Northern California Botanists1 Special Workshop / Session Field‐based Studies on Whitebark Pine in California ‐ A Data Sharing Session Chico, California Bell Memorial Union (Room 210) January 15, 2014, 9:00 a.m. – 2:30 p.m. 1
Please see N California Botanists website for more details including directions, PARKING, lodging options, etc. http://www.norcalbotanists.org/symposia/symposium2014.htm Northern California Botanists’ Workshop Chico, California (Bell Memorial Union, Room TBD) January 15, 2014, 9:00 a.m. ‐2:30 p.m. Field‐based Studies on Whitebark Pine in California – A Data Sharing Session23 Sierra Nevada Area – Dr. Connie Millar, Moderator 9:00 – 9:20 Climate, Bark Beetles, and High‐Elevation Pines (Whitebark and Limber) in the Great Basin: Not Always a Bad Combination – Dr. Connie Millar 9:20 – 9:40 Preliminary Observations and Reflections on Whitebark Pine Regeneration on June Mountain, Following a Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak – Dr. Martin MacKenzie 9:40 – 10:00 Effects of Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak on Whitebark Pine Stand Structure, Inyo National Forest, California, Dr. Marc D. Meyer and Dr. Hugh D. Safford 10:00 – 10:20 Status of Mountain Pine Beetle in Whitebark Pine Ecosystems in California – Beverly M. Bulaon 10:20 – 10:40 10:40 – 11:00 Break Current Status of White Pine Monitoring Project in the Sierra Nevada Network Inventorying and Monitoring Program – Dr. Jonathan Nesmith4 2
We are in the process of posting the presentations to a public website. In the interim, for further information, please contact Diane Ikeda, PSW Region, FS, at dikeda@fs.fed.us. 3
15 minute presentations followed by 5 minutes for Q&As, Speakers noted in bold; 4
Confirmed ‐ will join remotely 11:00 – 11:20 11:20 – 11:30 11:30 – 11:50 11:50 – 12:10 12:10 –12:40 A Layered View of the Whitebark Pine – Clark’s Nutcracker Mutualism – Ronald M. Lanner High‐Elevation Five Needle Pine Cone Collections in California and Nevada, Dr. Tom Blush and Dr. Det Vogler [Conservation Strategies for Whitebark Pine: A Case Study from the Lake Tahoe Basin – Dr. Patricia Maloney –unable to attend, handout will be provided] Field Assessment of Whitebark Pine in the Sierra Nevada – Sara M. Taylor, Daniel Hastings, and Dr. Julie Evens Wilderness Values and Whitebark Pine on the Eldorado National Forest, Pacific Southwest Region, California – Cecilia Reed Box Lunch or Bring Your Lunch5
Klamath, Cascade & Modoc Areas – Dr. Julie Evens, Moderator 12:40 – 1:00 1:00 – 1:20 Disease and Pest Incidence in Whitebark Pine Populations in Crater Lake and Lassen Volcanic National Park – Jenell I. Jackson, Daniel A. Sarr, and Dr. Erik S. Jules Structure and Dynamics of Whitebark Pine Forests in the Warner Mountains – Pete Figura 1:20 – 1:40 Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak in the Warner Mountains: Implications for Whitebark Pine – Danny Cluck 1:40 – 2:00 Assessing and Mapping Whitebark Pine in Northern California – Michael E. Kauffmann 5
If you are interested in a box lunch, please email your order on the attached form to dikeda@fs.fed.us by January 3 cob. Please bring cash or check to make payment on January 15th directly to the bakery, or designee. 1
2:00 – 2:20 Role of Fire and Its Importance as an Ecological Factor for Whitebark Pine, Its Habitat and Ecosystem – Dr. Neil Sugihara structure. Ignitions do occur at a high rate in the subalpine environment, but short fire seasons and limited fuel keep the frequency of fire influencing individual trees to a minimum. Although fires are relatively common, they are very small in scale (usually a single tree) play minimal role in maintaining California’s whitebark pine stands.
