FRONT RANGE CFLRP/SRLCC MONITORING UPDATE

1st Year Spatial Heterogeneity Results

Single Story

Multi Story

Openings

Spatial Aggregation “Groupy-Clumpy” Transect•Was not limited to NFS lands• Boulder County Parks and Open

Space•Oriented from Plot Center true north on all SRLCC CSE Plots•100 meter transect, measuring number and distance of Single story/multistory canopy cover and openings

Field Methods

Changes in Total Cover

PSINF PC 2

PSINF PC 3

Hall 1Hall 2

Heil 3Heil 5

Heil 7ARNF EV 28

ARNF EV 34

ARNF EV 13

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

Mean % length of transect covered by openings w/ (Standard Errors)

Before Treatment Sites

After Treatment Sites

Control sites

Perc

ent

Cover

N=5 N=10 N=4 N=7 N= 5 N=5 N=3 N=3N=5 N=5

Changes in Opening Size

PSINF PC 2

PSINF PC 3

Hall 1Hall 2

Heil 3Heil 5

Heil 7ARNF EV 28

ARNF EV 34

ARNF EV 13

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Mean size of openings w/ (Standard Errors)

Before Treatment Sites

After Treatment Sites

Control sites

Dis

tance (

mete

rs)

Take home

Total openings increased from pre to post treatments conditions Though differences were variable when

compared to control sites Mean single opening size increased

Again the variation between pre, post, and the controls were observed.

Future use? Ground truth remote sensing products and

analyses Operational use for TSA, and/or contractors

Treatment effects scale considerations

Limited monitoring resources, to evaluate a vast resource (Landscape) at fine scales (within stand/patch) We have to make decisions as to what level of

confidence we have in the data and what appropriate inferences we can be drawn from that data.

Trade-offs A very good understanding (i.e. beyond a reasonable

doubt”) at small scales in a limited number of site, vs A pretty good understanding (i.e. “a preponderance of

evidence”) at larger scales with more sites.