1 / 30

New Sampling Protocols and Data for the National FIA Program

New Sampling Protocols and Data for the National FIA Program. John D. Shaw Interior West Forest Inventory and Analysis USDA Forest Service. Interior West FIA User Group Webcast April 13 , 2010. What’s New…and Why?. FIA recently adopted several important protocol changes and additions

medea
Download Presentation

New Sampling Protocols and Data for the National FIA Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. New Sampling Protocols and Data for the National FIA Program John D. Shaw Interior West Forest Inventory and Analysis USDA Forest Service Interior West FIA User Group Webcast April 13, 2010

  2. What’s New…and Why? • FIA recently adopted several important protocol changes and additions • Some required several years for development • They will add valuable data and analysis capability to the FIA program • Some parts are regionally optional, but IW-FIA intends to collect the full suite • Coming in with next two field manual changes – ver 5.0 (2011) and ver 6.0 (2012)

  3. Manual 5.0 Changes • Present Nonforest Land Use* • Cover Assessment • Phase 2 Vegetation • Invasive Plants Manual 6.0 Changes • Prefield Canopy Cover and Land Use* • Damage • Phase 2 Down Woody Material • Reserved Status / Admin Withdrawn • Land Cover • Forest Definition Change

  4. Forest Land “traditional” FIA forest Other Wooded Land Forest Natural Land Use Nonforest Non-natural Land Use 5% 100% 0% Tree Canopy Cover How FIA Previously Classified Land Non-Forest Land Insufficient Cover / Stocking Non-Forest Land Non-Natural Land Uses

  5. Rangeland Other Wooded Land Forest “traditional” FIA forest Other Wooded Land Forest Other Natural (beach, chaparral, wetland, etc) Natural Land Use Agroforestry Agriculture (crops, pasture, orchards, Christmas trees, etc) Nonforest Developed (urban, rights-of-way, recreation, mining, etc) Non-natural Land Use 5% 10% 100% 0% Tree Canopy Cover Combining Present Nonforest Land Use and Canopy Cover

  6. Cover Assessment Documentation of Forest / Nonforest Call Issue: Past protocol was based on cover / stocking assessment to make forest / nonforest call, but there were no variables associated with the call – i.e., if the crew did the plot it was forest, if they didn’t, it wasn’t. Solution: “Cover Assessment” protocol is being implemented to reduce subjectivity and increase repeatability when making the forest / nonforest call. Supporting variables are Live Canopy Cover, Live + Missing Canopy Cover, and Number of Seedlings. Crews will now document assessment method and record supporting variables. Special methods apply to marginal, under-sampled conditions.

  7. Documentation of Forest / Nonforest Call

  8. Phase 2 Vegetation Issue: National vegetation sampling protocol occurs on the Phase 3 grid – less than one plot per 100,000 acres. Need for better data resolution led regional FIA programs to develop their own vegetation protocols on the Phase 2 grid. Solution: National Phase 2 vegetation protocol is preferable to regional methods. Protocol change gives a national protocol with sampling intensity options. P2 Veg protocol can be used to assess wildlife habitat, biomass, forage availability, grazing potential, vegetation competition with tree growth, fuel loadings from understory vegetation, and potential site productivity. The most abundant species provide information to classify plant community types into plant associations and to predict associated forest stand characteristics.

  9. Invasive Plants Issue: Multiple regional approaches to invasive plants, partly because of state-level definitions of “invasive”, “noxious”, etc. Solution: When an FIA unit samples invasive species, they will use the national field protocols. Data will be collected by crew members who have been trained and certified in the invasive plants protocol methods. These crew members are expected to have field guides that allow for unambiguous identification of the plant species on the list they are to use, and training in field identification and cover estimation of those species under different conditions.

  10. Invasive Plants • Changes to the species lists are managed by the individual FIA units using local change procedures – i.e., national methods but local species lists. • Lists may vary among states within FIA regions, in keeping with State definitions Total number of species: NRS 43 PNW – AK 44 PNW – R5 only 11 IW-FIA – varies by state 128 SRS – all states 40 SRS – FL add-ons 60 All regions combined 237

  11. Phase 2 Down Woody Material Issue: National DWM sampling protocol occurs on the Phase 3 grid – less than one plot per 100,000 acres. Need for better data resolution led regional FIA programs to develop their own DWM protocols on the Phase 2 grid. Solution: National Phase 2 DWM protocol is preferable to regional methods. Protocol change gives a national protocol with sampling intensity options. National Phase 2 DWM protocol is comparable to regional IW-FIA P2 DWM protocol. See Larry DeBlander’s section later today (12:30) for preliminary analysis of IW-FIA DWM data.

  12. Figure 25-1. Plot layout for sampling CWD, FWD, and litter and duff depth. CWD transects include two 24’ transects per subplot (starting at subplot center designated by its azimuth as labeled), optional extension onto condition mapped macroplots, and optional third transect for CWD.

  13. Prefield Canopy Cover and Land Use* Issue: Previously there has been a lost opportunity with respect to the collection of data on nonforest land. About 2/3 of IW-FIA Phase 2 plot locations are on nonforest, and there has been no tracking of forestnonforest status change. Solution: During our consideration of the forest definition change, we developed a land use – canopy cover matrix in which a minimum of tree canopy cover and land use* is recorded for every Phase 2 plot. In addition to having the ability to estimate acreage by land use and tree cover, we will be able to develop a transition matrix over time.

