1. Estimating fuel loading under various disturbance regimes and vegetation types in Northern Wisconsin forest landscape Class presentation, Mar 17 2004 Soung-Ryoul Ryu, John A. Rademacher, Jiquan Chen, Daolan Zheng and Thomas R. Crow

2. Fire and Forest Ecosystem Forest structure, species composition and diversity (Wang et al. 2001, Brisson et al. 2003, Taft, 2003, Wang 2003). Forest structure, species composition and diversity (Wang et al. 2001, Brisson et al. 2003, Taft, 2003, Wang 2003). Increase mortality of young plants (Ivanauskas et al. 2003) Increase mortality of young plants (Ivanauskas et al. 2003) Ecosystem productivity (Pausas et al. 2003). Ecosystem productivity (Pausas et al. 2003). Potential to accelerate the invasion of exotic species or insect (Kulakowski et al. 2003, Lesica and Martin 2003), Potential to accelerate the invasion of exotic species or insect (Kulakowski et al. 2003, Lesica and Martin 2003), Soil surface temperatures, nutrients cycling, soil water infiltration, nutrient availability and soil microbial community Soil surface temperatures, nutrients cycling, soil water infiltration, nutrient availability and soil microbial community (Schlesinger and Gill 1980, Knapp and Seastedt 1986, Brewer 1995, Dumonte et al. 1996, Brais et al. 2000, Thompson et al. 2000, Nardoto and Bustamante 2003, van der Werf et al. 2003).

3. Altered the patterns of fuel loading (Baker 1992, Tilman et al. 2000, Thompson et al. 2000, Wotton et al. 2003). Altered the patterns of fuel loading (Baker 1992, Tilman et al. 2000, Thompson et al. 2000, Wotton et al. 2003). Fire prevention, Fire prevention, Fire suppression, Fire suppression, Timber harvesting Timber harvesting Pest management Pest management Climate change Climate change Affect the intensity and frequency of fire through changing fuel quality and quantity (Stocks et al. 1998, Franklin et al. 2001, Wotton et al. 2003). Affect the intensity and frequency of fire through changing fuel quality and quantity (Stocks et al. 1998, Franklin et al. 2001, Wotton et al. 2003). Why Fuel Loading?

4. Climate Change Forest structure change (Odion and Tyler 2002, Lorimer and White 2003), Forest structure change (Odion and Tyler 2002, Lorimer and White 2003), Disturbance frequency (Lindbladh et al. 2003), Disturbance frequency (Lindbladh et al. 2003), Habitat changes (Lindbladh et al. 2003), DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2003) Habitat changes (Lindbladh et al. 2003), DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2003) Fine fuel mainly control fire ignition and spreading (<2.5cm in diameters) (Andrews and Bradshaw 1997). Fine fuel mainly control fire ignition and spreading (<2.5cm in diameters) (Andrews and Bradshaw 1997).

5. Study Objectives The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effect of various disturbance regimes and alternative forest ecosystem types on the fuel loading through modeling. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effect of various disturbance regimes and alternative forest ecosystem types on the fuel loading through modeling. Possibility of developing a simple model Possibility of developing a simple model Estimate the effect of various vegetation and disturbance regimes on fuel loading Estimate the effect of various vegetation and disturbance regimes on fuel loading Alternative productivity, decomposition, disease and mortality, and fire frequency Alternative productivity, decomposition, disease and mortality, and fire frequency

6. Contents Model Description Model Description Sensitivity Analysis Sensitivity Analysis Scenario Test Scenario Test Fuel loading and alternative disturbances regimes projected to the Chequamegon National Forest Fuel loading and alternative disturbances regimes projected to the Chequamegon National Forest Conclusions Conclusions

7. Model Description We developed a fuel loading model for three theoretical forest ecosystems mimicking northern hardwood, red pine, and jack pine forests. We developed a fuel loading model for three theoretical forest ecosystems mimicking northern hardwood, red pine, and jack pine forests.