Taylor, Sara M., Daniel Hastings and Julie Evens, California Native Plant Society, 2707 K Street, Suite 1, Sacramento, CA 95816, staylor@cnps.org FIELD ASSESSMENT OF WHITEBARK PINE IN THE SIERRA NEVADA Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) is a dominant vegetation type in the subalpine zone of southwestern Canada and the western U.S., including the Sierra Nevada north to the Warner and Klamath mountains in California. However, few stands have been visited in the field to confirm its presence, abundance, and status, and vegetation mapping in National Forests of California has been done remotely by the US Forest Service through the CALVEG system. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS), working in collaboration with the US Forest Service, initiated field surveys in the summer of 2013 to assess the extent and status of whitebark pine in areas lacking ground surveys. Specific survey sites were selected in three National Forests (NFs) in California: Sequoia, Eldorado and Stanislaus. We implemented the CNPS/CDFW vegetation rapid assessment protocol to assess areas mapped by CalVEG as dominant whitebark pine, and we included additional features to assess population size, status, and impacts such as the native mountain pine beetle (MPB) and the non‐
native white pine blister rust (WPBR), as well as environmental/habitat descriptions. We collected data to confirm and map undocumented whitebark pine stands in the Eldorado and Stanislaus NFs, as well as negative data where it was previously documented in maps but not found in the field in Sequoia NF. We will discuss the status of whitebark pine where it is patchily experiencing impacts from MPB and WPBR in areas surveyed, and provide input on long‐term monitoring and future areas for assessment.
2
12
conditions and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value. Additionally there are uses that are prohibited in the Wilderness. Prohibited Uses (c) Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act (including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area), there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area.
Sugihara, Neil PhD, Fire Ecologist, Fire & Aviation Management, US Forest Service, 3237 Peacekeeper Way, McClellan, CA 95652, 916‐
640‐1054, nsugihara@fs.fed.us ROLE OF FIRE AND ITS IMPORTANCE AS AN ECOLOGICAL FACTOR FOR WHITEBARK PINE, ITS HABITAT AND ECOSYSTEM Throughout the western United States, whitebark pine forests are known to be adapted to the regular occurrence of fire. Whitebark pine has several characteristics which make it resistant to fire. In these stands, other high elevation tree species represent competition for the site, and the regular occurrence of fire maintains whitebark pine as the dominant tree. Whitebark pine is considered to be a fire dependent forest type in most of its geographic range. However, the stands within California are subalpine trees on the edge of the species range and rarely occur on sites that are productive enough to develop continuous fuel layers. Thus fire is not an important factor in maintaining stand integrity or 11
ABSTRACTS Bulaon, Beverly M., Forest Entomologist, USDA Forest Service bbulaon@fs.fed.us STATUS OF MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE IN WHITEBARK PINE ECOSYSTEMS IN CALIFORNIA The mountain pine beetle is a native bark beetle that attacks several species of pine in western forests. In California, it particularly favors lodgepole and 5‐needled pines (western white, sugar, whitebark, limber, and foxtail). Since 2005, outbreaks of this beetle have occurred throughout its host range in the state; previously infested areas have intensified in levels of mortality, and movement into green stands is still being detected. Whitebark pine stands have been especially hard hit, with overstory canopy losses of up to 75% in many areas. While the loss is devastating, there are environmental and possible climatic factors contributing to the current unprecedented activity of this insect in the west. Cluck, Danny, Entomologist, Forest Health Protection, US Forest Service, 2550 Riverside Drive, Susanville, CA 96130, 530‐252‐6431, dcluck@fs.fed.us MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE OUTBREAK IN THE WARNER MOUNTAINS: IMPLICATIONS FOR WHITEBARK PINE Beginning in about 2004, mountain pine beetle populations and corresponding tree mortality in the Warner Mountains of the Modoc National Forest began to increase and are now occurring at an epidemic scale. A monitoring project was implemented in 2010 to capture existing conditions and monitor short and long‐term changes in whitebark pine ecosystems resulting from insect and disease agents in the Warner Mountains. Information such as understory species composition, tree species, tree size class, tree diameter, cone