1 / 15

W. Klenner, I. Cameron, R. Walton, D. Lewis and D. Huggard Habitat Supply Modelling Workshop

IDF and ESSF Stand Structure: Using Stand Modelling to Identify Practices That Create and Maintain Desired Conditions. W. Klenner, I. Cameron, R. Walton, D. Lewis and D. Huggard Habitat Supply Modelling Workshop December 6, 2006. (1) Biologically, stand structure matters.

kadeem
Télécharger la présentation

W. Klenner, I. Cameron, R. Walton, D. Lewis and D. Huggard Habitat Supply Modelling Workshop

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. IDF and ESSF Stand Structure:Using Stand Modelling to Identify Practices That Create and Maintain Desired Conditions W. Klenner, I. Cameron, R. Walton, D. Lewis and D. Huggard Habitat Supply Modelling Workshop December 6, 2006

  2. (1) Biologically, stand structure matters. Why Model Stand Structure?? (2) Simultaneously track many structural indicators. (3) Track complex and often interacting managed [harvesting] and natural [e.g. spruce beetle] disturbances - models can be good accountants. (4) Explore the likely consequences of management actions before application. (5) Explore temporal consequences - the creation and maintenance of desired conditions. (6) Explicitly identify the assumptions and relationships that underlie an activity. (7) Extend the shelf life of old and/or injured field biologists.

  3. Implications of Residual Stand Density on Understory Vegetation and Likely Timber Yields in an IDFdm Forest - examined tradeoff between stand density and indicators of understory vigor, stand structure and timber - used TASS (Tree and Stand Simulator) - pre-harvest conditions approximate a 130 year old stand - 10 residual density options examined

  4. Managing IDF forests for a productive understory

  5. Time Since Thinning IDF Crown Closure and Stand Density

  6. Ground - Level Percent Above Canopy Light (PACL) and Crown Closure

  7. Ground-level Light Conditions

  8. Other Indicators of Stand Structure Base of Live Crown

  9. Timber Productivity

  10. Developing Stand Management Prescriptions to Maintain Abundant Lichen Forage for Mountain Caribou

  11. Conceptual Representation of Canopy Structure and Light Conditions in an ESSF Stand

  12. Effect of Selection Harvest on Canopy Structure, Light Conditions and Lichen Abundance in an ESSF Stand

  13. 3-D Array of “Sensors” to Estimate Light Conditions

  14. Summary 1. Before management plans involving complex ecological - commodity tradeoffs are implemented, the short- and long-term likely consequences should be modelled as a decision support exercise to verify expectations and assumptions. 2. Models should help identify what we know, what we don’t and what we are uncertain about. They should complement, not replace field research. 3. Grandma was right….the devil is in the details! Remember... GIN → → GOUT

More Related