

Ecological4 Reality4 Economically4 Feasible4 Socially4 Acceptance4

Prescriptions)balancing.).).6

.).).)bounded)by)ecological,)social,)and)economic)principles.6

Scale)of)Management6

Stand4 Landscape%Context4

Urban%et%al%19874

Evaluate)prescriptions)and)impact)here6 Management)goals)&)objectives6 Develop) prescriptions)6

Ecological)Silviculture6

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

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Cambria Monterey Pine Mortality Assessment

!

Cambria Subsample (30%) Canestro Transects Proposed Properties

30%)Sampling:6 6

Covell%–%75%plots4 Fiscalini%–%19%plots4 Rancho%Marino%–%26%plots4

Cambria)Forest)Health)LongUterm)Plots6

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sampling Team Sampling Team

Collabor

• llaborations & Support

ations & Support

Questions? Questions?

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

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

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