production, presence of white pine blister rust, and presence of multiple species of insect pests, was collected. Additional plots were installed on the Klamath and Shasta‐Trinity NFs in 2012 and 2013 to expand whitebark pine monitoring in northern California and to compare with the Warner Mountain project. Conditions in 2010 indicated that mountain pine beetle was attacking and killing whitebark pines greater than 5” dbh (average size of attacked tree = 10.9” dbh), mostly in denser stands with a high proportion of larger diameter trees. Younger and smaller diameter trees are occasionally being attacked by twig beetles, Pityogenes spp. and Pityopthorus spp. White pine blister rust was confirmed or suspected on 50% of plots but only 1.7% of trees. Infections were limited to individual branches on larger trees and were not found on whitebark pine saplings or seedlings The aim of the monitoring project is to provide early detection of potential downward population trends and perhaps allow for more effective management intervention. Also, monitoring information from these parks will contribute meaningfully to the broader regional assessment of the status and trend of white pine species across western North America. Within SIEN parks, monitoring began in Yosemite, Kings Canyon, and Sequoia National Park in 2011 with the installation of 18 of a planned 108 randomly located quarter hectare plots. Each plot will be re‐visited every three years in a rotating panel design. Both whitebark and foxtail pine will be monitored. More information about the SIEN high elevation white pine monitoring protocol can be found here: Figura, Pete. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Redding, CA 9600, Pete.Figura@wildlife.ca.gov STRUCTURE AND DYNAMICS OF WHITEBARK PINE FORESTS IN THE WARNER MOUNTAINS To study the structure and dynamics of the extensive whitebark pine stands in the Warner Mountains, I established permanent plots at regular elevations along systematic transects near Eagle Peak. Over 2000 stems within 44 plots were initially marked and inventoried in 1994. I revisited the plots in 2006 and 2012 to determine the fate of individual stems. In the study area, whitebark pine forest structure and dynamics vary with elevation. At lower elevations (below approximately 2500 m), stands are characterized by low stem density and basal area, by relatively young, small trees, and by little downed wood and very few snags. The age structure of these stands suggests they began to develop in the late 19th century as whitebark pine expanded into sagebrush‐steppe habitat. Higher elevation stands generally exhibit structural characteristics that suggest suggesting old, self‐
perpetuating stands: uneven diameter and age distributions, individual trees of great size and age, occasional fire scars, occasional snags, and greater amounts of downed wood. Other structural components (density, basal area, tree height and maximum diameter) of these older stands vary with elevation. We have whitebark pine on the Eldorado National Forest, of which the greatest populations are found in our wilderness areas. Today I would like to provide an overview of wilderness law, regulation and policy and a perspective on whitebark pine and its associated habitat and its value in the wilderness areas on the national forest. Any conservation strategy for this species must consider the Wilderness Act in its design. A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural 1
10
http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/sien/monitor/forests.cfm.
Reed, Cecilia, Winter Sports & Wilderness, USDA Forest Service, Amador Ranger District, 26820 Silver Drive, Pioneer, CA 95666, ccreed@fs.fed.us, 209‐295‐5984 WILDERNESS VALUES AND WHITEBARK PINE ON THE ELDORADO NATIONAL FOREST, PSW REGION, CALIFORNIA pine (Pinus flexilis, 1986‐1994) and whitebark pine (P. albicaulis, 2006‐2012) in eastern California and the Nevada Great Basin. White pine blister rust was not involved with these events or at these locations (although dwarf mistletoe was in some situations), providing an opportunity to more clearly understand relationships of high‐elevation pine forest health, climate, and drought than when rust is present. The mortality conditions and environmental contexts for both species, both events, and throughout the study area were similar, and characterized by the following: multi‐year drought intersecting with warm(ing) background temperatures; sites with high climatic water deficit; north‐facing stands near the species’ lower elevation range; slopes without significant water catchment above; young (100‐200 yr) stands with closed canopies; small areas of mortality (15‐200 ha); within‐stand mortality averaging < 70%; co‐
