United States
Department of
Agriculture
File Code:
Route To:
Forest
Service
Region
Seven
Vegetation Mgmt. Sol. Enterprise Team
875 Mitchell Avenue
Oroville, CA 95965-4699
(530) 534-7984 Text (TDD)
(530) 534-6500 Voice
Date:
02/02/2009
Subject: FY2008 Treated Stand Structure Monitoring Report for HFQLG Pilot Project
To:
Colin Dillingham, HFQLG Monitoring Team Leader
Overview of Treated Stand Structure Monitoring current status, prepared by Lauren Payne,
Silviculturist and Co-Lead, VMS Enterprise Team.
The following monitoring questions relate to the stand structure attributes and the effect of the
Pilot project on these attributes.
1): Do Silviculture and fuel treatments meet California Spotted Owl Interim Direction, fuels,
and other stand objectives?
2): Are the desired abundance and distribution of snags and logs achieved in DFPZs and Group
Selections?
3): Does the implementation of silvicultural prescriptions produce or retain desired stand
elements such as logs, canopy cover, large trees, and early seral stage?
4): Do silvicultural treatments meet California spotted owl interim direction, and fuel and stand
objectives over time?
These questions are being addressed using a set of sample protocols that measure stand attributes
and their changes as a result of treatments under the Pilot project. Data is collected to monitor
stand elements such as tree size and species distribution, average tree diameter, canopy cover,
surface fuel loading, and understory vegetation for both pre- and post-treatment conditions. The
methodology employed was formatted using the monitoring procedures of the Forest Health Pilot
except that some modifications were made to measure understory vegetation attributes and
canopy cover.
DFPZ Sampling Overview
The original sample plan was designed to sample a set of 70 units pre-treatment, and at one year
and five years post treatment. The initial sample pool of 70 units was unbiased toward any
specific treatment, forest type, or location. Sampling of 70 randomly selected units was
conducted in 2001 and 2002. Due to the mitigation measure within the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan
Amendment (SNFPA) 2001 ROD, no stands were treated within suitable California spotted owl
habitat. Consequently all of the 70 sample plots fell within DFPZ treatments outside of
California spotted owl habitat.
In 2005, the HFQLG Steering Committee decided to fund the establishment of 70 additional
DFPZ monitoring samples. No new plots were established in 2005 due to a lack of candidate
stands however 21 new monitoring samples were established in 2006. In 2007, 30 new
monitoring samples were established and pre-treatment data collected. In 2008 post-1 year
Caring for the Land and Serving People
Printed on Recycled Paper
United States
Department of
Agriculture
Forest
Service
Region
Seven
Vegetation Mgmt. Sol. Enterprise Team
875 Mitchell Avenue
Oroville, CA 95965-4699
(530) 534-7984 Text (TDD)
(530) 534-6500 Voice
treatment data was collected on 44 DFPZ units and post-5 year data was collected on 1 DFPZ
unit.
To date, a total of 57 DFPZ units have been sampled at one year post-treatment and 6 DFPZ
units have been sampled at five years post-treatment.
Group Selection Sampling Plans
After approval of the Sierra Nevada Framework Project Amendment in 2004, HFQLG projects
began to include Group Selection treatments. As a result, the HFQLG Steering Committee
initially decided to fund the establishment of an additional set of 70 plots specifically to monitor
group selection treatments. The HFQLG Steering Committee decided to increase the sample set
for group selection treatments to a total of 140 plots in 2005. The same sampling strategy used
for DFPZ monitoring is used to monitor the group selection treatments. Group selection units
will be randomly selected at a rate of up to ten units per project until a total of 140 is reached.
The data set for group selection treatments will be considered as a discrete sample pool. The
results from the group selection monitoring will not be combined with the results of the DFPZ
monitoring.
To date, pre-treatment data has been collected on 47 group selection treatment units. Post-1 year
data was collected on three group selection units in 2007, and an additional four units were
sampled in 2008.
The forest stands being monitored in this sample set are not limited to the actual group selection
units since the effects of treatment activities will extend beyond the boundary of each 0.5 to 2.0
acres unit. Potential changes to the stand structure of adjacent areas may result from
construction of skid trails and landings to remove harvested trees; damage of adjacent trees from
timber falling; and potential wind throw of trees along the edge of group selection units.
Therefore, the stands where the plots are installed consist of an entire vegetation polygon from
the PLAS vegetation map developed by VESTRA Resources containing the selected group
selection units. In some instances a subdivision of a vegetation polygon may be selected. The
criteria for selection of a subdivision of a vegetation polygon is based on other topographic
(ridge / drainage) or cultural features (road / trail) that would limit the extent of the treatment
activities to only a portion of a vegetation polygon. Plots are randomly located within the
vegetation polygon and may or may not actually intersect the group selection unit.
Data Migration and Monitoring Analysis
Year 2008 marked a transition of entering TSSM data directly into the standardized National
Common Stand Exam (CSE) database. Additionally, all data that had previously been entered
into the Region 5 FIA database was migrated over to CSE. Due to the complexity of the TSSM
sample design, the breadth of data type collected, and less than 100% correlation between the
two database systems, the data migration required numerous steps and a component of the prioryears data required input by hand. The VMS enterprise team worked closely with NRIS
Caring for the Land and Serving People
Printed on Recycled Paper
United States
Department of
Agriculture
Forest
Service
Region
Seven
Vegetation Mgmt. Sol. Enterprise Team
875 Mitchell Avenue
Oroville, CA 95965-4699
(530) 534-7984 Text (TDD)
(530) 534-6500 Voice
personnel help to troubleshoot migration issues and verify data consistency between the
programs. This data migration was conducted for two purposes; the FIA program and database
is no longer supported by the Agency, and successful migration to the CSE platform allows data
access to a much larger audience, as well as the ability to load the data into the National Forest
Vegetation Simulator (FVS) program for further summarization and analysis. The CSE program
was not in use in Region 5 for the first few years of TSSM data collection. While the use of the
CSE and FVS programs for TSSM data processing and analysis is new to 2008, it does appear to
provide better streamlined data access and ability to conduct analysis.