  14. Figure 2: Examples of three plots showing the distribution of dots used for dot counts. Figure 3: Examples of three plots showing the polygons digitized for use in image segmentation (top) and the output classification of crown cover (bottom). From Goeking and Liknes. 2008. RMRS-P-56CD.

  15. Damage Issue: Like vegetation and DWM, regional FIA programs had developed regional protocols and species lists for damage assessment. There was a need to develop a national protocol that provided a degree of national consistency, while allowing for regionally important damaging agents – e.g., gypsy moth in the East, and MPB in the West. Solution: National core protocol requires only group-level identification of damaging agents, according to the Forest Health Protection PTIPS list – e.g., 11000 = bark beetles. Regions may add or drop specific agents as needed without modification of the national protocol – e.g., 11006 = MPB, 11030 Ips spp.

  16. Damage • IW-FIA will collect damage data on ~30 agents in addition to the national list of general agent groups • New list maintains consistency with previous regional damage protocol • These include damages that affect forest products, as well as growth and survival – e.g., sweep, forks • Protocol allows up to 3 damages per tree • IW-FIA will continue to collect Hawksworth DMR variable

  17. Reserved / Admin Withdrawn Lands Issue: FIA has traditionally attempted to identify lands that have been permanently removed from the timber base, but there are always exceptions to any rule set (e.g., cutting on National Monuments). This is further complicated by administrative withdrawls. For Reserved lands, there is a need to remove the responsibility from FIA (field crews) when interpreting legislative documents and legal precedent to determine if an area is “legally withdrawn”. Solution: Clarify, standardize, and simplify Reserved designation. Provide a core optional variable that can be populated to designate lands that don’t meet reserved criteria, but State cooperators may not want to include in timber base. For public land, Reserved status is to be determined by management agency and/or nominal designation. For private land, none will be considered Reserved.

  18. Major Changes in Reserved Status for IW-FIA States • Additional areas on Public Lands • Forest Service: Other land designations besides Wilderness and Wild & Scenic Rivers. Most importantly, National Recreation Areas • State and Local Government: All areas designated as “Parks” • Removal of Reserved Status on Private Lands • Tribal Timber Reserves no longer Reserved • Tribal Lands under National Park Service designation and cooperative management not reserved: e.g., Canyon de Chelly National Monument

  19. New Administratively Withdrawn Status Applied to IW-FIA States To be determined, according to the needs of States and other Cooperators.

  20. Land Cover Issue: Land-use / canopy cover matrix developed under the forest definition change process is but one of many ways to classify land. There is a desire to have the ability to combine variables in a more flexible way in order to group FIA plots according to other land classification schemes. Solution: Task team with interest in this approach developed an alternative land cover classification, with National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) and National Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS) classes in mind. New variable should allow more cross-walking of FIA data to other systems.

  21. Land Cover Classes and Brief Definitions

  22. FIA Land Cover Class and NLCD Crosswalk

  23. Forest Definition Change Issue: Current method for identification of “Forest Land” by FIA involves complicated application of stocking equations, with cover as an alternative when stocking equations are not available. This presents several problems, such as when different stocking equations are used in different areas, the same forest type may effectively have 2 or more thresholds for meeting “Forest” definition. WO-FIA directed regions to move to a cover-based definition, with a minimum of 10% projected canopy cover. Solution: Cover Assessment protocol was developed to provide objective assessment and documentation of projected cover. Definition allows for sites without sufficient cover by considering former condition (e.g., recently cut or burned), and potential to achieve sufficient cover as evidenced by regeneration.

  24. Forest Definition Change Forest Land Land that has at least 10 percent crown cover of tally tree species of any size or has had at least 10 percent crown cover in the past, based on the presence of stumps, snags, or other evidence. For land on which either forest is encroaching or the land is reverting to forest (i.e., past evidence of cover is lacking), there must be at least 200 stems per acre* to qualify. Additionally, the condition is not subject to nonforest use(s) that prevent normal tree regeneration and succession, such as regular mowing, intensive grazing, or recreation activities. In contrast to regular mowing, chaining treatments are recognized as long-term periodic or one-time treatments. As a result, areas that have been chained in the past, but meet the criteria for Forest Land should be classified as Forest Land.

  25. Rangeland Other Wooded Land Other Wooded Land Forest “traditional” FIA forest Forest Other Natural (beach, chaparral, wetland, etc) Natural Land Use Agriculture (crops, pasture, orchards, Christmas trees, etc) Nonforest Developed (urban, rights-of-way, recreation, mining, etc) Non-natural Land Use 5% 10% 100% 0% Tree Canopy Cover Combining Present Nonforest Land Use and Canopy Cover

  26. Questions? John D. Shaw USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station Ogden Forestry Sciences Lab 507 25th Street Ogden, UT 84401 Phone: (801) 598-5902 Email: jdshaw@fs.fed.us Web: www.fs.fed.us/rm/ogden

More Related