8. Maximum Net Primary Production (NPP) Aber and others 1995

9. Net Primary Production Aber 1979 Odum 1969 Canopy Closing

11. Aboveground tree, branch, and foliage biomass at various ages and model prediction for three ecosystem types.

12. Predicted forest floor fine fuel ( ● ) and measured forest floor fien fuel ( ▼ ). Error bar indicates one standard deviation.

13. (a)(b) Slope =0.95 R 2 =0.82 Slope =0.88 R 2 =0.69 The relationship between predicted and mean measured forest floor biomass. (a) when two outliers in red pine (empty triangles) were excluded, and (b) when thinning applied at age 25.

14. Sensitivity Analysis VariablesStandard Value TestedSensitivity of Model Value% Change SI Maximum NPP (Mg/ha/yr) 12 10.8-10%-5.0050.02 13.210%4.6346.29 Litter Decay0.475 0.428-10%3.20-32.03 0.52310%-2.53-25.26 FWD Decay0.124 0.112-10%6.03-60.32 0.13610%-5.30-53.04 Possibility of Disease 0.1 0.09-10%0.43-4.32 0.1110%0.212.06 Maximum Mortality Rate 0.01 0.009-10%0.18-1.77 0.01110%0.040.39 Fire PFI = 0.09 PFI = 0.1 MFD = 0.2 MAD = 0.05 MFD=0.22-10%-0.202.04 MAD = 0.055 PFI = 0.11 MFD=0.1810%0.282.77 MAD=0.045

15. Scenarios I ScenariosPDMDFF CLNCLN CLHCLH CLLCLL CHNCHN CHHCHH CHLCHL HLNHLN HLHHLH HLLHLL HHNHHN HHHHHH HHLHHL

16. Disturbance Types Productivity and Decay (PD) Current (C)High (H) Forest Types Maximu m NPP Decay Rate Maximu m NPP Decay Rate LitterFWDLitterFWD Hardwood12.00.4750.12412.60.4990.130 Red Pine10.50.4130.04911.00.4340.051 Jack Pine10.50.4130.04911.00.4340.051 Disturbance Types Disease and Mortality (DM) Low (L)High (H) Forest Types Possibility of Disease Mortality Possibility of Disease Mortality Hardwood00.0050.10.01 Red Pine00.0050.10.01 Jack Pine00.050.10.055 Disturbance Types Fire Frequency (FF) No Fire (N)High Frequency (H)Low Frequency (L) Forest Types FIPMFDMADFIPMFDMADFIPMFDMAD Hardwood0000.10.20.050.010.8 Red Pine0000.10.20.050.010.8 Jack Pine0000.10.20.050.010.8

17. Model Assumptions 1 Fire ignition and damage was calculated with random function Fire ignition and damage was calculated with random function Fire ignition, fuel combustion, and aboveground biomass damage Fire ignition, fuel combustion, and aboveground biomass damage We assumed that the ecosystem productivity returned to the 5 years prior to the fire occurrence with each 10% biomass reduction. We assumed that the ecosystem productivity returned to the 5 years prior to the fire occurrence with each 10% biomass reduction. Disease decreases the amount of live foliage resulting in the proportional NPP decrease. Disease decreases the amount of live foliage resulting in the proportional NPP decrease.

18. Model Assumptions 2 Harvesting method Clearcutting method removes all stems and leaves branches and foliage on the ground. Clearcutting method decreases 10% of the NPP for 10 years after harvesting Thinning was applied only for the red pine age 30 and 45 and every thinning removes 20% of biomass Thinning also harvests stem and converts branch and foliage to ground fuel. Thinning decrease the NPP 10% after harvests and recovers productivity 2% every year following harvest. After thinning, there is a 10% increase in carbon allocated to foliage lasting for 5 years.

19. Fuel loading under alternative disturbance regimes. Mean (AVE) and standard deviation (SD) of fuel loading were calculated for each simulation. Letters on the box-whisker plot indicate the significance effect of fire frequency on fuel loading (α=0.05).

