View
226
Download
2
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
https://foothillsri.ca/sites/default/files/null/HLP_2000_05_Prsnttn_FMFNDPTechResearchSeries.pdf
Citation preview
Foothills Model Forest
Natural Disturbance Program
1996-2000
N
A l b e r t a
Weldwood of Canada
FMA
Willmore
Wilderness Area
Study Area = Foothills Model Forest +
ANC
N
Jasper
National
Park
Provincial &
Municipal Lands
Alberta Newsprint
Co.
AlpineCentral MixedwoodLower Foothills
MontaneSub-alpineUpper Foothills
Ecological Zones of the Study Area
What’s the Big Deal about
Disturbance?
What processes shape forest patterns?
- geomorphology
- climate
- tree species traits
- disturbance
What’s the Big Deal about
Disturbance?
What processes shape forest patterns?
stable influence - geomorphology
stable influence - climate
stable influence - tree species traits
source of instability - disturbance
The study of disturbance tells us a lot
about how and why forest landscapes
are dynamic
= “natural range of variation”
Of What Value is the Natural Range of
Variability?
THEORETICAL: Template for maintaining biodiversity
through emulation of “natural” first order ecological
patterns.
Species are ecologically and evolutionarily adapted to
the historical range of patterns. If we learn from, and
use natural patterns as a template, we are more likely to
conserve biodiversity over the long term.
Of What Value is the Natural Range of
Variability?
PRACTICAL: Develop and defend management
strategies based on historical precedent
TRANSLATION: “Pattern” is quantifiable
--> allows translation to planning
--> use in monitoring programs
The FMF Natural Disturbance
Program
• Began from a common desire among partners
to maintain biological diversity.
• Formation of a team of land management
representatives + principle scientist.
• Allowed for direct and constant contact
between the science and the questions
being asked
Organization of NDP
Program Coord. & Science - David Andison, Bandaloop
Program Biologist - Kris McCleary, Bandaloop
Program Team: - Hugh Lougheed, Weldwood
- Alan Westhaver, JNP
- Don Harrison, AEP
- Dan Farr, Foothills Model Forest
- Greg Branton, ANC
Collaboration Formal - Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd.
- Forestry Canada, NOFC.
- LFS, Edmonton Fire Centre
- Western Fire Centre
- Banff National Park
Informal - FMF Criterion & Indicators
- PA Model Forest
- MacGregor Model Forest
- Forestry Canada, PFC
- UBC
- University of Wyoming
- University of Colorado
The FMF Natural Disturbance
Program
Strategy Develop a multi-year research program driven by
operational needs that allows the separation of
processes according to scale for investigation, and
the integration of project results for interpretation.
This strategy is outlined in greater detail in the long-term
research project plan (25+ possible projects)
“What are the historical, “natural”
disturbance patterns on the Foothills
Model Forest?”
“What are the historical, “natural”
disturbance patterns on the Foothills
Model Forest?”
Stand replacing or stand maintaining?
Patch size distribution?
How are patch shape and size related to non-forested?
Range of seral-stage percentages?
Numbers and sizes of island remnants?
Edge architecture? Dead standing?
Coarse woody debris?
Patch shape distribution?
Change in structure through riparian strips?
Topographic “hot” and “cold” spots?
How many disturbance regimes are there?
Within-stand age cohorts?
The ND Program Includes Many Projects,
Defined by Scale
Region - Foothills Model Forest
Landscape - Upper Foothills
Natural Sub-region
Disturbance - Gregg River Burn
Stand - Remnant island
PATTERN
APPLICATION
PROCESS
FUNCTION
The FMF Natural Disturbance Program
Focuses on Pattern and Process
Each Annual Workplan is
Developed From:
PRIMARY
• Practical partner needs and priorities
• Scientific possibilities (long-term research plan)
SECONDARY
• Findings from previous, internal research
• Other related research
• The status and progress of each project
• Feedback from experiments, users
Getting it “On the Ground”
• Province-wide workshop, March 1999
• Working with team members to interpret
and integrate in preparing plans and
activities.
