Document


Title

Comparing two methods of identifying ecological restoration opportunities
Document Type: Conference Proceedings
Author(s): Jimmie D. Chew
Editor(s): Philip N. Omi; Linda A. Joyce
Publication Year: 2003

Cataloging Information

Keyword(s):
  • coniferous forests
  • cover type conversion
  • Douglas-fir
  • FIA - Forest Inventory and Analysis
  • fire regimes
  • forest management
  • histories
  • Pinus contorta
  • Pinus flexilis
  • Pinus ponderosa
  • plant communities
  • ponderosa pine
  • population density
  • Pseudotsuga menziesii
  • Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness
  • vegetation surveys
Region(s):
Record Maintained By:
Record Last Modified: June 1, 2018
FRAMES Record Number: 2179
Tall Timbers Record Number: 16126
TTRS Location Status: Not in file
TTRS Call Number: A13.151/5:RMRS-P-29
TTRS Abstract Status: Okay, Fair use, Reproduced by permission

This bibliographic record was either created or modified by the Tall Timbers Research Station and Land Conservancy and is provided without charge to promote research and education in Fire Ecology. The E.V. Komarek Fire Ecology Database is the intellectual property of the Tall Timbers Research Station and Land Conservancy.

Description

Two methods for identifying ecological restoration opportunities in the Northern Region of the Forest Service are compared. Different analysis methods are often used to address issues at different planning scales. The first method is a nonspatial characterization of current vegetation conditions using Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) plot data grouped by potential vegetation for both the state of Montana and smaller landscape areas. The second method uses a spatially explicit model on two landscapes of one-half million and 1 million acres. Similar rule sets are used in both methods to compare current vegetation condition to historic vegetation conditions. This analysis indicates that spatially explicit modeling for determining restoration opportunities would not always support the same decisions made through a nonspatial analysis. For both types of land on the Pintler District area, suitable and unsuitable, the spatially explicit modeling indicates a greater need for more costly restoration and conversion treatments and less maintenance treatments compared to FIA plots for the entire state and just those within the area. For the three land classes on the Bitterroot Face area, only the suitable land had a similar mixture of treatment needs compared to the FIA plots for the entire state and those within the area. The differences in the levels of the treatment opportunities between the methods and scales can have a significant impact on the level of treatment needs and associated budgets identified for programs.

Online Link(s):
Citation:
Chew, Jimmie D. 2003. Comparing two methods of identifying ecological restoration opportunities. Pages 135-142 In: Fire, Fuel Treatments, and Ecological Restoration. Proceedings of the Conference on Fire, Fuel Treatments, and Ecological Restoration. Proceedings RMRS-P-29. Apr 16-18, 2002. Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.