20. Ecosystem TypesHardwoodRed PineJack Pine The Effect of Fire Frequency Productivity and Decomposition (PD) CHCHCH Disease and Mortality (DM) L AVE<0.0001 SD0.00170.02770.0216<0.00010.01240.0007 H AVE<0.00010.0023<0.0001 SD0.00050.00130.00060.00570.00030.0006 The Effect of DM Productivity and Decomposition (PD) CHCHCH Fire Frequency N AVE<0.0001 0.0028<0.00010.01210.0085 SD<0.0001 0.06040.00120.42780.0068 H AVE0.60590.09450.95510.44370.61570.3066 SD0.00050.00150.10430.70470.06200.8539 L AVE0.14580.31410.19030.49890.45270.6892 SD0.16350.16200.19390.77790.68350.7508 The Effect of PD Disease and Mortality (DM) LHLHLH Fire Frequency N AVE0.00190.0002<0.0001 SD<0.00010.0020<0.00010.0008<0.0001 H AVE0.70880.26600.21290.5183<0.00010.0003 SD0.44730.77890.44240.22140.07910.1246 L AVE0.31880.44520.03070.92100.79670.6090 SD0.27170.59950.09890.92990.18550.0365

21. Age distribution of Vegetation in CNF

22. Fuel loading under current age structure for three ecosystem types with alternative disturbance scenario. Each scenario was simulated ten times and averaged fuel laoding was used for the calculation. Each run had five harvest cycles. Letters on the box- whisker plot indicate the significance effect of fire frequency on fuel loading (α=0.05).

23. Ecosystem TypesHardwoodRed PineJack Pine The Effect of Fire Frequency Productivity and Decomposition (PD) CHCHCH Disease and Mortality (DM) LAVE0.22740.12610.11530.09350.00550.0645 HAVE0.22190.61420.06750.11460.08080.0075 The Effect of DM Productivity and Decomposition (PD) CHCHCH Fire Frequency NAVE<0.0001 0.50720.0419 HAVE0.12460.00380.99250.55890.39680.8711 LAVE0.53830.00170.29050.90790.77320.5062 The Effect of PD Disease and Mortality LHLHLH Fire Frequency NAVE<0.0001 0.37680.8871 HAVE0.08990.46010.49950.80440.72240.1003 LAVE0.40380.28110.84520.30330.70920.9354 Results of the analysis of variance test on estimated fuel loading in the Chequamegon National Forest under alternative disturbance regimes.

24. Conclusions We showed that possibility of simple model to predict the fuel loading under various ecosystem conditions We showed that possibility of simple model to predict the fuel loading under various ecosystem conditions Fire frequency had the largest effect on the fuel loading at the scenario testing Fire frequency had the largest effect on the fuel loading at the scenario testing Scenario showed that alternative PD and DM generally influenced fuel loading only under no fire condition. Scenario showed that alternative PD and DM generally influenced fuel loading only under no fire condition.

25. Conclusions However, when we projected the same disturbance regimes, each ecosystems responded to the disturbance regime differently. However, when we projected the same disturbance regimes, each ecosystems responded to the disturbance regime differently. Only jack pine ecosystem showed significant response to the fire frequency. Only jack pine ecosystem showed significant response to the fire frequency. Red pine showed highest variability to the fire frequency Red pine showed highest variability to the fire frequency Hardwood forest showed significant difference to the alternative disease and mortality condition under high productivity and decay condition. Hardwood forest showed significant difference to the alternative disease and mortality condition under high productivity and decay condition.

26. Thank you ! This project is funded by JFSP Program, USDA Forest Service NC station, and University of Toledo Thank you for the constructive advice and help of LEES Lab and Dr. Daryl Moorehead.

27. Question?

28. Contributions We expect the results of the study will contribute to our understanding about mechanisms between forest ecosystem characteristics and fuel loading, as well as about the effects of forest management and fire regime on fuel loading. We expect the results of the study will contribute to our understanding about mechanisms between forest ecosystem characteristics and fuel loading, as well as about the effects of forest management and fire regime on fuel loading. It will further facilitate developing forest management plan under various climate and management conditions. It will further facilitate developing forest management plan under various climate and management conditions.