TRADITIONAL AND FIRE- RELATED SILVICULTURAL TECHNIQUES TO REGENERATE OAK RESULTS FROM NC SITE OF THE REGIONAL OAK STUDY

Transcription

1 TRADITIONAL AND FIRE- RELATED SILVICULTURAL TECHNIQUES TO REGENERATE OAK RESULTS FROM NC SITE OF THE REGIONAL OAK STUDY

2 BACKGROUND Difficulty in regenerating oak has been identified by many resource practitioners as a key land management issue that spans across private, state, and federal land Oak regeneration failure, oak decline events, and altered disturbance regimes have resulted in decreased oak throughout the Central Hardwood Region (Fei et al., 211) Problems associated with the regeneration of mixed species stands oaks, in particular, are not new On mesic sites in the southern Appalachian, stands originating prior to 193 tend to be of mixed-species composition (oak) while stands originating after 193 tend to be dominated by yellow-poplar and red (or sugar) maple (Lorimer, 1983)

3 Fei and others (211)

4 Fei and others (211)

5 BACKGROUND Securing adequate oak regeneration is not problematic across the landscape Regeneration is more problematic on higher than lower quality sites Differences in regeneration potential, competition, and site quality across the Central Hardwood Region impedes the development of techniques and guidelines for sustaining oak as a major component of upland ecosystems Given the ongoing oak regeneration problem and the high ecological and economic value of oak across the Central Hardwood Region, the NCWRC and BCEF agreed to partner on a study focusing on oak regeneration in the southern Appalachians The problems regenerating oak throughout the Central Hardwoods coupled with silvicultural expertise within SRS and NRS presented an opportunity to expand our research to answer questions on regional basis

6 THE REGIONAL OAK STUDY: A COOPERATIVE EFFORT Figure from Fei et al., (211) NC: USFS-SRS, NCWRC, NC State, and University of Texas-San Antonio TN: USFS-SRS, Stevenson Land Company, and Alabama A&M University MO: USFS-NRS, USFS-Mark Twain NF, and University of Missouri

7 THE REGIONAL OAK STUDY: A COOPERATIVE EFFORT Ecosystem response to 3 (plus control) recommended but not widely tested treatments that alter light and hardwood competition to enhance oak regeneration Across 3 physiographic regions of the Central Hardwood Region 1. Southern Blue Ridge Mountains mesic, high quality 2. Cumberland Plateau submesic subxeric, intermediate quality 3. Ozark Highlands xeric, lower quality Figure from Fei et al., (211)

8 TREATMENTS 1. Control 2. Oak Shelterwood (Loftis 199) 3. Shelterwood/Burn (Brose et al., 1999) 4. Repeated Rx fire Photo: USFS NRS

9 ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS OF INTEREST All locations will address: Structure and composition of the forest overstory Regeneration dynamics of oak and other commercial and noncommercial tree species Understory plant diversity Surface fuel loading Some locations will address: Wildlife habitat Seed bank Bats and small mammals Reptiles and amphibians Insect abundance and diversity Breeding birds Artificial oak regeneration

10 NC EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN 16 5 ha (~12 acre) units Mature, mixed-hardwood forest stands, with oak/hickory comprising ~56% of BA Site index (oak 5 ) varies b/t 76 ft (23.1 m) and 1 ft (3.5 m)

11 225 m DATA COLLECTION 1 2 Fuels transects.4 ha regen plots m 6 Seed bank plots.1 ha small tree plot.5 ha large tree plot 1 m 2 herbaceous plots

12 TREATMENT STATUS Oak shelterwood All four reps are 6 yrs post herbicide trt Shelterwood/burn (Brose) Two units are 5 yrs post-harvest Two units are 4 yrs post-harvest Prescribed fire only Two units are 5 yrs post 1st of 3 planned Rx fires Will (hopefully) receive the 2 nd of 3 planned fires in the dormant season, Two units are 1 yr post the 2 nd of 3 planned Rx fires (Hopefully) all four units will be burned Fall, 214

13 # regen plots 1 ST OF 3 PLANNED PRESCRIBED FIRES (5YR RETURN INTERVAL) Dormant season fires (2/24/29 & 4/1/21) Cool backing fires (short strip lighting and flanking strip lighting) 1hr: 9 and 11% RH: 2 and 4% Wind speed: <7 mph Scorch height Mean: 2. ft Min: ft Max: 3.8 ft Litter consumption Pre-fire: 2.2 in Post-fire:.6 in Ground level Maximum temperature (df) 1 ft

