|
Tradeoffs among carbon and other ecosystem services in managed forest landscapes
Thomas
A.
Spies, USDA Forest Service, tom.spies@oregonstate.edu
(Presenter)
Mark
Harmon, Oregon State University, mark.harmon@oregonstate.edu
Warren
B.
Cohen, USDA Forest Service, warren.cohen@oregonstate.edu
Anita
Morzillo, Oregon State University, anita.morzillo@oregonstate.edu
Robert
E
Kennedy, Boston University, kennedyr@bu.edu
Jeff
Kline, USDA Forest Service, jkline@fs.fed.us
Brenda
McComb, Oregon State University, brenda.mccomb@oregonstate.edu
Our understanding of management effects on carbon cycling is incomplete in several areas including: 1) the effects fire and management regimes on carbon sequestration; 2) variation in effects of management on carbon across a range of forest ecosystems and land ownerships. Furthermore, relatively little work has examined tradeoffs associated with managing forests to increase carbon storage and to produce other ecosystem services at landscape and stand scales. Forest managers typically must meet several resource objectives at the same time and they lack a scientific basis for evaluating tradeoffs associated with managing for carbon and other ecosystem services. We are using forest monitoring and simulation models to evaluate trade-offs among carbon, and ecosystem services in selected landscapes of the Pacific Northwest and northern California. We use a suite of established models including LandCarb 3 and ForProd 2 (landscape carbon and wood products), a forest stand vegetation simulator ( FVS), and wildlife habitat capability models. A time series of Landsat imagery (Landtrendr) is used to establish the historical dynamics of carbon and forest habitats. The simulation models then project potential future dynamics of carbon, wildlife habitat and wood production under different scenarios. We are using LiDAR to help validate the simulation model projections for carbon and habitat structure. Tradeoff analysis is then conducted using the scenario simulations as data points. Early results suggest that the simulation models can produce a reasonable estimates of carbon and wildlife habitat conditions across multi-ownership landscapes but that the robustness of the model projections varies across environmental gradients and forest types. We explore how tradeoffs vary as a function of management scenario and forest landscape types including wet productive conifer types and dry, fire-prone landscapes with relatively low forest productivity.
Presentation Type: Poster
Session: Poster Session 2-A
(Wed 11:00 AM)
Associated Project(s):
Poster Location ID: 79
|