Forecasting the Benefits of Conservation Strategies for Land Managers

Transcription

1 Forecasting the Benefits of Conservation Strategies for Land Managers

2 Pretend You re the Managers of a Great Basin Landscape

3 You Need Answers to These Questions Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York What s the current condition of each ecosystem in your landscape? What is likely to get worse? Which management treatments and how much will improve altered ecosystems? Which management treatments produce the biggest bang for the buck?

4 And the Genie Gave You the Following Report What Does It Tell You?

5 What Does the Scorecard Tell You? Departure from Natural Range of Variability Ecological System Current 2 Years with No Mgmt 2 Years with Ecological Mgmt Strategies Aspen 7 49 Basin Wildrye Low Sagebrush Montane Sagebrush Steppe Riparian Wet Meadow 49 9 Hint: The higher the number, the greater the ecosystem s departure from its natural range. The scale is to, so a score of = very low departure, while a score of 9 = very high departure.

6 Conservation Forecasting Across U.S.

7 Benefits to Land Managers Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York Scorecards of current & future condition Which strategies work Best use of limited funds Where to do treatments Scientific NEPA documentation Help attract $$$ Help build consensus among resource managers and with stakeholders

8 Bodie Hills, California 89, acres BLM & Private Lands Multiple Stakeholders Management Treatment Recommendations July, 29 NEPA Now Underway Bodie Hills Conservation Action Planning $ and Action Underway on Private Lands

9 Great Basin National Park, Nevada 8, acres National Park Service Management Treatments Recommendations Immediate Fire Management Results with Revised FRCC Landscape Conservation December, 2 Forecasting

10 Dixie National Forest, Utah 75, acres Powell Ranger District, U.S. Forest Service Management Treatments Recommendations September, 2 Landscape Conservation Forecasting

11 Fishlake National Forest, Utah 48, acres Fremont River Ranger District Management Treatments Recommendations September, 2 Landscape Conservation Forecasting

12 Ward Mountain, Nevada 8, acres Ely Forest Service Ranger District and BLM Field Office Management Treatments Recommendations September, 2 Ward Mountain Restoration Project: Ecological Assessment and Landscape Strategy

13 Cherokee National Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative 8, acres Multiple Stakeholders Enhanced Conservation Action Planning Management Treatment Recommendations Underway

14 National Conservation Areas: Beaver Dam Wash & Red Hills, Utah 6,5 & 45, acres BLM, FWS & Multiple Stakeholders Management Treatments with Focus on Desert Tortoise Habitat Underway Resource Management Plans

15 Conservation Forecasting Maps Models Metrics

16 Conservation Forecasting Maps Models Metrics

17 Biophysical Settings Dominant vegetation type expected in the physical environment (geology & climate) under a natural disturbance regime.

18 Current Vegetation Classes Actual current vegetation classes for each biophysical setting early to late succession open vs. closed canopy native vs. uncharacteristic

19 LANDFIRE Maps vs. Local Data LANDFIRE national maps for BpS & Current Vegetation Accuracy varies; limited by available plot data May be useful for coarsescale planning Consider developing & using your own local geodata Do your own remote sensing, or Use/manipulate existing remote sensing data, and/or Extrapolate existing plot data = Greater accuracy, better management treatment planning, treatment area maps

20 Conservation Forecasting Maps Models Metrics "All Models Are Wrong But Some Are Useful George E.P. Box

21 Where Do The Models Come From? LANDFIRE developed reference condition models for every ecological system in the U.S.

22 Modifications & Refinements The LANDFIRE models often need to be modified, refined and augmented to reflect local systems

