Spruce Beetle Epidemic and Aspen
Decline Management Response Project
Adaptive
Implementation Strategy
Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and
Gunnison National Forests
Clay Speas – GMUG NF
Why an Adaptive Strategy?
• Extensive acres affected from Spruce beetle and
Aspen Decline.
Acres Affected (aerial detection)
250,000 spruce-fir since (2001-2013) - growing
 238,000 acres aspen decline since (2000-2010) - stable
• Site conditions change rapidly
– Normal NEPA process takes 2+ years to complete
– Green stands
Dead/dying stands
– Beetle behavior dynamics: Eruptive vs Inundative
• Interdisciplinary Team involvement in project
planning and implementation.
• Creation of a collaborative learning environment
Adaptive Implementation Strategy - Assumptions
• Prescriptions and design features – commonly used in the past
• Works within the Southern Rockies Lynx Amendment Framework.
“caps” for vegetation management using exceptions/exemptions.
Quantifies acres of vegetation management activities that do not
require use of exemptions/exceptions.
• Works within the framework of the 2010/2013 Programmatic
Agreement for Bark Beetles, Hazard Tree and Prescribed Fire for
cultural resources.
• Relies on a feedback loop to Forest Leadership Team, stakeholders
and regulatory agencies
• Utilizes “plan, do, check, act” cycle linking strategic planning, tactical
field operations, and reporting of outcomes for management action.
Learning what we do well and recognizing we can do better!
– Plan: ROD and project-level with ID Team
– Do: Implement
– Check: Sale administration, formal project-level reviews and on-going
coordination amongst District staff.
– Act: Forest Leadership Team Management Review
Changes in onthe-ground management
Complete Required Surveys
Spruce-fir
Structural Stand
Conditions
Resiliency Rx (< 40%)
Stand multi-storied and
averages ≥35% DHC
and advanced
regeneration are above
mean snow depth.
Single-storied
Stand is multistoried and <35%
DHC.
Silvicultural Rx: Initiate UAM4 using ITS4
or group selection (<3 tree length – 0.25 to
2 acre openings). Removal centered on
pockets of dead and dying. Harvest
approximately 15 to 25% of the stand area
with small openings tree lengths).
Emphasis for group placement is in pockets
of dead or dying trees. Individual tree
selection will be conducted as needed to
remove beetle affected trees in the matrix…
Minimize or avoid to the extent practicable
impacts to advanced regeneration during
layout and operations. Focus on protecting
high quality advanced regeneration (>35%
DHC) in blocks of 0.3 acres or larger where
it occurs.
Lynx Habitat: suitable.
Recovery and
Resiliency Rx (40-90%)
Stand multi-storied and
averages ≥35% DHC4
and advanced
regeneration are above
mean snow depth.
Silvicultural Rx: Remove all deaddying Spruce-fir and plant where
adequate seed sources are lacking –
Combination of Group Select where
mortality is patchy to larger CC 4 where
mortality is extensive. If needed,
mechanical site preparation will be used
to promote seed germination and
seedling survival. If portions of the stand
are less than 40%, create small
openings (0.25 to 2 acres or <3 tree
lengths) otherwise removal of the entire
stand may be needed.
Lynx Habitat: suitable.
SRLA5: Stand is not multi-storied and
therefore not subject to cap restrictions.
SRLA5: Stand is not multi-storied and
therefore not subject to cap restrictions
Two-storied (multistoried under SRLA)
Silvicultural Rx:
Lynx Habitat:
SRLA:
Stand is multistoried and
<35% DHC.
Silvicultural Rx:
Lynx Habitat:
SRLA:
Recovery Rx (>90%)
Stand multi-storied
and averages ≥35%
DHC4 and advanced
regeneration are
above mean snow
depth.
Stand is multistoried and <35%
DHC.
Silvicultural Rx: Remove all deaddying spruce-fir and plant where
adequate natural seed sources are
lacking and when funds are available.
Larger CC4 will be used where mortality
is extensive. If needed, mechanical site
preparation will be used to promote seed
germination and seedling survival.
Lynx Habitat: If 90% or greater of the
over-story is dead or projected to be
dead in two-years due to high levels of
beetle infestation may be considered
unsuitable lynx habitat if it lacks an live
green understory To goal it to protect
high quality >35% advanced
regeneration to the maximum extent
practicable.
SRLA5: Stand is not multi-storied and
therefore not subject to cap restrictions
Silvicultural Rx:
Lynx Habitat:
SRLA:
Appendix F – Design Features - Spruce Beetle Epidemic and Aspen Decline
Management Response Project
Objective: Use of a standard set of design features that will be applied to a
project to minimize/avoid impacts.
– Design Features – to address laws, regulations, Forest Plan
direction
– Many used on previous projects and proven to be effective.
– Required resource surveys will be completed – Drive use of
design features for protection of specified resources.
– Project ID Team will complete project layout, including treatment
units, location of roads, skid trails and landings, water influence
zones, etc..
– The ID team will also identify applicable project design features
that will be applied to the treatment area.
Project Design Checklist
Objectives:
– Ensures Interdisciplinary Planning of the project.
– Ensures all required surveys have been completed.
– Mechanism to identify specific design features
that should be applied to the project.
– Links project design to provisions in the timber
sale contract.
– Identifies project-specific monitoring if needed.
– Accountability
• Forest Service Specialists and Line Officer sign-off.
• Made available to stakeholders via Forest website.
Project Design Checklist
• ☒Wildlife and Fish Surveys
•  Northern goshawk/forest raptor surveys
•  Dense horizontal cover surveys (Canada lynx)
• Etc.
• Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive species ☐
– Applicable Design Features (list):
1.
2.
3.
District Biologist
Date:
District Ranger
Date:
Monitoring – Project Review
Objective: At least one project would be
reviewed annually by a Forest ID Team
– Implementation monitoring: were applicable
Prescriptions and design features identified and
implemented on the project.
– Effectiveness monitoring: treatments
implemented as designed and were design
features effective
Findings Report
Recommendations:
– Corrective actions if applicable surveys or design
features were not implemented
– Reduce or modify vegetation treatment
operations
– Modify resource protection measures
– Identify if additional monitoring is needed to
address an issue.
– New information/science that may affect current
management direction.
Management Review
Annual Review of “findings” by Forest Leadership Team
– Approve, reject or modify recommendations of review
team.
– Mechanism to consider best available science,
changes in agency policy or direction, or changed
conditions (such as the US Fish and Wildlife Service
listing a species as threatened or endangered).
– Mechanism to modify prescriptions/design features.
– Changed conditions or approaches
scope and
range of effects disclosed in NEPA exceeded.
– ID Team review of NEPA documentation.
– Correction, supplement or revision of the original
decision as specified in FSH 1909.15(18.2).
Annual Reporting to regulatory
agencies
• National Historic Preservation Act –
Programmatic Agreement for Bark Beetles, Hazard
Tree and Fuel Reduction Program and Prescribed
Fire P.A. of 2010/2013.
• Endangered Species Act - Southern Rockies Lynx
Amendment and Programmatic Biological Opinion
for the SBEADMR Project.
• Clean Water Act – Storm water management
(Forest Service BMP implementation/review) and
404 Permit (obtain as needed through life of
project).
Comments and
Feedback
• Overall process
• Is it realistic?
• Does it need to be modified to become more
collaborative?
• Where would you like to be included in the process?
• Immediate comments on Design Features?
• Immediate comments of Silvicultural Prescription Matrix?
• Implementation Monitoring - stakeholder involvement?
• Other suggestions/concerns?