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:
1/11/2008
Subject: FY2007 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 answered using a set of sample protocols that measure stand attributes
and their changes as a result of the Pilot project. Data is collected to describe stand structure,
fuels, 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 Plans
The original 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. Thirty-five units were randomly selected in 2001 and another
35 units were selected in 2002 from the pools of units approved for implementation each year.
Due to the mitigation measure that prevented treating any stands in suitable California spotted
owl habitat, all of the 70 sample plots fell within DFPZ treatments on the eastside of the SierraCascades 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.
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
To date, a total of 13 units have been sampled at one year post-treatment and 5 units have been
sampled at five years post-treatment. The 2007 monitoring results marks the first year that
treated units were ready for fifth year monitoring
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. Three of
the group selection treatments have been monitored for one-year post-treatment monitoring
through 2007.
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.
Results
As more units become available for one-year and five-year post treatment monitoring, the need
for a consistent methodical approach to evaluate treatments against the above listed monitoring
questions as well as overall HFQLG pilot project objectives has become increasingly apparent.
There is a high level of variability in vegetation types and stand conditions within the monitoring
sample pool, as well as varying project-specific objectives. Often, post treatment monitoring
results indicate some stand conditions meet treatment parameters whereas others do not. Taken
individually, these measurements don’t fully determine whether overall treatment objectives
have been met. VMS is currently working with research personnel in PSW as well as District and
Forest specialists to develop a process of analysis to both provide a standard set of vegetation
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
and fuels measures as well as an evaluation of the effectiveness of treatments at meeting HFQLG
and habitat objectives. We are using the 2007 monitoring results to help develop and test the
analysis process. This process will allow us to evaluate treatment effectiveness and vegetation
conditions at both the individual treatment unit and across the pilot project in a consistent
manner.
Overall, post treatment monitoring results in 2007 indicate little change in snags and generally
less than a 10% reduction in canopy cover. Most of the units monitored in 2007 were near or
below 50% canopy cover prior to treatment, and results indicate that most trees removed were
smaller understory and midstory trees that didn’t appreciably add to overstory canopy cover.
Large trees were preserved where they existed. There was a marked decrease in large down logs
in Last Chance, Pittville and Red Clover units. Shrub cover was reduced in most units where it
occurred, and remained appreciably below pre-treatment levels by year 5. Noxious weeds were
detected in Last Chance, Pittville and Antelope Border units where none had been detected pretreatment.
Treatment units Antelope Border 5 and 8 burned in the Antelope complex this summer prior to
monitoring. Canopy cover dropped from roughly 50% to near 30% in these units and surface
fuels including large down logs were largely reduced. Basal area in Unit 5 increased slightly
whereas in Unit 8 it decreased slightly. The overstory in these treatment units appears to have
survived relatively intact and indicates effectiveness of the DFPZ treatments.
Conclusion
The amount of post treatment data is still relatively sparse with only five DFPZ units monitored
for fifth year post treatment, and first year monitoring still pending on most DFPZ units. Two
additional group selection units were measured for post-first year monitoring in 2007. A total of
23 units have been monitored for either 1-year or 5-year post-treatment monitoring to date. The
results to date indicate the retention of large trees, significant reduction of ladder fuels, reduction
of down woody fuels to below maximum acceptable levels, and a loss of large down wood in
some cases. Canopy cover is usually reduced by treatments, however canopy cover varies
considerably, both pre and post treatment. While a few stands retained over 50% canopy cover
after treatment, others dropped to well below 40% cover. Over one third of the units monitored
to date showed no change to a slight increase in canopy cover one year after treatment. The
ability to answer monitoring questions 1 through 4 remains limited as most of the units
monitored to date fall outside of California Spotted Owl suitable habitat.
Caring for the Land and Serving People
Printed on Recycled Paper