# Presentation: 301572

## Landscape Assessment and Planning Models for Oregon

- A Proposed Partnership

## Needs

- State-wide forest assessment (ODF)
- Simple models for Forest plan revisions (FS R6)
- Simple models for west-side plan revisions, rangeland assessments (BLM)
- Better integration and application of  research for partners (PNW research station)

## Challenges

- Limited and declining funds
- Very busy people
- No desire for conflicting answers to broad questions
- Need integrated answers – single resource perspectives not suitable
- “Black box” models

## An Approach

- Leverage and cooperate
- Organize by geographic area to meet National Forest and BLM planning schedules
- Integrate natural disturbances and management activities
- A path for applying landscape science to planning
- Summarize to land units (subwatersheds)

**Notes:**
Easy to understand
LANDFIRE and FRCC use VDDT
Plan revisions in R9, R4, R3, R6
Well published
Easy to understand
LANDFIRE and FRCC use VDDT
Plan revisions in R9, R4, R3, R6
Well published

## Boxes and Arrows(States and Transitions)

## State and Transition Models 

**State and Transition Models **

- Vegetation Development Dynamics Tool (VDDT).  www.essa.com
- Tool for Exploratory Landscape Scenario Analysis (TELSA) www.essa.com

## Example Model - Wyoming big sage warm

*Agropyron*/*Poa*
- Closed herbland

- Wyoming big sage
- Open low shrub

**Fire, 0.01**

**Succession, 30 y**

*Poa*/*Festuca*
- Closed herbland

**Grazing, 0.025**

**Fire, 0.01**

**Grazing, 0.021**

**Fire, 0.008**

- Cheatgrass
- Open herbland

- Wyoming big sage/*Poa*
- Open low shrub

**Succession, 1000 y**

**Grazing + exotics, 0.011**

**Succession, 31 y**

**Succession, 31 y**

**Fire, 0.008**

**Grazing, 0.01**

- Wyoming big sage/cheatgrass
- Open low shrub

**Grazing + exotics, 0.011**

- Seeded native grass
- Closed herbland

**Herbicide and seed native species, 0.01**

- Exotic perennial grasses
- Closed herbland

**Herbicide and seed exotic species, 0.0001**

**Succession, 1000 y**

**Fire, 0.05**

**Herbicide and seed native species, 0.01**

**Succession, 81 y**

**Fire, 0.05**

**Example Model - Wyoming big sage warm**

**Herbicide and seed exotic species, 0.0001**

**Herbicide and seed native species, 0.01**

**Threshold**

## Warm, dry ponderosa pine forest

- 0 – 25 years
- Open Mid-height
- Shrub

- Grass/Forb
- 1 – 15 years
- Closed Herbland

- Interior Ponderosa Pine
- 150 years or more
- Late-Seral, Single-Layer
- Forest

- Interior ponderosa pine
- 150 years or more
- Late-Seral, Multi-layer Forest

- Interior Ponderosa Pine
- 40 – 85 years
- Stem Exclusion Forest

- Interior Ponderosa Pine
- 20 – 60 years
- Forest Stand Initiation

- Interior Ponderosa Pine
- 75 – 175 years
- Forest Understory Reinitiation

**Crown Fire**

**Mixed**
**Severity**
**Fire**

**Insects or Disease**

**Ground**
**Fire**

**Ground**
**Fire**

**Ground **
**Fire**

**Insects or**
**Disease**

**Growth and  Development**

**Growth and **
**Development**

**Growth and **
**Development**

**Growth and **
**Development**

**Growth and **
**Development**

**Growth and **
**Development**

**Warm, dry ponderosa pine forest**

## Summarize VDDT results to HUC6, ownership, potential vegetation group

**Database**

**Vegetation cover type, structure**
**Disturbances**
**Associated characteristics (e.g. wildlife habitat, products, etc.)**

