Pinyon-Juniper/Shrublands Successional Trends:

Implications of Long-Term Changes for Woodland Management

Robin J. Tausch1

Richard Miller2 and

Durant McArthur3Durant McArthur

1. Rocky Mountain Research Station, Reno, Nevada

2. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon

3. Rocky Mountain Research Station, Provo, Utah, Retired

Although we now have a good idea of the patterns of woodland expansion for the Great Basin as a whole these woodlands have never had thefor the Great Basin as a whole, these woodlands have never had the detailed inventories necessary for their intensive management and treatment. These inventories are necessary to understand the types and distribution of woodland variability.

Although they can give the appearance of simplicity, these woodlands are highly complex.

They are first highly variable in the associated perennial species present in their understory communities.

Depending on location there are:Different species and subspecies of sagebrush presentDifferent species of deep rooted perennial grasses presentDifferent species of perennial forbs presentDifferent species of perennial forbs present

The different combinations of these perennial plant species indicate significant differences in how a site should be managed, and in how it will

d t t t trespond to treatment.

Woodland sites also differ widely in climate, elevation, topography, aspect,slope, geology, and soils, all of which affect productivity.

Differences also affect the procedures available for effective management, and the options available for treatment to minimize the negativeand the options available for treatment to minimize the negative impacts.

Central to an understanding of the underlying variability of Great Basin dl d i l d t di f h th dl d hwoodlands is also an understanding of how the woodlands have

changed over the last 100 to 150 years, and how they will continue to change over the next 50 to 100 years.

These ongoing changes have direct affects on the possibilities for management, and on the options for, and the outcomes from treatment.

Great Basin Study Sites for the Changing Fire Regimes Study Funded by the Joint Fire Sciences Program (Rick Miller)

North & South Steens

South Mt

North & South Steens

South Mt

North & South Steens

South Mt

North & South Steens

South MtProgramHigh

Desert

Humb

South MtJuniper MtHigh

Desert

Humb

South MtJuniper MtHigh

Desert

Humb

South MtJuniper MtHigh

Desert

Humb

South MtJuniper Mt

Nevada: Robin Tausch,Rocky Mountain Research Station, Reno,NV

(Robin Tausch)

mboldt BonnevilleHighCentral

Shoshone Laho

ntan

lcar

eous

mboldt BonnevilleHighCentral

Shoshone

mboldt BonnevilleHighCentral

Shoshone

mboldt BonnevilleHighCentral

Shoshone Laho

ntan

lcar

eous

Oregon and Idaho: Rick Miller, OregonState University

Utah: Durant McArthur, R k M t i (Robin Tausch) Central

East Tintic

Hig

h C

al

Central

East Tintic

Central

East Tintic

Central

East Tintic

Hig

h C

alRocky Mountain Research Station, Provo, UT, Retired

S. Nevada###Megan Bradely,

Geography Dept.,UNR

###

Clover Mountains

Mt. Irish

Comparisons of Community Types Sampled, and Comparison of Relative Abundance of Pre-Settlement (age oldest tree > 140 yrs.) and Post-Settlement (age of oldest tree < 140 yrs.) plots

f th Ch i Fi R i St d i N d d Ut hfor the Changing Fire Regimes Study in Nevada and Utah.

A Joint Fire Sciences Program Funded Project

Shoshone MountainsEast Tintic Mountains

Shoshone MountainsEast Tintic Mountains

60

80 68%

87%

otal 60

8078% 79%

Plot

s20

40

60

32%

13%Perc

ent o

f To

20

40

22% 21%rc

ent o

f Tot

al

Sagebrush Woodland0

20 13%

Tree Dominance Level

P

>140Yrs <140Yrs0

20

Age of the Oldest Tree in the PLot

Per

g

Tintic Utah Juniper Mountain, IdahoShoshone, NevadaTintic Utah Juniper Mountain, IdahoShoshone, Nevada

Rates of Tree Establishment By Decade for Three Study Sites

40

80

120Post-settlement

60

80

100

120

140

160

Post-settlement

p

20

30

40

50

Post-settlement

40

80

120Post-settlement

60

80

100

120

140

160

Post-settlement

p

20

30

40

50

Post-settlement

Pre-settlement

40

50

0

40

200

Pre-settlement

a

160

Pre-settlement 200

0

20

40

0

10

Pre-settlement

40

50

0

40

200

Pre-settlement

a

160

Pre-settlement 200

0

20

40

0

10

0

10

20

30

0

Tree

s / H

a

0

40

80

120

0

50

100

150

0

10

20

30

0

Tree

s / H

a

0

40

80

120

0

50

100

150

Total

20

30

40

500

80

120

160Total Total

100

150

200

250

Total

20

30

40

500

80

120

160Total Total

100

150

200

250

Decade

1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 20000

10

1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000

0

40

1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 20000

50

Decade

1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 20000

10

1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000

0

40

1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 20000

50

A Joint Fire Sciences Program Funded Study

Tree establishment patterns on Southern Nevada Mountain Top Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Sites