In addition to the data migration work was begun in developing an analysis process that would
take into account the various direction and decision documents applicable to each project, and
the more general questions presented in the HFQLG Monitoring Plan. There are currently three
distinct planning intervals that represent some variation in management direction and objectives.
They are:
• 1999 – 2001; Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Act, Forest LRMPs and individual
project NEPA
• 2001 – 2004; Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Act, 2001 Sierra Nevada Forest
Plan Ammendment, Forest LRMPs and individual project NEPA
• 2004 – Present; Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Act, 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest
Plan Ammendment, Forest LRMPs and individual project NEPA
While the primary intent of the HFQLG TSSM monitoring is not to monitor effectiveness in
meeting individual project objectives as identified above, it does seem imperative to include
these considerations when answering the HFQLG monitoring questions.
The four HFQLG stand structure monitoring questions (page 1, above) are further expanded in
the monitoring plan to include:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
Has habitat for California Spotted Owl been maintained? (Q1, Q4)
Has habitat for California Spotted Owl been enhanced? (Q1, Q4)
Has habitat suitability for carnivores been maintained? (Q1, Q3)
Has habitat suitability for carnivores been enhanced? (Q1, Q3)
Has the amount of early seral forage been maintained? (Q3)
Has the amount of early seral forage been enhanced? (Q3)
Has the number of snags > 15 inches DBH been maintained? (Q1, Q2)
Has the number of snags > 15 inches DBH been increased? (Q1, Q2)
Has the amount of logs > 20 inches in diameter been maintained? (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)
Has the amount of logs > 20 inches in diameter been increased? (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)
Do the fuel conditions meet the DFPZ requirements? Eg. Computed four-foot flame
height at 90-percentile weather. (Q1, Q4)
We are working closely with District Biologist and other specialists to verify and define the
attributes necessary to address if California spotted owl and carnivore habitat has been
maintained and/or improved. We are also working on developing numerical tolerances to define
Caring for the Land and Serving People
Printed on Recycled Paper
United States
Department of
Agriculture
Forest
Service
Region
Seven
Vegetation Mgmt. Sol. Enterprise Team
875 Mitchell Avenue
Oroville, CA 95965-4699
(530) 534-7984 Text (TDD)
(530) 534-6500 Voice
when an attribute has been maintained, enhanced or increased. For example, if 40% canopy
cover is one attribute of habitat suitability, would a data measurement of 39% be considered as
not maintaining habitat suitability. Alternately, if the amount of large snags increases by 0.05
trees per acres is this sufficient to be considered an increase? Additionally, there are multiple
attributes that define habitat and whether it has been maintained or enhanced. This creates the
question whether meeting all or only some attributes within their tolerance level would qualify as
maintaining or enhancing habitat.
In addition to collecting and comparing stand attributes at pre-treatment and years one and five
after treatment, we are working on developing a comprehensive analysis process that takes into
account variation in management direction, numerical tolerances for attributes, and grouping or
ranking of attributes in a manner to make meaningful determinations of achieving objectives.
2008 Data Results
Post-1 year TSSM data was collected on 48 units and post-5 year data was collected on one unit
in 2008. The following is a comparison of pre-treatment to post-1 year data.
Canopy cover decreased appreciably from an average near 50% to 35%. The average tree
diameter increased from 13” to 16” which is consistent with thinning from below and retaining
proportionately more large trees. There was no change in large tree data, indicating large trees
were retained. The number of saplings decreased appreciably from an average near 175 trees per
acre, to 50 trees per acre. Stand basal area, a measure of stand density, decreased by roughly
27%. This basal area decrease is within typical ranges of silviculture “intermediate” thinning
and indicates fairly light thinning. The average crown base height (distance to the lowest live
branches) was raised from 9’ to 14’, consistent with general fuels and fire behavior goals. Shrub
cover did not appreciably change and while herbaceous cover increased slightly, it averaged less
than 10%. Large down wood (downed logs ≥ 20” diameter) decreased appreciably from an
average near 4 tons/acre to 1 ton/acre. Snags also decreased from an average of near 4 snags per
acre to 2 snags per acre. Total down woody fuels (1, 10, 100 and 1,000 hour fuels) decreased
appreciably from an average near 14 tons per acre to 8 tons/acre.
As there was only one unit for post-5 year data collection, analysis is a bit premature. This unit
did not have a preexisting component of large snags or large down wood, and there was no large
tree (<24” DBH) component in the overstory. Other results are consistent with general trends; a
slight increase in canopy cover and average diameter and a slight decrease in crown base height.
Shrub cover increased but remained below pre-treatment levels.
Conclusion
This preliminary analysis indicates that post-1 year conditions reflect general fuels objectives of
reduced surface and ladder fuels, raised average crown base and reduced canopy density. Stand
conditions appear to meet general silviculture objectives of retaining overstory trees while
reducing stand density to provide growing space for residual trees. Wildlife habitat elements
Caring for the Land and Serving People
Printed on Recycled Paper
United States
Department of
Agriculture
Forest
Service
Region
Seven
Vegetation Mgmt. Sol. Enterprise Team
875 Mitchell Avenue
Oroville, CA 95965-4699
(530) 534-7984 Text (TDD)
(530) 534-6500 Voice
including large snags (>15” DBH) and large down wood have both appreciably decreased and
may warrant further review and adaptive management.
Caring for the Land and Serving People
Printed on Recycled Paper