+ All Categories
Home > Documents > S tand D evelopment M onitoring FREP Timber Production Protocol

S tand D evelopment M onitoring FREP Timber Production Protocol

Date post: 03-Jan-2016
Category:
Upload: charles-lang
View: 16 times
Download: 2 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
S tand D evelopment M onitoring FREP Timber Production Protocol. SDM. The goal of SDM is to monitor shifts in stand attributes from the baseline data set from FG surveys. This will allow us to make inferences about our Stocking Standard and FG Policy as well as Forest Health Issues. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Popular Tags:
32
Stand Development Monitoring FREP Timber Production Protocol SDM
Transcript
Page 1: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Stand Development Monitoring

FREP Timber Production Protocol

SDM

Page 2: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

The goal of SDM is to monitor shifts in stand attributes from the baseline data set from FG surveys. This will

allow us to make inferences about our Stocking Standard and FG Policy as well as Forest Health Issues

• SDM data can be valuable for many other uses:

• Monitoring the impacts of forest management decisions such as site prep, planting density, spacing and fertilization

• Feedback to Standards Contained in Operational Contracts ie Spacing, Planting contracts

• Calibrating our stand level models• Comparing our stands to TIPSY to supply input to TSR for

Managed Stand Analysis Units

Page 3: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Average Age of stands at Breast HeightAverage of all blocks = 20

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A0

5

10

15

20

25

30

19

24

11

1817

20 20

23

25

18

24 24

2223

21

15

Average age at DBH

Page 4: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Years from Disturbance and Planting

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A

30

40

20

23

20

2628

30

33

24

29

24

30

35 35

20

24

33

0

2220

25

19

25

0

22

0

23

28 28

31

20

YrsSinceDisturb YRSfromPL

Page 5: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Total Trees & Total Conifers per HectareAverage of TC = 3241

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Total Trees Total Conifers

Page 6: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

There is no assessment of the Free Growing status of the WS trees

Page 7: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Another dense 28 year old stand - ICH Donald Hill

SDM Unit #21

4860 total stems/ha

Planted Pli, Lw and Sx

Planted Lw is just to the right of Jason

Smaller trees are L3 naturals – Sx, Fdi, Bl, Cw

Page 8: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Least Dense Stand SampledMS - Beaverfoot - SDM Unit #27

1360 Total Conifers – Spaced at 10 years of age

Page 9: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

This spaced stand also had the poorest formed (ugly) trees

Page 10: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Well Spaced Conifers per HectareAverage = 1054

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1440

1140 1120 1140

860

1120

1320

860820

1060

740 740

1240 1240

1000 1020

Dark Green with Glow – block had JS treatment

Page 11: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

The importance of SDM data to Managed Stand Yield Predictions

• We should be able to use SDM data to calibrate TIPSY or change our assumptions on how these stands are developing

• For example:• With the exception of SDM # 5 these stands are all old enough

that a Layer 3 tree is either ingress or a planted tree that ran into trouble.

• Counting a Layer 3 tree as a Well Spaced Crop tree has implications to genetic gain, regen delay, and our assumption that our stands all have a “planted” distribution

Page 12: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Percentage of Total Conifers that are L3Average = 58% of TC are L3 trees

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

84

65

89

11

46

7370 70

51

45

32

47

7168

36

75

Blue Glow = planting to >2200 stems/ha Green Glow = Spacing

Page 13: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

SDM 12 had the lowest number of L3 trees

This block had very regular spacing: 1620 Total conifers & 1140 WS

It was planted to Pli and Lw in 1987

This block was planted at a density of 2500 stems/ha

Page 14: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

% of Well Spaced that are L3Average = 34%

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

60

25

73

7

44

55

36

51

15

4

11

24

34

44

14

53

Blue Glow = planted to 2200 stems/ha or greater Green Glow = Spacing

Page 15: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Highest % of WS L3 trees

The youngest Pli stand and the ESSF stand had the highest % of Well Spaced trees that were L3

The picture shows an example of a stand planted to Pli where natural Sx has come in under the planted treesInitial Planting density was 1236 stems/haSDM #20

Page 16: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

The least % of WS that are L3 was in SDM #25

This block had very regular spacing - 2180 total conifer 1060 WS

This block was planted to Pli and Lw in 1987

Initial planting density was 2500 stems/ha

Page 17: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

What are the consequences of having L3 trees in the WS count?

In the Golden TSR all the managed stands are assumed to be planted

At the age of the stands in the SDM sample - L3 trees are naturals or ‘loser’ planted trees TIPSY assumes there are planted trees at a very regular spacing (like picture in previous slide)

Genetic Gain is applied to all the crop trees

Regen Delay is assumed to be 2yrs

The L3 trees have a much longer regen delay and have no genetic gain

This is a L3 planted Lw Most of the Lw are L1Example SI tree 16.7 dbh and 15.3 M ht

Page 18: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Do we have as many large trees as TIPSY assumes?

