Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CEER July 30, 2014 Presented by: David Ross, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service1
Coauthors: Marko Bey, Lomakatsi Restoration Project CalLee Davenport, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1now Department of the Interior
Implementing a Landscape Level Oak Habitat Restoration Initiative With Local Workforce Partnerships
So, why restore oak habitat?
Oregon White (Quercus garryana) California Black (Q. kelloggii)
Range – North /South orientation
Population structure – long-lived (500 yrs!), intermittent recruitment, fire-dependent
Habitat components Grassland ground layer (Native
American fire mgt) Open understory Proclivity for cavities Mast (acorns) – Food
Western Oak Demographics
Q. garryana
Post-European Settlement • Land use conversion: rural residential, (ex. I-5 Corridor, Puget Trough south to California), vineyards • Loss of recurring fire regime: influx of invasive weeds, conifer encroachment
(densification), wildfire risk • Extensive fragmentation
National Park Service
Importance of Oak Woodlands Oregon Conservation Strategy: Coast Range: once almost 1 million acres (now 4%) Willamette Valley: 400,000 ac (< 7%) American Bird Conservancy: Lists oak savannahs in the top 20 threatened bird habitats in the U.S. - importance for bird species richness Over 200 species of wildlife rely on oak habitats for a portion of their life cycle Oak obligate species: acorn woodpecker, oak titmouse…endemic plants Federally listed species: Kincaid’s lupine, Gentner’s fritillary, Fender’s blue butterfly Migratory birds: A Federal Trust resource Success story: Delisting/Post de-listing monitoring of Columbian white-tailed deer.
Our Restoration Challenges • Identification of where to work (where do we start?) (money’s
tight) – Utilization of TNC Oak Analysis (GAP type analysis) and other analysis
to determine the place to start. – Utilizing local knowledge of threatened oak stands.
• Landowner desire/personality • Fear of modifications to their land use or management (ranching,
firewood source, etc.). • Fear of what their property will look like post restoration. • Fear of using prescribed fire, mechanical manipulation, chemical
application • Fear of regulation • Lack of resources (funding, partners, etc.) • Timeline – Mother Nature (work windows)
How did we address challenges?
• Reach out to landowners through direct mailings, landowner field days, and local SWCD’s newsletters
• Farm Bill program. Ranchers already were coming into NRCS for technical & financial assistance.
• Across the fence: landowner to landowner • Consider development of local workgroups • Maintain strong communication • Maintain flexibility (switched duties)
Partnership Organization • Lomakatsi working with USFWS PFW programs on smaller restoration projects in
Klamath Basin (pre-2008). • 2010 - Dave Ross – Discussions with NRCS DC, suggested NRCS Cooperative
Conservation Partnership Initiative. Map on next slide. • It was important to find the “right entity” that was set up to be able to work with
multiple agencies, handle workforce issues, and manage multiple government/etc. funding sources. Lomakatsi stepped up
• Technical “assignments”: USFWS: Technical assistance, Environmental compliance (ESA, Cultural Resources), PFW funding Lomakatsi: Provide, coordinate and train restoration workforce/prescribed fire NRCS: Restoration funding (WHIP, EQIP), identify restoration sites
• KEY POINT: Decision to use the regional and state boundaries
as a funding strategy. • Meet regularly, communicate regularly, NO EGOs
In August of 2010, a formal partnership was established to address threats to oak habitats within targeted “biological hot spots” on private lands across Douglas, Jackson and Siskiyou Counties.
CENTRAL UMPQUA-MID-KLAMATH OAK HABITAT COOPERATIVE CONSERVATION
PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE
Technical support, Funding,
Landowner Contracts,
Project oversight
Project Sponsor Partnership Lead,
Restoration Design, Implementation
Multi-Party Monitoring,
Science delivery,
Environmental Compliance,
Funding, Agreements,
Oak CCPI Project Objectives:
1) Protect and promote the development of habitat for oak associated wildlife
2) Curtail the decline of oak associated plant communities by reducing existing threats
3) Improve watershed health and function
California Black Oak (Quercus kelloggii) Oregon White Oak (Quercus garrayana) Brewer’s Oak (Quercus garryana breweri)
1) Thinning, Utilization / Weed Control 2) Hand Pile / Swamper Burning
4) Native Grass Seeding
Oak Restoration Implementation
3) Prescribed Fire
Before and After
Ecological Forestry
“Ecological forestry" utilizes the principles of natural forest development, including the role of natural disturbances, to guide maintenance and restoration of forests. (Franklin, J. F and K. N. Johnson, 2011)
Thinning guidelines for ecological enhancement of Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana) stands with recent or non-existent conifer invasion (M. Cocking, November 2011)
Conifer-Encroached
Single-Stem
Oak Cluster
Continuous woodland Low-Branch/Edge Structure
Alternative guidelines developed by Lomakatsi for vegetation treatments to preserve, enhance, and promote the structural diversity, ecological function and overall health of Oregon white oak ecosystems.
Oak CCPI Workforce
Training, Capacity
Development
Programmatic Administrative
Staff
Technical Forestry Personnel
Timber Operators
Service Forestry Crews
Youth Engagement & Education in Oak Restoration
Providing youth with educational experiences in ecosystem restoration
through hands-on workforce training and employment designed to
inspire exploration and interest in natural resource career paths.
Program success and accomplishments – here’s what happened
• 2,000 acres of oak treatments • 30 private landowners participated • Future potential: 100-150 landowners
Implementation & Effectiveness Monitoring • Combining bird point sampling with vegetation sampling
• Bird monitoring / Intensive vegetation monitoring: Pre and post-treatment study design.
• Implementation monitoring: Qualitatively evaluate treatments
Lessons Learned • Recognize at the beginning what each partner can bring to
the partnership. • Solidify the partnership. • Identify your goals and collectively work towards achieving
them. Be S M A R T. • Don’t impede the success of your partnership
because of administrative issues. • Don’t be afraid to switch gears –
Adaptive Management. • Document what you’ve accomplished.
North American Bird Conservation Initiative, U.S. Committee, 2013. The State of the Birds 2013 Report on Private Lands. U.S. Department of Interior: Washington, D.C. 48 pages.
So, where do we go from here? • Formation of oak working groups
Klamath-Siskyou Oak Network Douglas Oak Working Group
• Creation of Mission Statements. • Creation of Memorandums of Understanding.
…No single “champion” but multiple “champions” of the cause.
• Money’s tight, partnering is the way to go. • Shovel ready projects.
• Expand tribal workforce restoration initiatives to other Native American tribes
• Continue to collaboratively “fine tune”
NRCS Farm Bill practices more specific to oak restoration.
So, where do we go from here?
Cast of characters
The Klamath Tribes Bureau of Land Management Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon Department of Forestry Oregon State University Extension Service California Department of Fire and Forestry Douglas Soil Water Conservation District Douglas County Fire Protection Association The Nature Conservancy-Southwest Oregon Northern California Resource Center Defenders of Wildlife Colestin Rural Fire District Jackson County Small Woodlands Association Southern Oregon Land Conservancy Oregon Oaks Working Group Grayback Forestry
Who we are • Marko Bey, Executive Director, Lomakatsi
Restoration, Ashland, Oregon (www.lomakatsi.org)
• David Ross, Department of the Interior, National Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Program, Lakewood, Colorado (formerly USFWS Klamath Falls Fish & Wildlife Office, Klamath Falls, Oregon
• CalLee Davenport, USFWS, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, Portland, Oregon
Questions?
