caitlin parke position #57600018 supplemental question 3

8/6/2019 Caitlin Parke Position #57600018 Supplemental Question 3

1/25

Stand Analysis

FOR 347

Caitlin Hartse

Overview:

Forest management at the stand level includes many different silvicultural objectives

including timber production, enhancement of wildlife habitat, reduction of hazardous

fuels, and restoring old-growth structure. It is very important to collect all of the data

available from the qualitative to the quantitative description of the stand to conduct a

proper stand analysis. This data is crucial for making educated management decisions

regarding the forest stand. Our objective was to analyze stand data from a multi-aged

mixed conifer stand at Lubrecht Experimental Forest to provide useful information of the

stand structure and composition to make educated management decisions.


2/25

Stand Location:

Coming from Missoula, MT, drive east on Interstate 90 for about 4 miles. Get off the

interstate on exit 109, which is the Bonner exit. Follow the road until it turns into

Montana Highway 200. Take this highway for approximately 22.3 miles East. Park the

vehicle at the Lubrecht Experimental Forest parking area. Walk across the highway to a

road that is gated off to unauthorized personnel. Hike up that road for about a quarter

mile. The stand will be on your right hand side. The boundary is flagged with pink

ribbon. It is about 9 acres in area. See figure 1.

Figure 1


3/25

Site:

The average annual precipitation of the stand is about 400mm, or 15.7 inches (Map

Viewer 2007). The elevation of the same area is about 4,200 ft and the average annual

temperature is about 10 degrees Celsius or 50 degrees Fahrenheit. The stand had no slope

and therefore no aspect. The site index of the stand was 60 and was recorded by

averaging the nine heights and diameters of the site trees that were collected, then

charting on site curves (Milner, 1992). There are six different rock types found in the

area. They include gravels, siltstones and sandstones, quartz monzonite, calcareous

marble, quartzite and argillites, and igneous dikes and sills. The soil type is a typical

coniferous forest soil with a small organic layer and acidic in nature due to needle drop.

There were no hydrological characteristics in or around the stand that would be of

operational concern.

Stand Origin:


4/25

diameter ratios. There were also noxious weeds present including leafy spurge

(Euphorbia esula) and spotted knapweed (Centaurea stoebe).

Stand Density and Composition:

This section covers the statistics we calculated using Microsoft Excel. Since only one

western larch was recorded it was excluded from individual calculations, but was

included in the stand calculations. A table showing the trees per acre (TPA), average

spacing, basal area, stand density index, and relative density index is shown in figure 2.

Density management diagram was used to plot the stand and the zones of optimum

growth and imminent mortality (Long and Shawn, 2005). See Figure 3.

Figure 2:

TPASpacing(ft) BA SDI

RelativeDensity

Stand 233 13.67 85.58 255.34 64%

PIPO 175 15.77 66.98 198.9 -

PSME 57 27.64 17.3 53.7 -


5/25

Figure 3:


6/25

Ponderosa pine (PIPO), Douglas-fir (PSME), and western larch (LAOC) were all found

on the site. Steve Arnos (2007)book Northwest Trees, provides lots of good

information on the silvics of each of these species. Ponderosa pine is a shade intolerant

species that is adapted to warm and dry climates. Its very tolerant of droughts, and has

thick fire resistant bark. It evolved to grow with frequent low intensity fires that burned

through the understory keeping stands open and park like. With fire suppression less

tolerant Douglas-fir grew up under the ponderosa pine. Douglas-fir is a species of

intermediate shade tolerance, but is the most shade tolerant of the three species present.

Its a late successional species and will eventually replace both the ponderosa pine and

larch. Western larch grows faster than many other species and is very shade intolerant

and fire resistant like ponderosa pine. Larch needs open stands to out compete other

species such as Douglas-fir.

Tree Characteristics:

Tree dimensions were collected on the first field trip, and again on a supplementary field


7/25

Ponderosa pine height to diameter ratio was 95:1, Douglas-fir 86:1, and larch was 63:1.

With the exception of the larch the ratios are over the 80:1 threshold (Wonn et. al., 2001).

The higher ratio results from overstocked stands. The trees put on height as fast as they

can to try and outpace each other, resulting in tall and skinny trees. As a result they are

more susceptible to blow down and snow damage, resulting in a stagnating stand.

Diameter results are shown in figure 4, larch was not calculated since there was only one.

Distribution frequencies were expressed in 2 in classes, see figure 5.

Figure 4

QMD (in) Max (in) Min (in)

PIPO 10.8 23.2 4.1

PSME 9.6 16 4.1

Figure 5

35


8/25

Management and Stand Objectives

The objectives, determined by the landowner, are to produce a steady income and

maximize the value of the stand over the long term. The primary goal of the landowner is

to enhance total yield and values of the stand under a management regime. Their

secondary goal is financial. Obviously we dont want to achieve financial success over

health of the stand. The rotation period of the stand is 50 years, and we proposed the

following three alternatives to a no-treatment option. With all the treatments we assumed

a total harvest of merchantable board feet at the end of the rotation.

Alternative Treatments

Our first option is a thinning from below. Under this alternative we will be

removing stems from the stand to a basal area target of 80 ft^2/ac. This thinning will

removed the small diameter trees first. There is only one initial thinning for this option.

See Figure 6.

Figure 6


9/25

The second option we explored is a thinning from above. In this option our basal

area target is 100 ft^2/ac. This option has the most activity of the three. We will be

entering the stand every ten years to remove target trees in the larger diameter classes.

See figure 7.