23 Determine Potential Management Actions Ecological System Management Management Action Action Name Description in Model From Class To Class Cost/ Acre Model Notes Management Comments In MidClosed 2% to open and 8% to A; in LateClosed 8% to Open and $5 2% to A; in Open classes % to A and 9% stays Open; A remains A 8% conversion to A based on current conditions with beetles; wuld be lower in future. Assumes ~ block burn including mosaic of systems. Actual outcomes variable; depends upon $5 Used x years after other manangement treatments to maintain open classes Montane Pine RxFire Prescribed fire to increase open & Open and All classes but A early succesion classes A Early Montane Pine RxFire Maintenance Prescribed fire to maintain open classes All Open (C,D) Montane Pine Restoration Treatment Eradicate uncharacteristic oak stands without replanting; pine seed source present OD Oak Dominated A Early $2 8% success rate Noncommercial. Management treatment would be targeted to areas with seed source; estimated % of OD has seed source. Success rate dependent upon continued fire Montane Pine Restoration Eradicate uncharacteristic oak OD Oak TreatmentNo stands without replanting; no pine Dominated Seed Source seed source present A Early $2 % success rate Noncommercial estimated 7% of OD acres does not have seed source. Success rate dependent upon continued fire Montane Pine Restoration Treatment + Planting Eradicate uncharacteristic oak stands with pine replanting OD Oak Dominated A Early $ 85% success rate Noncommerical. Success rate dependent upon continued fire Montane Pine ThinB Thin midclosed class to create more open canopy B Mid Closed C Mid Open $9 Montane Pine RxFireOak prescribed burns where partial pine seed source present OD Oak Dominated A Early $5 8% success rate Montane Pine Thinning Thinning of lateclosed class to create more open canopy E Late Closed D Late Open Remains in class $6 Noncommercial targeted to areas with seed source; estimated % of OD has seed source. Non commerical.

24 Add Management Actions to VDDT

25 Test Alternative Actions and Levels

26 Conservation Forecasting Maps Models Metrics

27 Core Metric Ecological Departure (aka Fire Regime Condition Class) Measures each ecosystem s condition across a landscape Integrated measure based upon vegetation composition, structure and disturbance regimes not just about fire! Departure of current vegetation from its natural range of variability i.e., dissimilarity between expected and current vegetation succession classes Low % 466% 67% High

28 Ecological Departure Worksheet Ecological Departure Workbook Calculations Cherokee National Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative Cove Forest Class Acres in Class A B 67 C 75,545 D 82 4,97 E F G 5,794 Ecological Departure Workbook Calculations NRV % Cherokee National Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative Current % in Class 7 4 Ecological Departure Cove Forest Montane RedChestnut Oak Class A Class A Acres in Class Acres in Class NRV % NRV % Current % in Class Current % in Class 67 2,8 4 7 Ecological Ecological Departure Departure Montane RedChestnut Oak Dry Oak Forest Class A Class A Acres in Class Acres in Class NRV % NRV % Current % in Class Current % in Class 2,8,882 7 Ecological Ecological Departure Departure Dry Oak Forest DryMesic Oak Forest Class A Class A Acres in Class Acres in Class NRV % NRV % Current % in Class Current % in Class,882,24 7 Ecological Ecological Departure Departure DryMesic Oak Forest LowElevation Pine Forest Class A Class A Acres in Class Acres in Class NRV % NRV % Current % in Class Current % in Class, B B C C ,545 4,559 2 NRV % NRV % Current % in Class Current % in Class 564, C C C C B B C C ,955,42,42 2, Acres in Class,28 2,89 NRV % Current % in Class B B 8,224 6,955 Ecological 2 2 Ecological Departure Departure 6 Montane Pine Forest &Woodland Class A B Ecological Departure 82 7 B B 4,559 8,224 Ecological 5 Ecological Departure Departure 2 2 LowElevation Pine Forest Montane Pine Forest &Woodland Class A B Class A B Acres in Class Acres in Class C C C D D 4,97 2, D D 2, D D 87, D D,5, D D, D F F ,864 8 F F F F F F E E 2,9,2 9 2 E E 9,86 2,9 5 2, UYP UBR 2,977 UBR UBR UOD UOD UPD UPD USF USF , ,858,84 Total 2,858 UYP UYP 2, Total Total 99 2,977 7, G G UWP UWP UYP UYP UBR UBR UOD UOD UPD UPD USF USF No FT/Age No FT/Age Total Total ,76 9, ,84, ,24,84,96 7,847 65, G G UWP UWP UYP UYP UBR UBR UOD UOD UPD UPD USF USF No FT/Age No FT/Age Total Total ,25 2,78 4 5,84, G G UWP UWP UYP UYP UBR UBR 6 5 2,78 5, UBR UBR F G UWP UWP UYP UYP 5 Insuff. Data No FT/Age G G 5,794 5,76 UWP UWP 2,28 USF Insuff. Data No FT/Age No FT/Age G G 5 UPD F F UOD 87 E E,2 2, E E 42,864 9, E E E 6 55 UWP UWP 7 67 UYP UBR ,24 974, ,88 4, UOD UOD UPD UPD USF USF No FT/Age No FT/Age Total Total 2 2 7, ,766 2, UOD UOD UPD UPD USF USF No FT/Age No FT/Age Total Total 2 2 7,79 4,4 UOD UPD 4,4 2 USF No FT/Age 2 2,82 2, Total 2,87 82

