1 / 18

CENTRAL CASCADES ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP

An intersection of state and federal organizations, sharing and focusing science and management resources to elevate our understanding of natural resources. CENTRAL CASCADES ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP. YOUNG STAND THINNING AND DIVERSITY STUDY.

greta
Télécharger la présentation

CENTRAL CASCADES ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An intersection of state and federal organizations, sharing and focusing science and management resources to elevate our understanding of natural resources. CENTRAL CASCADES ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP

  2. YOUNG STAND THINNING AND DIVERSITY STUDY A management study evaluating the ecological, operational, social, and economic consequences of alternative methods of managing 30-50 year-old plantations.

  3. TREATMENTS • Control (uncut, avg. 261 tpa) :Blue outline • Light thin (thinned to 105 tpa) :Yellow outline • Heavy thin (55 tpa) : Green outline • Light Thin with Gaps (same as light thin but with additional • 0.5 acre gaps over 20% of the treatment) : Red Outline

  4. The Young Stand Study targeted stands 35-50 years old

  5. LIGHT THIN W/GAP TREATMENT Gaps planted • This treatment mimics mortality patterns of • small fires • root-rot outbreaks • Insects

  6. HEAVY THIN TREATMENT • This treatment opens the canopy dramatically allowing • Rapid diameter growth • More understory development

  7. LIGHT THIN TREATMENT • This treatment is similar to a standard commercial thin.  • ~ 1/2 stems were removed • 110 trees per acre left

  8. MONITORING • Small Mammals pre twice; post 2 & 3, 11 & 12 • Amphibians pre twice; post 11 + cover boards • Birds pre twice; post 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12 • Vegetation pre stand exams, post 1, 3, 5, 11 • Logging Costs post • Soil Impacts post • Snags/down wood post 2, 11 • Stand Damage post • Public Perceptions post • Arthropods post 5 and 6

  9. Chanterelle’s MONITORING -- one year pre (1994), post 1996-7, 1999 KEY FINDING: • Chanterelle productivity significantly declined (but was not eliminated) immediately after thinning • the level of decline was greater in the heavily thinned stands than in those lightly thinned NO DATA COLLECTED TO SEE IF RECOVERED OVER TIME

  10. Chanterelle’s

  11. Mushrooms www.pbase.com/ladislav/image/33934414 1996 1997 1999 2001 Short-term reductions Pilz et al. 2006

  12. LOGGING DAMAGECompared tractor, cut-to-length, skyline, & helicopter KEY FINDINGS: • Most typical damage was scarring • Ground-based systems more severe • Skyline and helicopter: larger scars, gouging, and root damage • Damaged concentrated w/in 15 ft of skid trails / skyline corridor centerlines. • Cut-to-length systems -- harvester caused more wounding (70%) than forwarder (30%), but forwarder scars were larger and sustained severe gouging.

  13. Litter Dwelling ArthropodsAffects of thinning complex! • Key Findings: • Seasonal affects override treatment affects • Indirect affects on litter moisture decreases abundance and diversity proportional to thinning • Control vs light thin – no difference • Light thin w/gaps – no difference from heavy

  14. PUBLIC PERCEPTIONSPost-Thin, Heavy and Light KEY FINDINGS: • Both Treatments - low visual impacts met moderate scenic integrity standards

  15. COMPACTION • KEY FINDINGS: CABLE • 0.5% of area was disturbed • Compaction negligible, but some sites -- decreased bulk density • From tilling of dragging tops??

  16. COMPACTION – SLASH DEPTHS KEY FINDINGS: HARVESTER FORWARDER • 3-5 passes, compaction raised soil strength • no further increase in compaction • Existing OM, particularly rotten logs, cushioned and reduced compaction • Compaction was 21% at 4” depth, 12% at 8” • High levels of slash reduced compaction to a small extent • There was very little change in bulk density in the middle of skid trails at 8” depth

  17. COMPACTION KEY FINDINGS: CUT TO LENGTH (harvester forwarder) • Difficult to reuse old skid trails due to difference in the systems used 50 years ago • New skid trail showed same compaction as old trails • Bulk density increased 12% • Over 20% oF area of compacted, still within FS guidelines

  18. THE REST OF THE STORY…

More Related