Jingfeng Xiao, Ge Sun, Kevin M Potter, Johnny Boggs, Qingyuan Zhang, Steven G McNulty
There are twenty experimental forest and range sites (EFRs) across the southeastern United States that are currently maintained by the USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) to conduct forest ecosystem research for addressing ecosystem management challenges. The overall objective of this study was to use multiple gridded datasets to assess the extent to which the twenty EFRs represent the climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of southeastern forests. The EFRs represent the large variability of climate conditions across the region relatively well, but we identified small representation gaps. The representativeness of ecosystem structure by these EFRs can be improved by establishing EFRs in forests with relatively low tree cover, leaf area index, or tree canopy height. The current EFRs also represent the forest ecosystem functions of the region relatively well, although areas with intermediate and low aboveground biomass and water yield are not well represented. The trends in climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions were generally consistent between the region and the EFRs. Our study indicates that the current EFRs represent the region relatively well, but establishing additional EFRs in specific areas within the region could help more completely assess how southeastern forests respond to climate change, disturbance, and management practices. Study Implications This study across the experimental forests and ranges (EFRs) and the southeastern forest region fills the knowledge gap regarding climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of EFRs in the context of the broader southeastern forest region. Understanding ecosystem functions and structures across the EFR network can help the Southern Research Station to address new research questions. Our study indicates that the current EFRs represent the climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of southeastern forests well. However, establishing additional EFRs in certain regions could help more completely assess how southeastern forests respond to climate change, disturbance, and management practices.
{"title":"Do Experimental Forests and Ranges of the Southeastern United States Represent the Climate, Ecosystem Structure, and Ecosystem Functions of the Region?","authors":"Jingfeng Xiao, Ge Sun, Kevin M Potter, Johnny Boggs, Qingyuan Zhang, Steven G McNulty","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvae020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae020","url":null,"abstract":"There are twenty experimental forest and range sites (EFRs) across the southeastern United States that are currently maintained by the USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) to conduct forest ecosystem research for addressing ecosystem management challenges. The overall objective of this study was to use multiple gridded datasets to assess the extent to which the twenty EFRs represent the climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of southeastern forests. The EFRs represent the large variability of climate conditions across the region relatively well, but we identified small representation gaps. The representativeness of ecosystem structure by these EFRs can be improved by establishing EFRs in forests with relatively low tree cover, leaf area index, or tree canopy height. The current EFRs also represent the forest ecosystem functions of the region relatively well, although areas with intermediate and low aboveground biomass and water yield are not well represented. The trends in climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions were generally consistent between the region and the EFRs. Our study indicates that the current EFRs represent the region relatively well, but establishing additional EFRs in specific areas within the region could help more completely assess how southeastern forests respond to climate change, disturbance, and management practices. Study Implications This study across the experimental forests and ranges (EFRs) and the southeastern forest region fills the knowledge gap regarding climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of EFRs in the context of the broader southeastern forest region. Understanding ecosystem functions and structures across the EFR network can help the Southern Research Station to address new research questions. Our study indicates that the current EFRs represent the climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of southeastern forests well. However, establishing additional EFRs in certain regions could help more completely assess how southeastern forests respond to climate change, disturbance, and management practices.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142214767","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Allison G Swartz, Ashley A Coble, Evan A Thaler, Dana R Warren
In contemporary forest management, buffers of unharvested trees are left along streams to protect riparian and aquatic ecosystems. Buffer regulations often focus on specific minimum width requirements, which aid in straightforward regulation and application, but minimum widths also suggest buffered edges are uniform and contain little variability. Conceptual papers suggest that alternative buffer configurations may offer greater flexibility in landscape-level protection, increase forest complexity, and enhance aquatic and riparian biodiversity. However, before considering alternatives to fixed-width buffers, it is necessary to quantify the inherent variability in current buffer practices present on the landscape. In this study, we used aerial imagery to quantify variability of buffer widths in two hundred randomly selected recently harvested units on managed land in Oregon and Washington with both fish-bearing and non-fish-bearing sections of stream. Wider buffers on larger streams had a greater magnitude of variability, but when normalized by stream size, variation was greater in smaller streams, and overall, variation ranged from 25% to 50% of the mean width. Despite local variability, buffer widths rarely fell below 9.14 m (30 ft). The variation quantified here provides an initial measure of variability to inform future management, given emerging interest in variable retention buffers. Study Implications: In contemporary forest management, riparian and aquatic habitat protection usually relies on minimum buffer width regulations. Minimum requirements create the perception that buffered edges are uniform distances from streams containing little variability, so conceptual papers have suggested alternative buffer configurations with variable retention edges to enhance ecological benefits. However, there are several reasons why, in practice, buffer widths may vary substantially from minimum sizes within and across harvest units under current forest management, but this potential variation has not been quantified. Before considering alternative riparian management options, it is necessary to quantify and understand the inherent variability in current practices. By utilizing high-resolution aerial imagery and digital elevation models, we quantified buffer width variation. Using a set of two hundred recently harvested units, we demonstrate notable buffer width variation across managed Pacific Northwest forests. We attribute the variation in buffer widths to the presence of road crossings, tributary junctions, underlying valley slope and slope variation, and flexibility in regulations that may be overlooked in broad evaluations of strict minimum widths. Understanding fundamental information about buffer width variability provides information about current practices and provides a standard against which proposed increases in variability may be compared.