dominant trees of the same size and age class surviving the events. I discuss the potential adaptive value of these mortality episodes, given the apparent rapid increase in genetic fitness and improvement in silvical conditions for the species. I offer some optimism that such bark‐beetle events in the absence of exotic pathogens are part of a natural system by which pine species accommodate influences including drought, warming temperatures, soil‐moisture stress, and native beetles. I further speculate on potential futures in regard to white pine blister rust in this region. Nesmith, Jonathan, Ph.D., Ecologist, Inventory and Monitoring Program, Sierra Nevada Network ‐ National Park Service, Sequoia National Park, 47050 Generals Highway, Three Rivers, CA 93271, jonathan_nesmith@nps.gov Whitebark pine regeneration is occurring at all elevations, but sapling and seedling density are uniformly lower than that of tree density. Between 1994 and 2012, the diameter of whitebark stems in young/invading stands increased faster than that of stems in older stands. The diameter of 47% of sampled stems in young/invading stands increased by two‐fold or greater, while only 3% of stems in older stands doubled in diameter. Cone production was observed in trees as young as 36 years old. Stem mortality was limited (0.22% of stems/year) between 1994 and 2006 and may have been primarily driven by self‐thinning. However, between 2006 and 2012 the annual rate of stem mortality increased over five‐fold and the mountain pine beetle emerged as the primary mortality factor. Between 2006 and 2012, 5.4% of inventoried stems either succumbed to or were infected by mountain pine beetle. In 2012 mountain pine beetle damage was evident on all study transects and in 23% of plots. White pine blister rust is rare in the study area (0.34% of live stems in 2012). White pines are foundational species in many subalpine ecosystems and are currently experiencing population declines due to several anthropogenic stressors. The Sierra Nevada Network Inventory & Monitoring Program, in concert with the Klamath Network and Upper Columbia basin Network, has developed a long‐term monitoring protocol to examine white pine community dynamics throughout the Pacific West Region’s parks. Jackson, Jenell I.1, Daniel A. Sarr2, and Erik S. Jules1 1
Department of Biological Sciences, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521 USA, erik.jules@humboldt.edu 2
Klamath Network, National Park Service, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA DISEASE AND PEST INCIDENCE IN WHITEBARK PINE POPULATIONS IN CRATER LAKE AND LASSEN NATIONAL PARKS Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) is a crucial component of sub‐
alpine forests in western North America. Unfortunately, whitebark pine is currently threatened by a suite of factors including fire suppression, climate change, the exotic pathogen white pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola), and the native mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae). Only a limited number of monitoring efforts have been conducted in the southern Cascades of Oregon and California and therefore much 9
2
CURRENT STATUS OF THE WHITE PINE MONITORING PROJECT IN SIEN PARKS of the status regarding whitebark pine in this area is unknown. We are currently working to establish 30 50 x 50 m long‐term monitoring plots in Crater Lake and Lassen National Parks. Thus far, we have completed 20 plots in each park and the remainder will be completed in summer 2014. In each plot, individuals of all tree taxa >1.37 m in height were tagged and both the diameter at breast height (dbh) and height were recorded. In addition, the presence of white pine blister rust and mountain pine beetle were assessed on all whitebark pine. In Crater Lake, 16% of all whitebark pine in our plots were dead. On living whitebark pine, blister rust infection was found infecting 61% of trees, while mountain pine beetle activity was found on 2% of trees. Whitebark pine in Crater Lake are also experiencing encroachment by mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana); 64% of the total basal area in our plots was hemlock, which is over three times that of whitebark pine (20%). In contrast, only 5% of whitebark pine in our plots were dead in Lassen. On living whitebark pine in Lassen, blister rust infection was found infecting 55% of trees, while mountain pine beetle activity was found on 2% of trees. The basal area of mountain hemlock (82% of total basal area) was nearly than four times that of whitebark pine (17%). These results indicate that both white pine blister rust and mountain pine beetle are important factors affecting whitebark pine populations in the southern Cascades. Moreover, Lassen National Park appears to have more white pine blister rust than previously thought and increases in mortality may be observed in the near future.