Megan Bradley 2009, M.S. Thesis, University of Nevada, Reno

Tree establishment patterns in Underdown Canyon, Shoshone Mountains, Nevada

Average tree Age plus 95% C.L. by Crown Diameter Class for Four Great Basin Data Sets

Sampled 2001 - 2002p

Pattern of Understory Decline Over Time With the Increase in Pinyon/Juniper Dominance

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Tree Dominance = Low Mid High

70 600

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

50

60

Total Tree 400

500

af B

io. (

kg)

Total Tr

30

40

Total Under

200

300

Und

erst

ory

Lea ree Leaf B

io. (kPicture 1

Picture 2

10

20

100

200

Tota

l Ukg)Picture 1

0 25 50 75 100 125 1500 0

Leaf Bio. Weighted Avg. Age of Pinyon

Upper Underdown Canyon, Shoshone Mountains, Nevada, June 1973Picture 1.

Upper Underdown Canyon, Shoshone Mountains, Nevada, June 2007Picture 2.

North Kern East Chaining

1971Mostly Phase I, some Phase II on hillside.

1971

2008

Mostly Phase III, some Phase II on hillside

2008

Blythe Springs Chaining

Mostly Phases I and II, with some Phase III on hillside

1971

2008Mostly Phase III, with some Phase II on hillside

2008

Underdown 1973 Underdown 2005

150

Low Tree

a pl

ot)

100

125 High Tree

Slope Difference P < 0.01

(kg/

0.10

ha

75

af B

iom

ass

50

erst

ory

Lea

25

Tota

l Und

e

0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 20000

Tree Needle Biomass (kg/0.10 ha plot)Underdown Canyon, Shoshone Mountains, NV Pre-Treatment Data (40 plots of 0.10 ha)

Pattern of Increase in One-Hour Live Fuels With Increasing Relative Tree Dominance in the Underdown Canyon Demonstraton Area, Shoshone Mountains, NV

30000Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Underdown Canyon Demonstration Area Fuels

20000

25000

els

(kg/

ha)

15000

20000

Hou

r Li

ve F

ue

5000

10000

Low Elevation Plots

Mid Elevation Plots

Tota

l One

-H

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.00

High Elevation Plots

Relative Tree Percent Cover

Upper Underdown Canyon, NV 1973Upper Underdown Canyon, NV 2005

Distribution of the Study Plots Between Low, Mid, and High Tree Dominance for the Changing Fire Regimes Study

Sweetwater Mtns., CA

Upper Underdown Canyon, NV 1973

60

Shoshone Mountains41% 40%

49% 47%

al

40 E. Tintic Mountains40%

cent

of T

ota

2010%

13%Perc

Low Mid High0

Tree Dominance Level

Cathedral Burn, White Pine Range, Nevada, Mid-June, 2008 (Burned Mid-July 2007)

Cathedral Burn, White Pine Range, Nevada, Late July, 2009 (Burned Mid-July 2007)

Jackass Burn, Sweetwater Mountains, Nevada-California, Late August, 2009 (Burned 2006)

Cheatgrass and Tumble Mustard Dominate a Phase III Expansion Woodland Site Four Years After Wildfire

Burn Site is located on the East Side of Mount Como, Pine Nut Mountains, Nevada

Outcomes of alOutcomes of al

Marking Corral Mechanical, Phase I, July 2009 Treated Late August, 2006 (JFS SageSTEP Project)

Marking Corral Mechanical Phase II, July 2009Treated Late August, 2006 (JFS SageSTEP Project)

Marking Corral Mechanical Phase III, July 2009Treated Late August, 2006 (JFS SageSTEP Project)

Marking Corral Burn, Phase I, July 2009Treated Late August, 2006 (JFS SageSTEP Project)

Marking Corral Burn, Early Phase II, July 2009Treated Late August, 2006 (JFS SageSETP Project)

Marking Corral Burn, Late Phase II, July 2009Treated Late August 2006 (JFS SageSTEP Project)

Marking Corral Burn, Phase III, July 2009Treated Late August, 2006 (JFS SageSTEP Project)

For planning management and treatment there are three types of woodland sites.

1 Sites where all the trees should be removed to delay the rate of tree1. Sites where all the trees should be removed to delay the rate of treere-establishment as much as possible. This is about 20% of the total current woodland area.