{"title":"Quantifying the Variability of “Fixed-Width” Buffers on Harvested Lands in Western Oregon and Washington","authors":"Allison G Swartz, Ashley A Coble, Evan A Thaler, Dana R Warren","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvae018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae018","url":null,"abstract":"In contemporary forest management, buffers of unharvested trees are left along streams to protect riparian and aquatic ecosystems. Buffer regulations often focus on specific minimum width requirements, which aid in straightforward regulation and application, but minimum widths also suggest buffered edges are uniform and contain little variability. Conceptual papers suggest that alternative buffer configurations may offer greater flexibility in landscape-level protection, increase forest complexity, and enhance aquatic and riparian biodiversity. However, before considering alternatives to fixed-width buffers, it is necessary to quantify the inherent variability in current buffer practices present on the landscape. In this study, we used aerial imagery to quantify variability of buffer widths in two hundred randomly selected recently harvested units on managed land in Oregon and Washington with both fish-bearing and non-fish-bearing sections of stream. Wider buffers on larger streams had a greater magnitude of variability, but when normalized by stream size, variation was greater in smaller streams, and overall, variation ranged from 25% to 50% of the mean width. Despite local variability, buffer widths rarely fell below 9.14 m (30 ft). The variation quantified here provides an initial measure of variability to inform future management, given emerging interest in variable retention buffers. Study Implications: In contemporary forest management, riparian and aquatic habitat protection usually relies on minimum buffer width regulations. Minimum requirements create the perception that buffered edges are uniform distances from streams containing little variability, so conceptual papers have suggested alternative buffer configurations with variable retention edges to enhance ecological benefits. However, there are several reasons why, in practice, buffer widths may vary substantially from minimum sizes within and across harvest units under current forest management, but this potential variation has not been quantified. Before considering alternative riparian management options, it is necessary to quantify and understand the inherent variability in current practices. By utilizing high-resolution aerial imagery and digital elevation models, we quantified buffer width variation. Using a set of two hundred recently harvested units, we demonstrate notable buffer width variation across managed Pacific Northwest forests. We attribute the variation in buffer widths to the presence of road crossings, tributary junctions, underlying valley slope and slope variation, and flexibility in regulations that may be overlooked in broad evaluations of strict minimum widths. Understanding fundamental information about buffer width variability provides information about current practices and provides a standard against which proposed increases in variability may be compared.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"65 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141608389","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gavriela Mallory, Mindy S Crandall, Reem Hajjar, Jessica Leahy
Purposive stakeholder involvement in public lands management has grown in the United States in recent decades. These collaborative efforts can serve land managers by increasing available resources, fostering creativity, and augmenting public buy-in to processes and outcomes. Whereas such advantages seem to reflect the benefit of democratic norms, few studies have assessed the democratic legitimacy of collaborative natural resource planning initiatives. Additionally, although collaboration on federal lands has been studied extensively, little is documented about stakeholder engagement in state lands management. Through a comparative case study of state forest advisory groups in New York’s High Peaks Region and Oregon’s Elliott State Forest, this article assesses the democratic norm of political identity development by investigating how participants characterize their impacts. Results indicate that participants consistently influenced group processes and outcomes and changed personally through the work of deliberation. However, these impacts were mediated by inclusion and power dynamics at multiple scales. Study Implications: Collaborative forest planning initiatives may benefit land managers by increasing available resources, promoting creativity, and developing public buy-in to processes and outcomes. Such benefits depend on impactful stakeholder participation; if collaborative initiatives only empower the historically powerful, advantages may be limited. This study uses participants’ perceived impacts in forest planning efforts as a partial proxy for the quality of collaboration. We demonstrate that participant perceptions of their impacts are shaped by inclusion, influence, process structure, conversational quality, and the duration of collaborative institutions. By attending to these factors, land managers can bolster the advantages of collaborative planning efforts.
