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