Forest Health Forest Health MonitoringMonitoring

Presented ByAllison Kanoti

Notice

Much of the information from the following was gleaned from fact sheets produced by the forest service…More credits are due than are given on individual slides

USDA FOREST SERVICE

Several Branches–National Forest System–State and Private ForestryState and Private Forestry

•Forest Health Protection–Forest Health MonitoringForest Health Monitoring

–Research and DevelopmentResearch and Development•Forest Inventory and Analysis

FHP: Forest Health Monitoring

USDA Forest Service: State and Private Forestry: FHP: FHM

• Detection Monitoring• Evaluation Monitoring• Intensive Site Monitoring

Detection Monitoring

Components• Determine Baseline • Detect Change• Invasive Species

DetectionMethods• Remote Sensing• Aerial Survey• Ground Plots (FIA, Phase

3 Plots)

Evaluation Monitoring

Undesirable changes detected in Detection Monitoring:EM Investigates:

ExtentSeverityCauses

Project Proposals (often from FHP state Cooperators)Competition for funding in two categories (Base EM

and Fire EM)

e.g. State funding to investigate the impact of balsam woolly adelgid on balsam fir stands in New England

Intensive Site Monitoring

• detailed research – better understand complex ecosystem processes

• selected watershed study sites – represent major forest ecosystems

• E.G. Delaware River Basin Study – began in 1999 – Model for regional collaborative monitoring networks– Cooperative

• Forest Inventory and Analysis, • Forest Health Monitoring, • Global Change• U.S. Geological Survey (Water Resources Division).

Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA)

Why is FIA important?

“Determining the ecological and biological significance of Determining the ecological and biological significance of our forest resources in an accurate and timely manner is our forest resources in an accurate and timely manner is one of the most important pursuits in modern forestryone of the most important pursuits in modern forestry. That is the mission of the USDA Forest Service’s Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program. FIA is the most complete forest FIA is the most complete forest census in America, providing the only continuous national census in America, providing the only continuous national inventory that quantifies the status of forest ecosystems inventory that quantifies the status of forest ecosystems across all private and most public forestland.across all private and most public forestland.

Because of its fundamental importance in measuring sustainability, FIA is universally popular among professional FIA is universally popular among professional foresters, environmentalists, industry, private landowners, foresters, environmentalists, industry, private landowners, and virtually any other group that has an interest in forest and virtually any other group that has an interest in forest managementmanagement. . .” --Bob Goodlatte and James Garner, Journal of Forestry 12/99

Components of FIA

From: Forest inventory and Analysis Sampling and Plot DesignBill Burkman, 2005

Components of FIA

• 3 Components (Phases)– Phase 1: Remote Sensing

• Classify land into Forest and Non-Forest• Quantify fragmentation, urbanization and distance variables

– Phase 2: Forest Inventory Ground Plots• 1 plot per 6,000 acres• Forest (ecosystem variables) and non-forest (land use

changes)

– Phase 3: Forest Health Ground Plots• 1 per 16 Phase 2 plots (co-located with Phase 2 plots)• 1 plot per 96,000 acres• Forest health indicators (vegetation cover, crown, soil,

lichen diversity, down woody material, ozone damage)

Plot Design: Phase 2

• 4 subplots– 24 foot radius (~1/6 acre area)

• Condition Data– Site index– Stand: Age, Size, Forest Type,

Disturbance, Stocking– Land Use

–All trees >5” diameter–Species–History (what is condition now (live, natural mortality, removal) in comparison to past condition)–Diameter–Heights –Quality (cull, grading, merchantability)–Crown: position, condition, ratio

Plot Design: Phase 2

• 1 microplot/subplot (6.8’ radius)– All saplings 1”<DBH<5”

• Diameter, Height, Crown (position, ratio)

– Count of seedlings (tree species<1”)

• ME 3.7’ radius plot w/in microplot– Count of shrub species– Presence of dwarf shrubs and woody vines– Used by IF&W

Plot Design: Phase 3

In addition to Phase 2 Variables:

– Tree• Damages• Additional Crown

Variables

– Lichen Diversity– Vegetation Plot– Soil Sampling– Down Woody Debris

Summary of Forest Health in Maine:1996-1999

The following data are from:Forest Health Monitoring in Maine: 1996-1999. USDA Forest Service. NE-NF-145-02

Crown Estimates

• Uncompacted live crown ratio:– % of tree height supporting

live foliage• Crown light exposure:

– % of foliage receiving full sunlight

• Crown position: – Crown position in relation to

overstory level of stand• Crown densityCrown density: :

– amount of light blocked by amount of light blocked by branches, reproductive branches, reproductive structures, and foliage structures, and foliage

• Crown diebackCrown dieback: : – recent branch mortality recent branch mortality

• Foliage transparencyFoliage transparency: : – amount of skylight visible amount of skylight visible

through the live, normally through the live, normally foliated portion of the foliated portion of the crowncrown.

Mary Ann Fajvan, West Virginia University, www.forestryimages.org

Maine 1996-1999

Crown densityCrown density: : – amount of light blocked by branches, amount of light blocked by branches,

reproductive structures, and foliagereproductive structures, and foliage

• 91 percent of trees had high density ratings (>30%)

• 9 % low– 12% 241– 15% 129

Crown diebackCrown dieback: recent branch : recent branch mortalitymortality

• 81 % low, 3 % high (>20 %),16% moderate (6-20%)– 5 % of red maple high, 24% moderate

Some results from phase 3 plots: TransparencyMaine 1996-1999

Foliage transparencyFoliage transparency: amount of skylight visible : amount of skylight visible through the live, normally foliated portion of the through the live, normally foliated portion of the crown.crown.

99 percent of trees had normal transparency

Summary Crown Conditions: Maine 1996-1999

Damages

• Location– Roots and Stump– Bole

• Lower• Upper

– Crownstem– Branches– Buds and Shoots– Foliage

• Thresholds and Severity Ratings

• Types – Canker, gall– Advanced Decay– Open wounds– Resinosis, gummosis– Cracks and seams– Broken bole or roots– Broken or dead top– Broken or dead branches– Vines– Brooms on roots, bole, crown– Damaged buds, foliage or

shoots– Foliage discoloration– Other

Some results from phase 3 plots: Damage

81 percent of trees no damage15 percent one damage4 percent 2 or more damages

Red Spruce6 % damaged

21% seams/cracksNorthern White Cedar

33% damaged (>75% decay)Eastern White Pine

14 percent damaged44 percent dead or broken top29 percent dead or broken branch

Decay51%

Broken Top22%

Broken Branch

10%

Open Wound8%

Other9%

All Species Damage

Percentages

Summary: Maine 1996-1999

• Most trees are healthy:– Full crowns – Little dieback– Little damage

Credit Where Due

The following slide images are pirated from:

Steinman, J. 2004. Forest Health Monitoring in the Northeastern United States: Disturbances and Conditions during 1993-2002. USDA Forest Service. NA-TP-01-04

Health of All Trees Combined

• Growth rates low in N. Me, S. teir PA, Central MN (yellow thru red)

• Mortality a concern in many counties (yellow thru red)

• Why low growth/high mortality?

• Unhealthy Crowns: – >25%

dieback– >30%

transparency

– <35% density

• NY and NE crowns less healthy than the region in general

Health of Balsam Fir

• Low net growth reflects high mortality

Balsam Fir Damages

Health of American Beech

American Beech

Damages

Conclusion

Data collected by FIA and FHP are important resources for assessing

the state of the nation’s forests and the threats to forest health and

analyzing long term forest trends