{"title":"An Analysis of Political Identity Development in State Forest Advisory Groups","authors":"Gavriela Mallory, Mindy S Crandall, Reem Hajjar, Jessica Leahy","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvae014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae014","url":null,"abstract":"Purposive stakeholder involvement in public lands management has grown in the United States in recent decades. These collaborative efforts can serve land managers by increasing available resources, fostering creativity, and augmenting public buy-in to processes and outcomes. Whereas such advantages seem to reflect the benefit of democratic norms, few studies have assessed the democratic legitimacy of collaborative natural resource planning initiatives. Additionally, although collaboration on federal lands has been studied extensively, little is documented about stakeholder engagement in state lands management. Through a comparative case study of state forest advisory groups in New York’s High Peaks Region and Oregon’s Elliott State Forest, this article assesses the democratic norm of political identity development by investigating how participants characterize their impacts. Results indicate that participants consistently influenced group processes and outcomes and changed personally through the work of deliberation. However, these impacts were mediated by inclusion and power dynamics at multiple scales. Study Implications: Collaborative forest planning initiatives may benefit land managers by increasing available resources, promoting creativity, and developing public buy-in to processes and outcomes. Such benefits depend on impactful stakeholder participation; if collaborative initiatives only empower the historically powerful, advantages may be limited. This study uses participants’ perceived impacts in forest planning efforts as a partial proxy for the quality of collaboration. We demonstrate that participant perceptions of their impacts are shaped by inclusion, influence, process structure, conversational quality, and the duration of collaborative institutions. By attending to these factors, land managers can bolster the advantages of collaborative planning efforts.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141171210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Changes to US wildfire policy in 2009 blurred the distinction between fires managed for resource benefits and fires with primarily suppression objectives, making management strategies difficult to track. Here, qualitative text is coded from a sample of 282 Wildland Fire Decision Support System Relative Risk Assessments completed on wildfires between 2010 and 2017 to examine the prevalence of different strategies and their associations with risk. Suppression is used most, associated with high risk. Managers discuss intent to suppress even when it is untenable. Monitoring, confine, or point protection are used much less commonly and when risk is low. The Southwest region discusses a diversity of strategies, leveraging landscape barriers from past management to support them; the Northwest discusses suppression or monitoring and rarely links strategy selection to barriers. Based on associations between physical barriers to fire spread, risk, and strategy, creating more barriers may provide a path forward to better implement fire policy. Study Implications: Systematic analysis of text data in wildfire decision documents provides insights into how fires are managed. Most wildfires are still aggressively suppressed despite federal fire policy promoting the use of fire to enhance resources. When managers discuss risk during wildfires, it is evident that physical barriers to fire spread (e.g., rivers, roads, trails, rocky scree), including mechanical fuel treatments, prescribed fires, and previous wildfires, are important factors in operational fire planning. However, management strategies promoting the use of wildfire to enhance ecological resiliency or reduce transmission of future fires to values are used sparingly. Southwest fire managers are relying on past wildfires, fuel treatments, and prescribed fires more so than the Northwest to engage in a full spectrum of fire management strategies. This finding suggests that, at least in some geographies, ongoing investments in fuels management will pay dividends in reducing risk and broadening opportunities to meet federal policy goals.
{"title":"Wildfire Management Strategy and Its Relation to Operational Risk","authors":"Erin Noonan-Wright, Carl Seielstad","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvae009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae009","url":null,"abstract":"Changes to US wildfire policy in 2009 blurred the distinction between fires managed for resource benefits and fires with primarily suppression objectives, making management strategies difficult to track. Here, qualitative text is coded from a sample of 282 Wildland Fire Decision Support System Relative Risk Assessments completed on wildfires between 2010 and 2017 to examine the prevalence of different strategies and their associations with risk. Suppression is used most, associated with high risk. Managers discuss intent to suppress even when it is untenable. Monitoring, confine, or point protection are used much less commonly and when risk is low. The Southwest region discusses a diversity of strategies, leveraging landscape barriers from past management to support them; the Northwest discusses suppression or monitoring and rarely links strategy selection to barriers. Based on associations between physical barriers to fire spread, risk, and strategy, creating more barriers may provide a path forward to better implement fire policy. Study Implications: Systematic analysis of text data in wildfire decision documents provides insights into how fires are managed. Most wildfires are still aggressively suppressed despite federal fire policy promoting the use of fire to enhance resources. When managers discuss risk during wildfires, it is evident that physical barriers to fire spread (e.g., rivers, roads, trails, rocky scree), including mechanical fuel treatments, prescribed fires, and previous wildfires, are important factors in operational fire planning. However, management strategies promoting the use of wildfire to enhance ecological resiliency or reduce transmission of future fires to values are used sparingly. Southwest fire managers are relying on past wildfires, fuel treatments, and prescribed fires more so than the Northwest to engage in a full spectrum of fire management strategies. This finding suggests that, at least in some geographies, ongoing investments in fuels management will pay dividends in reducing risk and broadening opportunities to meet federal policy goals.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"105 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140931009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Zachary J Hackworth, John J Cox, Jeffery L Larkin, Wendy Leuenberger, Joshua M Felch, Allison G Davis, Christopher D Barton