14

15 # regen plots 2 ND OF 3 PLANNED PRESCRIBED FIRES (5YR RETURN INTERVAL) Dormant season fire (4/2/214) Cool backing fires (short strip lighting and flanking strip lighting) 1hr: 6-8% RH: 2-37% Wind speed: 3-8 mph Scorch height Mean: 4.6 ft Min: ft Max: 49.9 ft Litter consumption Pre-fire: 2.3 in Post-fire:.1 in Ground level Maximum temperature (df) 1 ft

16 Tons/acre FUELS 12 1 Pre-burn 1 Post-burn 1 Pre-burn 2 Post-burn hr 1 hr 1 hr 1 hr

17 VEGETATION RESPONSE: OVERSTORY/MIDSTORY LAYERS

18 BA (ft 2 /acre) STRUCTURE BASAL AREA % -16% -8% -64% CON OSW RXF SWB

19 Trees/acre STRUCTURE TREES/ACRE % -56% -16% -69% CON OSW RXF SWB

20 QMD (in) STRUCTURE TREE SIZE % +39% +6% +17% CON OSW RXF SWB

21 VEGETATION RESPONSE: REGENERATION LAYER

22 SPECIES GROUPS 1. Canopy sweet birch, fraser magnolia, cucumber, white ash, basswood, black walnut, black locust, buckeye, yellow birch 2. Hickory pignut, mockernut, bitternut, red hickory 3. Midstory dogwood, sourwood, silverbell, striped maple, beech, serviceberry, ilex spp., musclewood, ironwood, American chestnut 4. Maple red and sugar maple 5. Oak northern red oak, southern red oak, black oak, scarlet oak, chestnut oak, white oak 6. Yellow-poplar

23 Stems/acre Stems/acre Stems/acre CONTROL 3 25 <2ft ft canopy hickory maple midstory canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP oak YP ft - <1.5" dbh 2 canopy 15 1 hickory maple midstory oak YP

24 Stems/acre Stems/acre Stems/acre OAK SHELTERWOOD 25 2 <2ft ft canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP ft <1.5" dbh canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP

25 Stems/acre Stems/acre Stems/acre RX FIRE <2ft canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP ft canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP ft - <1.5" dbh canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP 3 5 6

26 Stems/acre Stems/acre Stems/acre SHELTERWOOD/BURN <2ft canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP ft canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP ft - <1.5" dbh canopy hickory maple midstory oak YP

27 Survival (%) POPULATION DYNAMICS - SURVIVAL CON OSW RXF SWB YP MAPLE OAK

28 Height growth (inches) POPULATION DYNAMICS HEIGHT GROWTH CON OSW RXF SWB -1 CANOPY HICKORY MAPLE MIDSTORY OAK YP -2-3

29 Basal diametergrowth (inches) POPULATION DYNAMICS BASAL DIAMETER GROWTH CANOPY HICKORY MAPLE MIDSTORY OAK YP CON OSW RXF SWB -.4

30 WRAP-UP

31 CONCLUSIONS Conclusions regarding the efficacy of treatments cannot be made at this time - treatments have not been fully implemented Unfortunately, ecological and forestry-related research (silviculture, in particular) is a long-term endeavor Applicable results often requiring 1+ years of data collection

32 Purposeful burning by Native Peoples European settlement - land clearing for pasture & agriculture, continued use of fire Fire suppression Structure & composition Silvicultural systems Domestic grazing Land abandonment Exploitive logging/wildfires Photo: Southern Appalachian brook trout foundation Source: American Memory online photographic collection, Library of Congress Wood utilization associated with subsistence living