29 Scorecard of Current Condition

30 ROI Return on Investment Measures which combination of management strategies produces the biggest bang for the buck ROI = the change in ecological departure between no management and another proposed management scenario, divided by the total cost

31 B Mid Closed C Mid Open D Late Open E Late Closed U Oak Dominated % 25% 55% 5% % % % 57% 2% 2% % 6% 5% 2% 2% 9% 4% 6% % 9% 9% 7% 7% % 2% 4% 4% 25% % 7% 7% 2% 7% 4% 7% 9% 2% 6% % Ecological Departure Uncharacteristic Classes , $ ,5 5. Test Alternative Management Scenarios Total Cost $ ROI (vs. Min. Mgmt) Enter Notes Scenarios (enter name below ) Notes $ 2,, $,5, $ 2,22, $.6.7. Enter Management Strategies, Number of Acres/Year, Costs & Number of Years RxFire Years 5 & 62 Thin B to C for first yrs Maintenance Fire ( "off" years) Thinning Restoration Treatment No Seed Source (7% of OD) Restoration Treatmt w Seed Source (% of OD) Restoration Harvest + Pine Planting No mgmt 2 yrs high fire suppression Max ecological mgmt B urn & thin st & last 5 years Fire only mgmt B urn 25 st & last 5 years 25 Mechanical only mgmt ROI mgmt Thin 25 st & 4 last 5 yrs B urn 25 st & 5 last 5 yrs ROI II Cost of Strategy (per acre) Number of Years 5 5 $ 5 $ 25 9 $ 5 5 $ 6 $ 2 $ 2 2 $ 2 2

32 Return on Investment Across Management Scenarios Strategy Worksheet Montane Pine Forest Vegetation Class (describe) type x in left box if highrisk A Early B Mid Closed C Mid Open D Late Open E Late Closed U Oak Dominated NRV 2% % 25% 55% 5% Current Condtion 6% % % % 57% 2% 2,87 acres No mgmt 2 Max ecological yrs high fire mgmt suppression Fire only mgmt Mechanical only mgmt ROI mgmt (revised) % 2% % 6% 5% 2% 2% 2% 8% 47% % % 25% 9% 9% 6% 8% 4% 5% 5% 4% 59% % 6% 4% 6% 7% % 8% 4% Ecological Departure Uncharacteristic Classes Total Cost ROI (vs. Min. Mgmt) $ $ 7,5, $,5, $..6 9,, $.8 85, 5.4

33 Return on Investment Across Systems Ecological Departure Ecological System Acres (rounded to No Mgmt w nearest ) Fire Suppression Cove Forest ROI Mgmt ROI Ave. Annual Cost, 4.7 $ 2, Dry Oak Forest 65, $ 96,5 DryMesic Oak Forest 4, $ 22, LowElevation Pine Forest 2, $ 75,75 Montane Pine Forest 2, $ 5,75 Montane RedChestnut Oak Forest 7, $ 6,45 Northern Hardwood Forest,6 4 n/a Riparian & Floodplain Systems 2,5 9 n/a $ SpruceFir Forest 2, $ 4,5

34 Conservation Forecasting Benefits, Constraints, Lessons Learned

35 Constraints Landscapelevel tool (5, acres +) Perceived as black box Only as good as the data Aquatic systems require supplemental assessment Focal species require supplemental metrics Current spatial model is complex, expensive Ideally should have adaptive model runs over time Cost, especially new remote sensing

36 Conservation Forecasting Benefits

37 Scorecards Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York Ward Mountain Ecological Forecasts June 2, 2 Ecological Departure Ecological System Minimum Preferred Current Mgmt 2 Condtion Mgmt yrs Black Sagebrush Montane Sagebrush Steppe Upland Montane Sagebrush Steppe Mountain 47 Aspen MixedConifer Wyoming Big Sagebrush Basin Wildrye Winterfat Aspen Woodland MontaneSubalpine Riparian Mountain Shrub