• Looking at the distribution of large diameter stems in the stands is very interesting

• Analyzing the number of large trees present in the stands should also help to calibrate TIPSY

Page 19: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Number of L1 Well Spaced Trees

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

40

360

0

580

80

200220

260

560

520

340

500

200

340

440

60

Green glow = Spaced Blue Glow = planted to 2200 or greater stems/ha

Page 20: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Percentage of WS trees that are L1

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

2.78

31.58

0.00

50.88

9.30

17.86 16.67

30.23

68.29

49.0645.95

67.57

16.13

27.42

44.00

5.88

Green Glow = Spaced Blue Glow = planted to 2200 stems/ha or greater

Page 21: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Average Dbh of the L1 trees in each unit. Not a huge range – but the spaced fertilized stand has the largest Dbh

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A

L1 Avg DBH 12.8 15.8 0 14.8 13.4 15.5 15 15.9 17 14.5 15.5 16.4 16.5 15.3 16.9 15.6

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

L1 Avg DBH

Cm D

bh

Blue glow is planted to >2200Green glow is spaced

Yellow glow is spaced and fertilized

Page 22: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

How do we achieve an even distribution of large diameter trees?

• These preliminary results show that spacing or planting to a high density achieved the distribution of large trees that TIPSY assumes is present in planted stands

• Looking at the L3 data in combination with the L1 suggests that perhaps planting to less than 2000 stems/ha results in a stand that has a more “natural” distribution for TIPSY than planted

Page 23: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Custom TIPSY Table

With the SDM data collected you can match the BGC Zone, Site Index , Leading Species, and with Breast Height Age – match an exact line in the TIPSY table.

Then direct comparisons can be made to determine if our stands “look like” the TIPSY model we have chosen for TSR. SDM #20 – BGC Zone - MSFrom Inventory Label – Pli80 Sx20SI from GI = 21Average age at Breast Ht = 20

TIPSY table for DCO TSR Managed Stand Analysis Units

Page 24: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Comparison of 5 TIPSY runs to SDM block #20The left column is how this stand was modelled in TSR

PL2000-2 PL4444-2 Nat2000-7 Nat4444-7 Nat6132-10 SDM

L3 302 NaN 1398 NaN 587 NaN 1587 NaN 2283 NaN 3860

L2 586 NaN 1246 NaN 441 NaN 817 NaN 843 NaN 380

L1 616 NaN 529 NaN 391 NaN 457 NaN 454 NaN 340

250

750

1250

1750

2250

2750

3250

3750

4250

4750

Total Stems/ha by Layer

# St

ems/

ha

Page 25: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Layer 1 and 2 of TIPSY Runs

PL2000-2 PL4444-2 Nat2000-7 Nat4444-7 Nat6132-10

SDM0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

L1L2

Page 26: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Stand Distribution Impacts

• Deciding if the stand distribution is more like a planted distribution or a natural distribution has a direct impact on volume calculations.

• The next slide from Alex and Wendy shows the relative difference of the distributions on volume

Page 27: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

W. Bergerud

Lodgepole Pine at Site Index of 20

Using TASS version v20524

Proje

cted V

olume

at 80

yrs

Total Density at 15 years0 500 1000 1500 2000

Spatial distribution affects projected volume

27

Page 28: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

TIPSY OAF’s

• SDM data should help us to refine Operational Adjustment Factors - especially OAF 2

• TIPSY provides a cumulative OAF impact for each age in the table – but will take some thinking to figure out if any comparisons can be drawn to the SDM data

Page 29: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

% of Live TC with Damage Average = 14%

1 3 5 12 15B 20 21 23 24A 25 27 28 29 30A 31 15A0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 0

37

14

22

5

2

27

25

9

13 14

24

14

10

7

%TCwithDamage Live

Page 30: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Unit 15B ICHL1 L2 L3

AB 220 120 0

DSC 20 80 0

ISQ 20 0 0

NY 0 0 60

Healthy 80 600 920

340 800 980 2120

%

L1 76

L2 25

L3 6

Stand 24

Page 31: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Unit 15 ICH

L1 L2 L30

200

400

600

800

1000

1200Total conifers by damage agent

HealthyNYISQDSCAB

L1 L2 L30

50

100

150

200

250

300

Breakdown of Damage Agents

NYISQDSCAB

Page 32: S tand  D evelopment  M onitoring  FREP  Timber Production Protocol

Unit 15 B Dead Trees

L1 L2 L30

20

40

60

80

100

120

Dead Stems by Damage Agent

UnknownAB


Recommended