Kauffmann, Michael E. Educator, Humboldt State University, Redwood Science Project, 1 Harpst Street, Arcata, CA 95521, mek31@humboldt.edu | http://www.conifercountry.com/ ASSESSING AND MAPPING WHITEBARK PINE IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA In the summer of 2013 I visited, assessed, and mapped populations of whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) across four National Forests in northern California; Klamath, Shasta‐Trinity, Modoc and Lassen. 3
and tree regeneration. Our results indicate significant changes in stand structure, including the loss of basal area, tree densities, and canopy cover of whitebark pine in MPB‐impacted stands. MPB‐
related mortality was greatest in larger diameter (>20 cm dbh) whitebark pine trees, but whitebark pine mortality was not contingent on the number of trees per cluster. In mortality plots from all sites, there was a shift in the size class distribution of whitebark pine to smaller diameter classes (<15 cm dbh) relative to control plots, resulting in declines in mean tree diameter (all species), maximum tree diameter (whitebark pine), and the number of tree size classes following MPB attack (i.e., reduced structural diversity). Severity of MPB attack was positively related to the mean diameter of whitebark pine trees within stands, suggesting that stands containing larger whitebark pine were more susceptible to MPB attack. Whitebark pine regeneration was greater in MPB‐
impacted plots than control plots at June Mountain and White Wing Mountain, but there was no such difference at Rock Creek. Density of young (<3 year) whitebark pine seedling clusters was positively associated with percentage dead canopy cover and severity of MPB‐
attack, suggesting increased whitebark pine regeneration in response to stand impacts by MPB. All three sites showed a relatively stable production of whitebark pine regeneration at least within the past 50 years, with a pulse of new seedlings in the past 2–
4 years in MPB‐impacted stands. Our results show whitebark pine stands are heavily impacted by MPB outbreaks and suggest low resistance but potentially high resilience to initial attack. Long‐term monitoring will be required to track future patterns of mortality, stand structure, and regeneration in whitebark pine populations of the southern Sierra Nevada. Millar, Connie, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany, California 94706, cmillar@fs.fed.us, 510‐559‐6435
CLIMATE, BARK BEETLES, AND HIGH‐ELEVATION PINES (WHITEBARK AND LIMBER) IN THE GREAT BASIN; NOT ALWAYS A BAD COMBINATION I review the conditions and consequences of two drought‐mediated, bark‐beetle mortality events in high‐elevation populations of limber 8
sensitive or threatened species. A comprehensive cone collection was made from the Lake Tahoe Basin and seed were used for common garden studies to evaluate adaptive phenotypic traits (i.e., phenology, water‐use efficiency, growth, resource allocation patterns) and disease resistance. Population studies and surveys for long‐term monitoring were also conducted to determine species abundance, population trends (in reproduction, survival, mortality, and growth), pathogen and insect pressure, environmental influences (climate, geology, fire, landscape features, land‐use, etc.) and identifying disturbance agents (i.e., white pine blister rust/WPBR, mountain pine beetle/MPB, fire and their historical and current frequency, prevalence, and intensity). Genetic studies from the Lake Tahoe Basin have focused on structure, diversity, adaptations, and extent of gene flow. This integrative approach allowed us to identify four populations of white pines that warrant species restoration. Reasons for restoration include high disease pressure by Cronartium ribicola (WPBR), negative population growth, adverse effects of WPBR on fecundity and survival, mountain pine beetle (MPB) mediated mortality, and loss of genetic variation (a consequence of historical‐logging). Restoration strategies and out‐planting protocols will be further discussed. Meyer, Marc D. 1 and Hugh D. Safford2 1 USDA Forest Service, Sierra National Forest, Clovis, CA mdmeyer@fs.fed.us 2 USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Vallejo, CA, hughsafford@fs.fed.us EFFECTS OF MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE OUTBREAK ON WHITEBARK PINE STAND STRUCTURE, INYO NATIONAL FOREST, CALIFORNIA We monitored whitebark pine populations in three areas of recent (post–2005) and severe mountain pine beetle (MPB)‐induced mortality to evaluate patterns of tree mortality, regeneration, and size class structure in whitebark pine stands of the Inyo National Forest in the southern Sierra Nevada. We also monitored nearby undisturbed ‘control’ sites lacking evidence of recent MPB‐related mortality at two sites (June Mountain and Rock Creek). We established a total of 66 plots (0.05 ha size) and recorded site attributes, tree attributes and health, vegetation and ground cover, 7