38 Which Strategies Work Strategy Worksheet Minim um Mgm t 5 yrs Maxim um Mgm t Stream lined Mgm t % 6% 8% 6% % % 6% % % 2% % % % % 7% 8% % 6% 9% 9% 4% 9% 6% 2% 9% 46% 6% % % 8% 2% 6% 8% % % % 6% % % 5% % 7% 4% 7% 9% 2% 2% % Ecological Departure HighRisk Classes 9 4 type x in left box if highrisk x x x x A Early B Mid Closed C Mid Open D Late Open E Late Closed Shrubs w Ann & Per Grass Tree Encroached Early Shrub Annual Grass Shrubs w Annual Grass Tress w Annual Grass Depleted Shrub NRV 7% 47% 24% % 2%,88 acres Enter percentages from "Final Conditions" as a whole number Current Condtion Vegetation Class (describe) x Black Sagebrush Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York , $ 9 9,8 $ Vegetation Conversion Total Cost $ $ ROI (vs. Min. Mgmt) Enter Notes Scenarios (enter name below ) Transitions & Multipliers $ $ Enter Management Strategies, Number of Acres/Year, Costs & Number of Years RxFire (C,D) Chainsaw ChipHerbSeed (TE,TA) ThinHerbSeed (SA) Chainsaw Lopping (C) Seed (DP) Minimum Mgmt 5 yrs Maximum Mgmt Streamlined Mgmt 75

39 What They Cost Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York Great Basin National Park Management Costs Ecological System Acres AlpineSubalpine AspenSubalpine Conifer,2 LimberBristlecone Pine mesic 4,5 MidElevation Forests AspenMixed Conifer 8, Shrublands Antelope Bitterbrush 4 Basin Wildrye 27 Black Sagebrush,88 Low Sagebrush Steppe 42 Montane Sagebrush Steppe upland 2,7 Riparian and Wet Meadows Montane Riparian 45 Wet Meadow 9 Total Cost Ave. Annual Cost Years Mgmt Cost Years 45 Mgmt Cost Years 6 Mgmt Cost Years 5 Mgmt Cost $88,5 $8,2 5 Year Total Est. Cost: Streamlined Mgmt $88,5 $8,2 $24,75 $62,5 $46,25 $82,5 $52,5 $6,7 $9,8 $, $2,5 $5, $2,6 $6,4 $5,2 $75, $87,5 $,5, $87,5 $96,8 $9,8 $, $,875, $5,88 $,8 $,92 $92 $9,8 $2, $78,4 $8,4 $98, $2, $,59,9 $279,9 $62, $,648, $,9, $45, $9,95 $22,46 $4,2 $78,

40 Best Use of Limited Funds Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York Ecological Departure Ecological System Acres (rounded to No Mgmt w nearest ) Fire Suppression Cove Forest ROI Mgmt ROI Ave. Annual Cost, 4.7 $ 2, Dry Oak Forest 65, $ 96,5 DryMesic Oak Forest 4, $ 22, LowElevation Pine Forest 2, $ 75,75 Montane Pine Forest 2, $ 5,75 Montane RedChestnut Oak Forest 7, $ 6,45 Northern Hardwood Forest,6 4 n/a Riparian & Floodplain Systems 2,5 9 n/a $ SpruceFir Forest 2, $ 4,5

41 Where to Act Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York

42 Scientific NEPA Documentation Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York

43 Attract Funding Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York

44 Help Build Consensus Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York among resource managers and with stakeholders

45 Conservation Forecasting Key Success Factors

46 Good Project Team some skills may reside in same person Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York Ecologist refines reference models and understands management effects GIS manipulates data & produces maps VDDT builds models and runs scenarios Facilitator orchestrates workshops Project director sees the big pix, herds the cats, lines up $

47 Agency Engagement Raft River Mountains, UT. Credit: Elaine York Support from local agency leader Engagement of local agency staff (ecologist, veg, fuels, fire, wildlife managers, etc.)

48 For More Information appliedconservation.com Journal of Conservation Planning

49 Questions & Discussion?