Figure 7

The final option is a regeneration harvest, or clear-cut. We plan on harvesting all

the trees, broadcast burning the stand to release the nutrients and clean up the slash to

make it easier to plant. Then plant ponderosa pine at 250 TPA. We ran the simulation to

account for 75% survival of the seedlings See figure 8

Harvest21.16 MBF

Harvest3.078 MBF

2007 20572017 2027 2037 2047

Harvest7.177 MBF

Harvest2.93 MBF

Harvest2.689 MBF

Harvest2.622 MBF


10/25

Analysis of Alternatives:

We used the computer simulator FVS developed by the Forest Service to explore

alternatives and determine harvesting values. From this simulator we were able to make

some projections and growth models, all the tables we generated are located in the

appendix. For each alternative we used graphs from the time of the first treatment, a mid

rotation treatment, and the stand right before final harvest. The economic analysis was

done in Excel. The price for logs was determined from the Montana Sawlog and Veener

Log Price Report. The prices were listed as of March 18, 2008. We used the price of

$363/MBF (thousand board feet) for bull pine for all the calculations. The costs were

generated based on a general price list. Felling was listed at $40/MBF, hauling

$110/MBF, burning $240/ac, and planting $200/ac. All the profits and costs were put in

present net worth terms, with a rate of return of 4%. The net present value for each

alternative was calculated by subtracting costs from profits. See figure 9 for a table

comparing all the options, and individual analysis of each prescription to follow.

Figure 9


11/25

Figure 10

Final QMD Final SDI Final BA Total YieldMBF

No Treatment 16.5 259 172 35.586Thinning fromBelow 21.5 156 115 27.66Thinning fromAbove 14.6 175 110 21.16

Clearcut 14.1 272 170 21.55

Option one, thinning from below, implementing this option will open the stand

up. By removing the smaller diameter stems the stand will be more open and park like.

The fire danger will be greatly reduced. All the smaller ladder fuels and understory trees

along with a few intermediate and co-dominants will be selected for removal. This

option is the best if the landowner wants to return the stand to a more natural open grown

pine stand. Pages 2-4 of the appendix show the critical graphs for the stand over three

separate ages. As seen in figure 6, we would only need to enter the stand once at the

beginning and once again at the end of the rotation. This is good to reduce soil

compaction and erosion as well as the possible introduction of invasive species. The


12/25

However, with the mountain pine beetle epidemic cresting there is major potential to lose

the majority of pines in the stand anyway. So altering the stand to be more resistant to

those beetles might be a good idea. Figure 7 shows that we have to enter the stand every

10 years to conduct thinnings. The most profitable thinning being first and each

subsequent thinning reduced in the amount of material harvested. See figure 11. This is

a good option if the landowner wants to have an economic stimulus every ten years.

However, entering the stand every ten years will mean more road maintenance costs. Not

to mention the environmental impacts on the soil and the possibility of invasive species

entering the stand.

Figure 11

Year MBF PV Profits ($)PV Costs($) NPV ($)

2007 7.177 2605 1076 1529

2017 3.078 754 311 443

2027 2.93 485 200 2852037 2.689 300 124 176

2047 2.622 198 81 117

2057 21 16 1080 446 634


13/25

Recommended Alternative

We recommend the first option, thinning from below. This option has many

benefits including the reduced fire danger and stand density, not to mention the stand at

the end of the rotation has a larger basal area than the other options. The downfall to this

option is there is only one cutting at the beginning and one at the end. If the landowner

manages their money well this wont be a problem, however if they want more money

over a longer period of time this is not the option for them.

We didnt choose option two because although it has the most economic

opportunities with a thinning every ten years, it doesnt end with as healthy a stand as the

first option. Option two would be the best option for a landowner in need of money on a

regular basis.

The final option was also not chosen based on stand size. The trees at the end of

the rotation will be the smallest of all three options. The cost of implementing the

clearcut was also the highest with the addition of planting and burning costs, though the

profits from harvesting all the trees balanced that out.


14/25

Figure 12

Year BA SDI QMD2007 80 125 14.9

2017 89 134 16.3

2027 97 142 17.7

2037 105 149 19

2047 111 153 20.3

2057 115 156 21.5

By comparing these numbers to what would be achieved in the control stand, Figure 13,

it can be inferred that the stand is overall healthier and better off with treatment. The

QMD is 5 inches larger, and the stand is much less dense (SDI of 156 as compared to an

SDI of 259). The pertinent diameter distribution and height graphs can be seen in the

appendix.

Figure 13

Year BA SDI QMD

2007 143 256 10.6

2017 154 264 11.8

2027 163 270 13

2037 169 269 14.2


15/25

Bibliography

Arno, Stephen F. Northwestern Trees. 1st ed. Seattle: The Mountaineer Books, 2007.

Long, James N., and John D. Shaw. "A Density Management Diagram for Even-AgedPonderosa Pine Stands." Western Journal of Applied Forestry 20.4 (2005): 205-215.

Milner, Kelsey S. "Site Index and Height Growth Curves for Ponderosa Pine, WesternLarch, Lodgepole Pine, and Douglas-Fir in Western Montana." Western Journalof Applied Forestry 7.1 (1992): 9-14.

Wonn, Hagan T., and Kevin L. O'hara. "Height: Diameter Rations and StabilityRelationships for Four Northern Rocky Mountain Tree Species." West Journal ofApplied Forestry 16.2 (2001): 87-93.

Montana Sawlog and Veneer Log Price Report, Bureau of Business and EconomicResearch, University of Montana (3/18/2008).


16/25

1

Appendix

Thin From Below Graphs Pages 2-4

Thin From Above Graphs Pages 5-7

Clearcut Graphs Pages 8-10


17/25

2


18/25

3


19/25

4


20/25

5


21/25

6


22/25

7


23/25

8


24/25

9


25/25

10

caitlin parke position #57600018 supplemental question 3

Documents