Interagency Whitebark Pine Health Monitoring Program for the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

1. Interagency Whitebark Pine Health Monitoring Program for the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Cooperating Organizations: USDA Forest Service Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee (GYCC) Forest Health Protection USDI National Park Service Greater Yellowstone Inventory and Monitoring Network Yellowstone National Park Grand Teton National Park John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway USDI Geological Survey Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center Montana State University Department of Mathematical Sciences US Fish and Wildlife Service

2. Interagency Whitebark Pine Health Monitoring Program for the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Acknowledgements and Credits: USDI National Park Service Dan Reinhart Erin Shanahan Rob Daley Rachel Simons John Fothergill USDI Geological Survey Shannon Podruzny Jonathan Ball

3. Whitebark Pine Why is whitebark pine a vital sign for the Greater Yellowstone Network • “Keystone” species of the subalpine zone • Valuable food source for a variety of wildlife species (more than 17 species) • Major predictor of grizzly bear annual survival and reproduction • Alters microclimates in the harsh subalpine zone

4. Swelling Flagging Chewing Whitebark Pine Monitoring Objectives • To estimate the proportion of whitebark pine trees >1.4 m within the GYE infected with white pine blister rust and how it changes over time. • To determine the relative severity of white pine blister rust infection in trees > 1.4 m in height. • To estimate survival of individual whitebark pine trees > 1.4 m in height taking into account mountain pine beetle and blister rust infection.

5. Whitebark Pine Protocol Status Peer Reviewed and approved by IMR I&M coordinator in 2007 Greater Yellowstone Whitebark Pine Monitoring Working Group. 2007 Interagency Whitebark Pine Monitoring Protocol for the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, Version 1.0. Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee, Bozeman, MT. Protocols are a key component of quality assurance helping to ensure that changes detected are actually occurring in nature and not simply a result of measurement differences

6. Whitebark Pine Monitoring background Probabilistic sample design • Target population • All whitebark pine in the GYE • Sample frame • Stratified inside & outside the Grizzly Bear PCA • Sampling units • Stands 2.5 hectares or larger

7. Whitebark Pine Monitoring background Plot establishment 2004-2007 • 150 stands surveyed • 176 permanent transects • 4,774 trees tagged • Over 4000 miles hiked

8. Whitebark Pine Monitoring background Panel Design • Representative of the population • Estimates of blister rust infection can be calculated annually • Can accommodate a split panel design

10. Whitebark Pine Status of blister rust in the GY E First time ecosystem wide results • Table 1. Summary statistics for Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem 2004-2006.

11. Whitebark Pine Status of blister rust Proportion of trees with blister rust is .20 Ratio of trees with blister rust infection varies across ecosystem 84% of the cankers are on branches High levels of mountain pine beetle Ratio of trees with blister rust infection

12. Whitebark Pine Status of Mountain pine beetle Objective: to estimate survival of whitebark pine trees > 1.4 m in height taking into account mountain pine beetle, etc. • Minor protocol amendment to include: • MPB indicators • Other agents contributing to mortality (fire, mechanical damage) • Multi-agency training with Forest Health Protection entomologist held June 23 • In 2008 the USGS added 2-person crew to assist with transect monitoring

13. Whitebark Pine Mountain pine beetle Proposed analysis of 2008 data What proportion of the whitebark pine sample is now dead or recently dead? Of the dead, what proportion were burned or appeared killed by MPB or Blister rust? Examine the tree characteristics (e.g. DBH) of the dead trees

14. Whitebark Pine Residual Issues Observer Variability • Data analysis (Huang 2006) show that : • detection of blister rust cankers is different among observers • A tendency toward increasing agreement over time. • This indicates that training and experience may play a key role in obtaining consistent results.

15. Whitebark Pine Next steps • Inclusion of a “recruitment” objective Estimate the number of juvenile WbP trees that become cone producing trees • Student driven research component using existing data set • Design field & data analysis methods • May need to modify sample frame to include recently burned stands (20 years or less)

16. Whitebark Pine Next steps • IGBST applied for funding through the USGS Status & Trend program Integrated analysis, modeling, and synthesis of the impacts of blister rust and mountain pine beetle mortality to whitebark pine in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem • Analysis of 2008 data • Report to be published with IGBST annual report 3. In 2009, continue with higher frequency panel revisits to document mortality from Mountain Pine Beetle

17. Greater Yellowstone Network Greater Yellowstone Science Learning Center (GYSLC): http://www.greateryellowstonescience.org/ Whitebark Pine topic page from GYSLC: http://www.greateryellowstonescience.org/topics/biological/vegetation/whitebarkpine Annual reports from the Interagency Whitebark Pine Monitoring Program http://www.greateryellowstonescience.org/topics/biological/vegetation/whitebarkpine/projects/healthmonitoring https://science1.nature.nps.gov/naturebib/biodiversity/2008-9-9/ID660051_GYE_WBP_2007_Annual_Report.pdf Main Greater Yellowstone Network: http://www.nature.nps.gov/im/units/gryn/