• Presentations, working papers, one-on-
one, tours, mini-workshops, reports,
manuscripts, …..
Project Example #1:
Managing Age-Class Distributions
on the Weldwood FMA
Practical Question:
What amounts of old growth forest are
appropriate to manage for on the FMA over the
long term from a biodiversity perspective?
Scientific Question:
What are the natural, historical levels of all seral-
stage percentages over the last 2-300 years?
Non-forested
Year of stand origin<18501851 - 19001901 - 19501951 - 1996No data
1950 Age-Class Distribution of the
Foothills East
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1950 1910 1870 1830 1790 1750 1710 1670 1630
Age-Class of Origin
Perc
en
t o
f A
rea
Subalpine East
Upper Foothills
Lower Foothills
Older Forest as of 1950 on the
Weldwood FMA
Landscape %>300 yrs %>200 yrs %>100 yrs
Lower Foothills 0 0 16
Upper Foothills 0 4 21
Subalpine east 2 15 45
Note that these represent “natural” percentages
of older forest.
HOWEVER, despite high data quality, the
description of age-class “pattern” is limited by
the sample size (1).
So far….
• High degree of confidence that most stands are
even-aged, and therefore well represented by age-
classes.
• Distinctive levels of young, mid-seral, and old
growth forest in each natural subregion.
Estimates of Original Areas Disturbed on
the Weldwood FMA in 20-year Periods
Period Lower Upper Sub east
1930-1949 2 2 1
1910-1929 11 8 15
1890-1919 11 22 23
1870-1889 53 51 27
1850-1869 55 36 4
1830-1849 67 47 27
1810-1829 6 1 4
Project the Range of Disturbance
Rates Over Time, Across the FMA
• Spatially explicit disturbance model
(LANDMINE)
• Equations derived from “rollback” estimates
of 20 year disturbance rates.
• Equations for disturbance.
• Random number generator.
• Initial conditions.
0
25
50
75
100
Y P M O
AC Distribution
Landscape in 1950 - Initial Condition
AC Distribution
0
25
50
75
100
Y P M O
Landscape in 20 Years?
0
25
50
75
100
Y P M O
AC Distribution
Landscape in 20 Years?
0
25
50
75
100
Y P M O
AC Distribution
Landscape in 100 Years?
0
25
50
75
100
Y P M O
AC Distribution
Landscape in 100 Years?
Older Forest as of 1950 on the
Weldwood FMA
Landscape %>300 yrs %>200 yrs %>100 yrs
Lower Foothills 0 0 16
Upper Foothills 0 4 21
Subalpine east 2 15 45
The simple answer.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Percent Area >200 Years
Fre
qu
en
cy
4%
Projected Historical Range of Area for the Mature Seral-Stage of the Upper Foothills
The more precise answer.
Older Forest as of 1950 on the
Weldwood FMA
Landscape %>300 yrs %>200 yrs %>100 yrs
Lower Foothills 0 0 16
Upper Foothills 0 4 21
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Percent Area 101-140 Years
Fre
qu
en
cy
1995
(48%)
1950
(16%)
Projected Historical Range of Area for the Mature Seral-Stage of the Lower Foothills
Amount of mature
forest in the Lower
Foothills in 1995 is
beyond the “natural
range of variability”
Original Question:
What amounts of old growth forest are appropriate to
manage for on the FMA over the long term from a
biodiversity perspective?
Answer:
There is no single amount of old growth forest that is
more “natural” than many others.
Using a combination of empirical research and
simulation modeling Weldwood now has a series of seral-
stage ranges of natural variation with which to compare
long-term planning projections.
Example #1 Summary
Project Example #2:
Disturbance Events and Patch Sizes
Practical Question:
What is an ecologically appropriate way to design
harvesting blocks within operating areas?
Scientific Question:
How do natural disturbance patches arrange
themselves in space?
The simpler scientific question
often is “what is the natural range
of patch sizes”
… but this does not fully address
the original practical question.