33 ROS LITERATURE 1. K e y s e r, T. L. T. R o o f, J. A d a m s, D. S i m o n, a n d G. W a r b u r t o n E f f e c t s o f p r e s c r i bed f i r e o n t h e b u r i e d s e e d b a n k i n m i x e d - h a r d w o o d f o r e s t s o f t h e s o u t h e r n A p p a l a c h i a n M o u n t a i n s. S o u t h e a s t e r n N a t u r a l i s t 1 1 ( 4 ) : G r e e n b e r g, G. H., K e y s e r, T. L., Z a r n o c h, S. J., C o n n o r, K., W a r b u r t o n, G., a n d S i m o n, D. M A c o r n v i a b i l i t y f o l l o w i n g p r e s c r i b e d f i r e i n u p l a n d h a r d w o o d f o r e s t s. F o r e s t E c o l o g y a n d M a n a g e m e n t : G r e e n b e r g, C. H., K. E. F r a n z r e b, T. L. K e y s e r, S. J. Z a r n o c h, D. M. S i m o n, a n d G. S. W a r b u r to n. I n p r e s s. S h o r t - t e r m r e s p o n s e o f b r e e d i n g b i r d s t o o a k r e g e n e r a t i o n t r e a t m e n t s i n u p l a n d h a r d w o o d f o r e s t. N a t u r a l A r e a s J o u r n a l. I n P r e s s. 4. R a y b u c k, A. L., C. E. M o o r m a n, C. H. G r e e n b e r g, C. S. D e P e r n o, K. G r o s s, D. M. S i m o n, G. S. W a r b u r to n S h o r t - t e r m r e s po n s e o f s m a l l m a m m a l s f o l l o w i n g o a k r e g e n e r a t i o n s i l v i c u l t u r e t r e a t m e n t s. F o r. E c o l. a n d M a n a g e : R a y b u c k, A S h o r t - t e r m r e s p o n s e o f s m a l l m a m m a l a n d P l e t ho d o n s a l a m a n d e r s f o l l o w i n g o a k r e g e n e r a t i o n s i l v i c u l t u r e t r e a t m e n t s. M S T h e s i s, N o r th C a r o l i n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y. 5 4 p p. 6. C a n t r e l l A. W., Y. W a n g, C. J. S c h w e i t z e r, a n d C. H. G r e e n b e r g S h o r t t e r m r e s p o n s e o f h e r p e t o f a u n a t o o a k r e g e n e r a t i o n t r e a t m e n t s o n t h e m i d - C u m b e r l a n d P l a t e a u o f s o u t h e r n T e n n e s s e e. F o r. E c o l. a n d M a n a g e : C a n t r e l l, A. ; W a n g, Y. ; S c h w e i t z e r, C. J. ; G r e e n b e r g, C H e r p e t o f a u n a l a n d s m a l l m a m m a l r e s p o n s e t o o a k - r e g e n e r a t i n g s i l v i c u l t ure p r a c ti c e s i n t h e m i d - C u m b e r l a n d P l a t e a u o f S o u t h e r n T e n n e s s e e. I n B u t n o r, J. R., e d P r o c e e d i n g s, 1 6 t h B i e n n i a l S o u t h e r n S i l v i c ultural C o n f e r e n c e ; ; F e b r u a r y , 2 1 1, C h a r l e s t o n, S o u t h C a r o l i n a. e - G e n. T e c h. R e p. S R S A s h e v i l l e, N C : U. S. D e p a r t m e n t o f A g r i c u l t ure, F o r e s t S e r v i c e, S o u t h e r n R e s e a r c h S t a t i o n : C a n t r e l l, A H e r p e t o f a u n a l a n d s m a l l r e s p o n s e t o o a k r e g e n e r a t i o n t r e a t m e n t s o n t h e m i d - C u m b e r l a n d P l a t e a u o f s o u t h e r n T e n n e s s e e. M S T h e s i s, A l a b a m a A & M U n i v e r s i t y, N o r m a l, A L p p. 9. K a b r i c k, J. M., J. L. V i l l w o c k, D. C. Dey, T. L. K e y s e r, a n d D. R. L a r s e n. p e n d i n g. M o d e l i n g a n d M a p p i n g O a k A d v a n c e R e p r o d uction D e n s i t y U s i n g S o i l a n d S i t e V a r i a b l e s. F o r e s t S c i e n c e. I n P r e s s. 1. V i l l w o c k, J a s o n L. ; K a b r i c k, J o h n M. ; M c N a b, W. H e n r y ; Dey, D a n i e l C L a n d f o r m a n d t e r r a i n s h a p e i n d i c e s a r e r e l a t e d t o o a k s i t e i n d e x i n t h e M i s s o u r i O z a r k s. I n : F e i, S o n g l i n ; L h o t k a, J o h n M. ; S t r i n g e r, J e f f r e y W. ; G o t t s c h a l k, K u r t W. ; M i l l e r, G a r y W., e d s. P r o c e e d i n g s, 1 7 t h c e n t r a l h a r d w o o d f o r e s t c o n f e r e n c e ; 2 1 A p r i l 5-7 ; L e x i n g t o n, K Y ; G e n. T e c h. R e p. N R S - P N e w t o w n S q u a r e, P A : U. S. D e p a r t m e n t o f A g r i c u l t ure, F o r e s t S e r v i c e, N o r t h e r n R e s e a r c h S t a t i o n : V i l l w o c k, J. L F a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g u p l a n d o a k a d v a n c e r e p r o d uction i n t h e M i s s o u r i O z a r k s. M S T h e s i s, U n i v e r s i t y o f M i s s o u r i. 6 1 p.

34 QUESTIONS??????????