## Example 6th field HUC display.

**Example 6****th**** field HUC display.**
-  from Wimberly, MC, and JL Ohmann. 2004. Landscape Ecology 19:631-646

## Current Vegetation Data

- Gradient Nearest Neighbor process (Wimberly, MC, and JL Ohmann. 2004. Landscape Ecology 19:631-646.)
- FIA plots and Landsat-TM, topography, others => tree data by pixel
- Summarized to VDDT boxes and HUC6, ownership, PNV groups

## Example Historical Fire Regime

- Summarize HRV run

## Example Current Departure from HRV

**Example Current Departure from HRV**

- Summarize current conditions

## Example Future Departure from HRV

- Summarize future conditions

## Past, Current, or Future Habitat

| HUC | Acres |
| --- | --- |
| 1 | 10,000 |
| 2 | 2,000 |
| 3 | 500 |
| ... | xxxxx |

**Historical Disturbances or Future Scenario**

**Habitat**
**interpretation**

## Relation to LANDFIRE 

**LANDFIRE**
- 4 and 5 box models
- Not designed for wildlife habitat and other uses

**Our Proposal**
- Many boxes and arrows
- Wildlife, forest products, & other uses
- Easily summarized to FRCC
- Agreement with LANDFIRE on coordination

## Relation to wildlife habitat

- Direct relation to Bayesian Belief models being constructed for the Region
- Direct relation to Johnson and O’Neil habitats
- Direct integration of disturbance and management effects
- Not done at the stand level

## Testing Methods - ODF Pilot

- Proof of concept, late summer 2005
- 3.8 million acres
- Upper Deschutes
- McKenzie
- N. Fork Willamette
- Vddt models built by local experts
- Summarize to 6th field HUC
- Test scenarios

## State-wide Partners

- Oregon Department of Forestry
- Forest Service, R6
- Bureau of Land Management
- PNW Research Station
- Others?  (TNC, Park Service, FWS, ...)

## Products

**VDDT models by geographic area for all lands and ownerships.**
**Linkage to broad-scale fire, wildlife, utilization (biomass, timber) models**
**Current vegetation cover types and structure stages (pixels and HUC6) from GNN**
**Local experts who understand the models**
**HUC6 summarization process and DB**
**Documentation**

## Alternative 1 – WOPR+East Side

**Focus:** BLM western Oregon & East-Side NF Plan Revisions
- Western Oregon – FY06
- NE Oregon – FY06
- East-side Cascades – FY07
- SE Oregon – FY08

| Partner | FY06 |  | FY07 |  | FY08 |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | Funds | In-kind | Funds | In-kind | Funds | In-kind |
| R6 | $36,000 | $198,000 | $38,000 | $187,000 | $42,000 | $77,000 |
| BLM | $175,000 | $57,000 | $184,000 | $82,000 | $120,000 | $43,000 |
| ODF | $96,000 | $100,000 | $149,000 | $98,000 | $83,000 | $103,000 |
| PNW  | $0 | $302,000 | $0 | $317,000 | $0 | $335,000 |

## Alternative 2 –East Side First

**Focus:** East-Side NF Plan Revisions & BLM SE Oregon sage grouse
- NE Oregon – FY06
- South half, east side Cascades – FY06
- SE Oregon – FY06&07
- North half, east-side Cascades – FY07
- SW Oregon – FY08
- NW Oregon – FY09

| Partner | FY06 |  | FY07 |  | FY08 |  | FY09 |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | Funds | In-kind | Funds | In-kind | Funds | In-kind | Funds | In-kind |
| R6 | $36,000 | $109,000 | $38,000 | $94,000 | $40,000 | $99,000 | $45,000 | $64,000 |
| BLM | $78,000 | $107,000 | $112,000 | $62,000 | $118,000 | $22,000 | $86,000 | $23,000 |
| ODF | $96,000 | $100,000 | $149,000 | $98,000 | $157,000 | $103,000 | $87,000 | $103,000 |
| PNW  | $0 | $302,000 | $0 | $317,000 | $0 | $332,000 | $0 | $204,000 |