These are sites that are highly productive and represent areas with valuable habitat, and important watershed characteristics and forage. Tree removal will also break up large, contiguous stands, potentially reducing the size of wildfires.potentially reducing the size of wildfires.

2. Sites where no trees should be removed (or possibly only young trees filling in the stands). While these sites are common, they are not

b d t ti b t 5%+ f th t dl dabundant, representing about 5%+ of the current woodland area.

These are sites that are usually old-growth, or are otherwise sites of low productivity, such as on steep slopes, or shallow or sandy p y, p p , ysoils. Overall, they are not economical to try to treat.

3. The remainder, about 75% of the current woodland area, can possibly be managed in multiple wayspossibly be managed in multiple ways.

Currently about 20% of this area is in tree dominated, Phase III expansion woodlands that are at or near maximum biomass and and fuel loads.

About 50% of this area is in Phase II expansion woodlands. These woodlands average about half the maximum biomass Phase IIIwoodlands average about half the maximum biomass. Phase III biomass will probably not be present for another 40 to 50 years.

The remaining about 30% is in Phase I expansion woodlands that only average about 25% of maximum biomass. For sites with adequate tree density, maybe another 80 to 100 years to reach Phase III.

Different Phases of woodlands can respond differently to differentDifferent Phases of woodlands can respond differently to different types of treatments. Results from the SageSTEP Marking Corral site provides examples.

I th dl d f N d d t Ut h th tlIn the woodlands of Nevada and western Utah there are currently about 100,000+ acres a year moving into Phase III woodlands.

As this happens the potential for wildfire or insect attack is rapidly pp p p yincreasing across large areas of the landscape.

Treatment of many of these sites involves both tree removal toreduce the potential for both wildfire and insect attack whilereduce the potential for both wildfire and insect attack, while simultaneously limiting the expansion and dominance of exotic annual or perennial invaders.

The use of mechanical removal procedures in Phase III woodlands, along with seeding could provide for an increased presence and growth of herbaceous perennials, potentially improving the resilence of the site to a follow up treatment by prescribed fireresilence of the site to a follow up treatment by prescribed fire.

Following chaining there was about eight to ten years, and sometimes longer, of increased presence and growth of herbaceous perennials,longer, of increased presence and growth of herbaceous perennials, potentially improving the resilience of the site to a follow up treatment by prescribed fire.

R lt f th l t h i i t di l i di t iblResults from these long-term chaining studies also indicate a possible rotation time for repeating biomass harvests in these woodlands.

Also, the combination of the trees left behind, and the release of the , ,understory, seems to help control the expansion and dominance of exotic annuals.

An indication of tree growth following a harvest treatment can be seen in theAn indication of tree growth following a harvest treatment can be seen in the patterns of tree survival and growth following treatment on the older chainings. An average for the chainings studied in eastern Nevada was the removal of about 95% of the tree dominance, but that left about half the original density.

This can be seen in the paired pictures between 1971 and 2008 for N. Kern E and Blythe Springs Chainings that follow in the next two slidesE. and Blythe Springs Chainings that follow in the next two slides.

North Kern East Chaining

19711971Chained in 1969

200839 years of re-growth of trees surviving chaining39 yea s o e g o t o t ees su g c a g

Nearing the end of Phase II

Blythe Springs Chaining

1971Chained in 1958Chained in 1958

2008 50 years of re-growth of trees 50 yea s o e g o t o t eessurviving chaining

Now in Phase III

From SageSTEP Network data the trees 5” basal diameter and larger in Phase III expansion woodlands comprise:

1 about 93% of the stand biomass1. about 93% of the stand biomass2. about 40% of the tree density

The harvest for biomass of trees from Phase III woodlands that are 5 i h d t b l di t h t 93% f th biinches and greater basal diameter harvests 93% of the biomass and also nearly all the habitat for insects such as sawfly, needle scale and bark beetle.

The remaining trees will have both accelerated growth, and still represent twice the density needed to redominate the site.

Based on the tree growth rates from chaining studies reachingBased on the tree growth rates from chaining studies, reaching Phase III dominance, and harvestable biomass levels, would again be possible in a minimum of 50 to 60 years on more productive sites.

Because of the rapidity with which the woodlands are currently changing, p y y g g,the best landscape level results might occur of initial treatments are concentrated on two areas.

1 Those areas where all trees should be removed to provide fire breaks1. Those areas where all trees should be removed to provide fire breaks, as well as needed habitat and watershed improvement.

2. Selective tree removal in the existing Phase III woodlands using the 5” rule.

Strategically locating both treatments to maximize the reduction in the size of potential wildfiresof potential wildfires.