Young Forest Patch Size Distribution on
FMF Landscapes
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
<1
1-4
0
40-
80
80-2
00
2-60
0
600-
1,00
0
1-2,
000
2-5,
000
5-10
,000
10,0
00+
Forest Patch Size Class (ha)
Perc
en
t A
rea
Montane
Subalpine JNP
Subalpine East
Upper Foothills
Lower Foothills
Creating patch-size
distributions is not difficult.
Young Forest Patch Size Distribution on
FMF Landscapes
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
<1
1-4
0
40-
80
80-2
00
2-60
0
600-
1,00
0
1-2,
000
2-5,
000
5-10
,000
10,0
00+
Forest Patch Size-Class (ha)
Perc
en
t A
rea
Montane
Subalpine JNP
Subalpine East
Upper Foothills
Lower Foothills
Comparing patch-size
distributions is not difficult.
13 Patches 8,886 ha
15 Patches 28 ha
54 Patches 697 ha
76 Patches 1,163 ha
… but forested patches cluster to form disturbances
28 Ha Burnt
38 Ha Event
1,163 Ha Burnt
1,325 Ha Event
697 Ha Burnt
1,422 Ha Event
8,886 Ha Burnt
10,856 Ha Event
Disturbance vs. Event
Original Question:
What is an ecologically appropriate way to design
harvesting blocks within operating areas?
Answer:
A combination of patch sizes, disturbance sizes, and
event sizes accurately describe the design of historical
disturbances. Each can be quantified and directly
translated into harvest block design.
Example #2 Summary
Project Example #3:
Island Structure Within
Disturbances
Practical Question:
What is an ecologically appropriate way to leave
islands within harvest blocks?
Scientific Question:
How much, and where are unburnt island
remnants left by fire naturally?
Greg River Burn
8,886 ha Burn (1956)
13 Disturbed Patches
over 8,415 ha
326 Remnant Islands
covering 471 ha
Island Remnants Example
ISLAND = Any contiguous area of same-
aged forest that survived the last stand-
replacing disturbance.
DISTURBANCE = A collection of young
forest patches created from the same event.
EVENT = The greater area of a
disturbance (formed by a collection of
forest and non-forest patches)
Total Area in Island Remnants by
Disturbance
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 500 1000 1500
Gross Disturbance Size (ha)
Pe
rce
nt
of
Gro
ss
Are
a in
Is
lan
ds
AVERAGES 12 %
Island Remnants per Patch
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0 500 1000 1500
Patch Size
No
. o
f Is
lan
ds
Increases with Patch Size
Areas in Island Remnants
5,117 Islands in the entire sample dataset
… most are very small.
4,225 islands <1 ha
466 islands 1-2 ha
350 islands 2-10 ha
67 islands 10-100 ha
4 islands > 100 ha
Island Remnant Types
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30Total area in islands (%)
Perc
en
t o
f is
lan
d a
rea b
y
typ
e
100% live
50-99% live
5-49% live
Original Question:
What is an ecologically appropriate way to leave islands
within harvest blocks?
Answer: Another combination of factors:
- Leave anything between 4-20% of the block area in islands.
- The larger the block, the more islands to leave.
- Make the largest island about 1/3 of the total area allowed in
islands.
- Most of the islands are very small (<1 ha).
- Most islands should be at least partially disturbed.
Example #3 Summary
What are we Missing?
In example #1, we have already resolved other
practical issues together with Weldwood to create a
workable solution that is still ecologically sound.
In examples #2 and #3, those practical issues
(economics, public acceptance, groundrules, etc)
have yet to be integrated into workable solutions.
This is where we need to work together.
The Future
By the end of this year, over half of the projects identified
in the long-term research plan will be completed. Of
those that remain, many are related to experimentation,
and simulation.
- Complete outstanding research projects
- Adaptive experimentation
- Increased education, communication
- More workshops, more “hands on” integration
- Provide bridges to other projects
- Encourage ecological response research activities.
- KEEP TALKING AND THROWING OUT IDEAS.
Recommended