## How It All Fits Together: What

**Mid-scale**
- Wall-to-wall using GNN
- Refined on Forests using MSN

-           MSN methods
- Delineated polygons

**Existing vegetation mapping**
**Fine scale**
- (Optional)

**Inputs:  ****GNN methods**

-               **Inputs:**** Delineated polygons**
-                   MSN modeling

**6****th**** field veg **
**dynamics modeling**

**LANDFIRE**

**How It All Fits **_[Together](file:///../../../../data_management/NRIS_implementation/existing_veg_mapping/report_final_draft/Presentation1.ppt#Gradient Nearest Neighbor)__: What_

- Fig. 1

- Outputs: Fuel model attributes,
- Wildlife habitat, DecAID support,
- Silviculture support, wall to wall (GNN),
- National Forests (MSN)

- Outputs: Fuel model attributes,
- Wildlife habitat, DecAID support,
- FRCC determinations, Wall to wall
- coverage  (Oregon)

## Gradient Nearest Neighbor

**Landsat-TM**

**30 meter pixel data**

**FIA Plots**

**Match**

**Relate plots to TM, elevation, aspect, slope, other data**

**Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3**
**...****.**

**Assign a plot to each pixel**

- FIA = Forest Inventory and Analysis
- TM = Landsat Thematic Mapper

## Most Similar Neighbor

**Stand Exam Plots and Polygons**

**Plot**

**Data layers**
- Canopy cover
- Tree species
- Other veg data
- Elevation
- Aspect
- Slope
- ...

**Relate plots to mapped features**

**Assign plots to the most similar polygon**

## How It All Fits Together: Who

**Mid-scale**
**Standing Regional Team (full time)**
**Subregional Teams (part time)**

- Existing vegetation mapping
- Fine scale
- (Optional case by case)
-  Standing Regional Team (full time)
-    Subregional Teams (part time)

- Inputs:  **PNW (Ohmann)/FIA**
**                ****Prineville Center   **
**                ****National Forests**

-  Inputs:  **National Forests**

**6****th**** field veg **
**dynamics modeling**
- Hemstrom and Forests

**LANDFIRE**
- National Team

**How It All Fits Together: Who**

- Fig. 2

## How It All Fits Together: Partners

**Mid-scale**
-  NFS

**Existing vegetation mapping**
**Fine scale**
**(Optional case by case)**
** **** ****NFS**

- Inputs:   **PNW/FIA**
**                  ****NFS**
**                 ****Oregon Heritage Program**

- Inputs**:** **NFS**
**         ****Oregon Heritage Program**

**6****th**** field veg **
**dynamics modeling**
**Hemstrom and Forests**
**PNW,NFS,ODF**

**LANDFIRE**
**National Team**
**Interagency**

**How It All Fits Together: Partners**

- Fig. 3

## How It All Fits Together: When

**Mid-scale**
**Prioritized by Plan Revision **
**Schedule, ongoing updates**

**                 **
**          ****MSN methods**
**Delineated polygons**

**Existing vegetation mapping**
**Fine scale**
**(Optional)**
**Ongoing as needed**

**Inputs:  ****GNN methods**

**              ****Inputs:**** Delineated polygons             **
**                  ****MSN modeling**

**6****th**** field veg **
**dynamics modeling**
**Completion 2010**

**LANDFIRE**
**Completion end 2006**
**(Pacific NW)**

**How It All Fits Together: When**

- Fig. 4

## How It All Fits Together: 

**Mid-scale**
**$1 million per year to Forests  **
**Core team $0.2 mm per year**

**                 **
**              ****MSN methods**
**Delineated polygons**

**Existing vegetation mapping**
**Fine scale**
**(Optional)**
**Ongoing as needed;**
**Costs vary**

**Inputs: ****GNN**

-               **Inputs:**** Delineated polygons             **
**                  ****MSN modeling**

**6****th**** field veg **
**dynamics modeling**
**Completion 2010**
**$200,000 per year**
**(Oregon only)**

**LANDFIRE**
**Completion end 2006**

**How It All Fits Together: **
**NFS Costs**

- Fig. 5