Download US Forest Service Experimental Forests and Ranges Development

Peter A. Stine
National Coordinator for
Experimental Forests and Ranges
USDA Forest Service
Research and Development
The Forest Service Experimental Forest
and Range Network
• A total of 80, in 32 states and Puerto Rico
• Designated through an official “Establishment
Record.” This official designation includes all
locations where establishment records have
been prepared and approved by the Chief of
the Forest Service according to FSM 4062
direction.
• “Cooperating” Experimental Forests and
Ranges (four, including Olympic EF)
Origins
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1881 Division of Forestry in USDA
1886 Bernard Fernow becomes chief of the
Division of Forestry
1896 National Academy of Sciences appoints
commission to investigate Forest Reserves
1897 President Cleveland creates 13 Forest
Reserves with about 21 million acres
1897 Organic Act identifies purposes of
reserves, regulates uses, provides for
protection of stream flow, authorizes sale of
timber
1898 Biltmore Forest School in North
Carolina
1898 Gifford Pinchot succeeds Fernow
1898 first 4 year program in Forestry, at
Cornell
1900 Society of American Foresters
established
1900 Yale School of Forestry established
1905 U.S. Forest established
1907 National Forest lands grow to 150
million acres through Roosevelt “midnight
forests” executive order
Historical Context of EFRs
1903
“I believe that there is no
body of men who have it
in their power today to do
a greater service to the
country than those
engaged in the scientific
study of, and practical
application of, approved
methods of forestry for
the preservation of the
woods of the United
States.”
Beginnings of EFRs
1908 … the first “experiment
station is established at Fort
Valley, Arizona
“… the experiment
stations in the West …
are now building the
scientific foundation
upon which the future
practice of American
forestry is to rest.”
Fort Valley Experimental
Forest, Arizona
Raphael Zon; 1st Chief of the Bureau of
Silvics, U.S. Forest Service
EFRs Across the United States
• Oldest is Fort Valley EF in Arizona (1908)
• Newest is Heen Latinee EF in Alaska (2009)
• 62 are on NFS lands, the remainder are
managed solely by Forest Service R&D, state
lands, one BLM and one private
• Well represented across the ecological
domains of the US, only four of 20 forested
ecological domains are underrepresented
Sizes of Experimental Forests
and Ranges
EFRs offer some key advantages largely
unavailable at other research field sites
• These are permanent
facilities dedicated to
research activities.
Key Advantages
• Historical environmental
records and research
data span up to 100 years
and provide a wealth of
information from which
new studies can draw.
“Methods of Cutting” plots,
Stanislaus-Tuolomne Exp Forest 1929
Key Advantages
• Long term research is
feasible and enabled.
• Manipulative field
studies, testing
management ideas, are
encouraged. This is one
of the fundamental
reasons for establishing
these sites and sets them
apart from almost any
other field site..
Forest thinning experiments, Teakettle EF
Key Advantages
• New studies,
complimenting and
conterminous with
existing studies, are
feasible and enabled.
• Both basic and applied
research activities are
encouraged and
enabled.
H. J. Andrews Experimental Forest
NSF Long-term Ecological Research Site
Key Advantages
• Land and Resource
managers are typically
involved in both
articulating the
research and
monitoring questions
as well as enabling the
execution of the work
through a variety of
logistical support
activities.
Research on the Desert Experimental Range
addresses the needs of range managers
Key Advantages
• Many sites provide
demonstration plots or
stands to illustrate the
results of research
findings for
educational purposes.
• Logistical support
(housing, meeting
rooms, laboratories,
data, maps, etc.) is
available at many EFRs.
Thinning/prescribed fire Demonstration plot at
Sagehen Experimental Forest
U.C. Berkeley Field
Station at Sagehen
Experimental Forest
Primary Research Themes
• Silviculture/Forest
Ecology
• Water
• Fire
• Grasslands and ranges
• Soil conservation
• Wildlife
• Atmospheric science and
climate change
• Ecological restoration
Hubbard Brook EF New Hampshire
Recent Additions to Focus on EFRs
• Urban ecology and
forestry
• Human uses
• Social sciences
• Humanities, arts
Bonanza Creek EF Alaska
Evaluation Criteria for EFRs
• Scientific Merit
• Partnerships
• Available Scientific
Infrastructure
• Site Management
• Research products
generated at EFR
• Cross-site, regional, and
international activities
•
•
•
•
Access
Data management
Ecological Importance
Education and Outreach
Activities
• Support from National
Forest (or other host)
Types of Networks in the EFR System
• Network in name (e.g.
MAB locations)
• Environmental
Monitoring (e.g. National
Phenology Network)
• Experimentation Network
(e.g. silviculture
experiments)
• Synthesis Networks (e.g.