Populations here range in size from microsites with only a few trees to extensive stands of many square miles. The health and viability varied within populations as well—depending on biotic and abiotic factors as well as the combined effects of climate change‐induced disturbance. In this presentation we will explore the current status of whitebark pine in three regions—the Klamath, Cascade, and Warner mountains—investigating variability in ecology, phytogeography, and pathology for this imperiled species. Lanner, Ronald M., Forest Biologist, http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/locations/placerville/ USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Institute of Forest Genetics, 2480 Carson Road, Placerville, CA 95667, PINETREE30@COMCAST.NET A LAYERED VIEW OF THE WHITEBARK PINE‐CLARK'S NUTCRACKER MUTUALISM The mutualism of these organisms consists of the bird (Clark's nutcracker) caching in the soil, and leaving uneaten, seeds of the tree (whitebark pine), thus facilitating germination and establishment of the tree. Pine regeneration provides for the needs of future nutcrackers, keeping the system open. The mutualism can be viewed in several contexts, the following of which are pine‐
centric: 1) Ecological ‐‐ Whether the nutcracker is the sole disperser/establisher, where regeneration occurs (soil type, aspect, elevation, topography, plant cover, burn history, etc.), distance from source seeds are cached, frequency of multiple stems resulting from multiple‐seed caches, seed and seedling survival, seed predator evasion, successional status of established stands, stand density, vulnerability of the mutualism to pests, landscape ecology of whitebark pine ecosystems. 2) Dendrological ‐‐ Species characters of the pine that adapt it to dispersal and establishment via nutcracker agency, such as crown 4
conformation, branching pattern, cone structure, seed size and nutrient profile, variable seed dormancy. 3) Evolutionary ‐‐ Includes co‐evolutionary impacts of the mutualists on each other; phylogeny of the pine and its close relatives, and effect of the mutualism on other organisms ("bystanders"). The inescapable conclusion is that the pine's biology can only be comprehended in the context of its mutualism with its disperser. MacKenzie, Martin, Forest Pathologist, State & Private Forestry, Forest Health, Southern Sierra Shared Service Area, Stanislaus National Forest, 19777 Greenley Road, Sonora, CA 95370, 209‐532‐
3671x242, mmackenzie@fs.fed.us PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS AND REFLECTIONS OF WHITEBARK PINE REGENERATION ON JUNE MOUNTAIN, FOLLOWING A MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE OUTBREAK The whitebark pines (Pinus albicaulis) that dominate the flanks the ski‐runs on slopes of the June Mountain Ski resort on June Mountain, CA experienced an outbreak of the native mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) and while the beetle killed the majority of the overstory trees it did not kill any of the “advanced regeneration” that was on the site. After a preliminary walk through of the stand followed by some ring counts of a few seedlings it became obvious that the “seedlings” were not “advanced regeneration” but were better described as being “retarded regeneration. When the ground‐level rings were counted in a 50 cm tall seedling it was revealed that it was over 55 years old. The outermost growth ring of this particular seedling displayed a growth response to the (bark beetle caused) death of the overstory; for the 2012 ring was wider than the previous three combined. In another even smaller seedling it was revealed that the seedling was putting on an annual radial growth of about 5 tracheids per year; a radial growth rate that would have equated to 248 rings per inch. Obviously any proposed process of Ecosystem Restoration will have to involve the protection and release of this retarded regeneration. While, white pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola) has both severely and negatively impacted whitebark pine in the Rockies, the fungus has not yet been observed on June Mountain. Over hundreds of years the climate, at 10,000 ft on June Mountain, has selected seedlings for their ability to survive the local climate and the great majority of the trees killed by the mountain beetle expressed climate resistant genes. As evolutionary selection had screened those trees for their ability to survive the climate rigors of 10,000 ft, it may have screened out genotypes that had genes for rust resistance. By actively managing the process of regeneration foresters can maximize the number of genotypes on the landscape in this way prepare for the ultimate arrival of the blister rust. If in the next couple of decades blister rust arrives, the fungus will immediately begin the process of natural selection for rust resistance. Long term successful re‐establishment of a whitebark dominated ecosystem on June Mountain will be dependent upon getting the greatest number of genotypes on the ground, an allowing the rust to select for those with the rust resistance genes. Upon reflection, the disturbance caused by an outbreak of a native beetle can be used to prepare the ecosystem for the disturbance that will be caused by the eventual arrival of an exotic disease. While we may lack the financial resources to fund a blister rusts resistance and breeding programme for whitebark pine, by silvicultural manipulation we may be able to prepare the ground for nature to conduct a screening for us and enhance our chances of a successful ecological restoration of whitebark pine. Absent such an effort the site may well become Pinus contorta and Abies magnifica var. Critchfieldii dominated. [Maloney, Patricia, Department of Plant Pathology & Tahoe Environmental Research Center, University of California – Davis pemaloney@ucdavis.edu – unable to attend, handout will be provided.] CONSERVATION STRATEGIES FOR WHITEBARK PINE: A CASE STUDY FROM THE LAKE TAHOE Gene conservation through cone collections is a fundamental step in developing conservation and restoration restoration strategies for 5
6