Quantifying Uncertainty
in Ecosystem Studies
(QUEST))
Current Network Activities
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Clim DB Hydro DB
EcoTrends
StreamChem DB
AmeriFlux
Federal Pollinator Network
Forest Service Climate Tower Network
Monitoring Climate Change Impacts on EFRs
Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET)
National Ecological Observatoryu Network
(NEON)
National Atmospheric Depositions Program
(NADP)
Soil Climate Analysis Network (SCAN)
USA National Phenology Network (NPN)
Forest Inventory and Analysis on EFRs
Phenocam
Regional Environmental Sensor Network
EFR Climate Synthesis
Hydroclimatic Effects on Ecosystem Response
Integrating Landscape-scale Forest
Measurements
Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Long-Term Soil Productivity Study (LTSP)
Long-Term Stand Responses to Silviculture
Quantifying Uncertainty in Ecosystem Studies
USFS Management Intensity Demonstration
Plots
Decomposition on the Forest Floor; Soil
Productivity Studies
Vegetation Dynamics across EFRs
International Cooperative Program on
Assessment and Monitoring of Air Pollution
Effects on Forests
Long-Term Intersite Decomposition Experiment
Team (LIDET)
Lotic Intersite Nitrogen eXperiment (LINXII)
Engaging Arts and Humainities
Detritus Input and Removal Treatments (DIRT)
Nutrient Network (NutNet)
SnoTel
Basic meteorological station
Long-Term Ecosystem Productivity Study
Analysis of long term temperature records at
Experimental Forests across the U.S.
EFRs enable evaluation of long-term changes in
climate from local to continental scales.
• Long history/breadth of
distribution across ecosystem
types.
• Consistency of data collection
• Relatively stable landscapes
• Linkages between changes in
climate and changes in ecosystem
structure and function.
• Regional differences; local
differences (e.g. cold air drainages)
• Studies can provide critical
guidance on how climate change
interacts with management
activities, develop options for
mitigation and adaptation.
Some Key Questions (Fleishman et al. 2010)
• What quantity and quality of surface and groundwater
will be necessary to sustain US human populations and
ecosystem resilience during the next 100 years?
• How do different strategies for ecosystem management
across the gradient of development intensities affect
human health in urban areas?
• How do different strategies for growing and harvesting
biomass or biofuel affect ecosystems and associated
social and economic systems?
• How do different strategies for managing forests,
grasslands, and agricultural systems affect carbon
storage, ecosystem resilience, and other desired
benefits?
Key Questions (cont.)
• What are the ecological and economic effects
of different methods of restoring forests,
wetlands, and streams?
• What are the reliable scientific metrics for
detecting chronic, long-term changes in
ecosystems?
• What are the relative ecological effects of
increasing the intensity versus spatial extent of
agriculture and timber production?
Data Management Challenges
Data Assets:
–
–
–
–
Historical data
Modern data
Administrative data
Web presence
Historical data are both an
invaluable asset and a
tremendous challenge
Research data – historical:
Unlocking the value in the file cabinets
• Catalog holdings; includes assembly of basic metadata
(data creators, field and lab methods, site descriptions,
etc.)
• Prioritize catalog entries conversion to digital format
• Convert from paper to digital; includes organizing data
into consistent file structures
• Develop complete metadata compliant with an
appropriate standard and EFR/Data Archive best
practices; create supplementary content for
understanding the data set
• Package components and disseminate on the web via
R&D Data Archive
Experimental Forests and Ranges
across the United States:
low to high precipitation
Desert Experimental Range, Utah
Cascade Head Experimental Forest,
Oregon
Experimental Forests and Ranges
across the United States:
Tropical Sites
Luquillo Experimental Forest, Puerto Rico
Hawaii Experimental Tropical Forest
Experimental Forests and Ranges
across the United States:
Boreal Sites
Heen Latinee Experimental Forest, Alaska
Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest, Alaska
Experimental Forests and Ranges
across the United States:
Northeastern U.S.
Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest,
New Hampshire
Silas Little Experimental Forest, New Jersey
Experimental Forests and Ranges
across the United States:
Southeastern U.S.
Palustris Experimental Forest, Louisiana
Coweeta Hydrological Lab,
North Carolina
Experimental Forests and Ranges
across the United States:
Rocky Mountain Region
Glacier Lakes Experimental Ecosystem
Sites, Wyoming
Boise Basin Experimental
Forest, Idaho
Experimental Forests and Ranges
across the United States:
Pacific Region
Caspar Creek Experimental Watershed,
California
Starkey Experimental Forest
and Range, Oregon
Experimental Forests and Ranges
across the United States:
In California
San Joaquin Experimental Range, California
Sagehen Creek Experimental Forest,
California
EFR Strategic Business Plan
• Winter 2011-12
• It is strategic in the sense
that it will address and
recommend the array of
scientific research and
monitoring options suited
to our collection of EFRs.
• It is a business plan in the
sense that it will provide a
comprehensive evaluation
of our current investments
and assets and lay out the
business requirements for
how we achieve our vision
for the future.
Wind River EF Washington
EFR Strategic Business Plan
• Intended to
provide FS R&D
Leadership with
a menu of
options from
which to choose
• Each option will
offer a trajectory
for us to move
forward on to
fulfill a
corresponding
set of
expectations for
the network
Priest River
Experimental Forest,
Idaho
Headquarters Office
in 1912
Priest River
Experimental
Forest, Idaho
Celebrating its
Centennial in 2011