Streamside management zones (SMZs) are regulated components of actively managed forests in the eastern United States, but width and overstory retention requirements vary widely among states. Within watershed-scale harvests, we evaluated the relative abundances of three riparian-associated songbirds (Acadian flycatcher, Empidonax virescens; blue-headed vireo, Vireo solitarius; and Louisiana waterthrush, Parkesia motacilla) near Appalachian headwater streams receiving three SMZ treatments representative of a range of current state SMZ regulations in the eastern United States. Prior to harvest, all species were relatively abundant near all stream types, including ephemerals. Abundances of all species were largely similar among SMZ treatments at 3 years and 10 years postharvest and were higher along streams with greater residual canopy cover within 100 m. Forested SMZs as prescribed by current regulations can sustain these species in managed forests up to 10 years postharvest, but abundance appears to be driven largely by canopy cover retention in adjacent stands. Managing habitat for riparian-associated songbirds in harvested watersheds will require expanding the extent of focus beyond the local stream corridor to include consideration of silvicultural systems that retain greater canopy cover in surrounding forests. Where conservation of riparian-associated songbirds is a management objective, SMZ protection should be extended to all streams. Study Implications. The results of this study suggest that forested streamside management zones (SMZs) mandated by contemporary best management practices (BMPs) in Kentucky and other eastern US states can sustain similar abundances of three riparian-associated songbirds in managed watersheds up to 10 years after harvest. Overstory retention in SMZs along perennial and intermittent streams is common across the eastern United States, but state BMPs rarely require retention along ephemeral streams. Target songbird species occupied forests along all stream types prior to harvest, and their postharvest abundances were positively associated with canopy retention within 100 m of streams. If long-term occupancy of managed stands by riparian-associated songbirds is an objective, we recommend using SMZs around all streams, including ephemerals, and implementing at least moderate-retention silvicultural systems in areas within 100 m of streams.
{"title":"Ten-Year Response of Riparian-Associated Songbirds to Implementation of Streamside Management Zones in Watershed-Scale Harvests in the Appalachian Mountains","authors":"Zachary J Hackworth, John J Cox, Jeffery L Larkin, Wendy Leuenberger, Joshua M Felch, Allison G Davis, Christopher D Barton","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvae008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae008","url":null,"abstract":"Streamside management zones (SMZs) are regulated components of actively managed forests in the eastern United States, but width and overstory retention requirements vary widely among states. Within watershed-scale harvests, we evaluated the relative abundances of three riparian-associated songbirds (Acadian flycatcher, Empidonax virescens; blue-headed vireo, Vireo solitarius; and Louisiana waterthrush, Parkesia motacilla) near Appalachian headwater streams receiving three SMZ treatments representative of a range of current state SMZ regulations in the eastern United States. Prior to harvest, all species were relatively abundant near all stream types, including ephemerals. Abundances of all species were largely similar among SMZ treatments at 3 years and 10 years postharvest and were higher along streams with greater residual canopy cover within 100 m. Forested SMZs as prescribed by current regulations can sustain these species in managed forests up to 10 years postharvest, but abundance appears to be driven largely by canopy cover retention in adjacent stands. Managing habitat for riparian-associated songbirds in harvested watersheds will require expanding the extent of focus beyond the local stream corridor to include consideration of silvicultural systems that retain greater canopy cover in surrounding forests. Where conservation of riparian-associated songbirds is a management objective, SMZ protection should be extended to all streams. Study Implications. The results of this study suggest that forested streamside management zones (SMZs) mandated by contemporary best management practices (BMPs) in Kentucky and other eastern US states can sustain similar abundances of three riparian-associated songbirds in managed watersheds up to 10 years after harvest. Overstory retention in SMZs along perennial and intermittent streams is common across the eastern United States, but state BMPs rarely require retention along ephemeral streams. Target songbird species occupied forests along all stream types prior to harvest, and their postharvest abundances were positively associated with canopy retention within 100 m of streams. If long-term occupancy of managed stands by riparian-associated songbirds is an objective, we recommend using SMZs around all streams, including ephemerals, and implementing at least moderate-retention silvicultural systems in areas within 100 m of streams.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"515 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140831975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Thomas Worthley, Amanda Bunce, Anita T Morzillo, Chandi Witharana, Zhe Zhu, Jacob Cabral, Emlyn Crocker, Nicholas Cranmer, Steven DiFalco, Daniel Hale, Durga Joshi, Danielle P Kloster, Nancy Marek, Jason Parent, Julia Rogers, Mark Rudnicki, Kexin Song, John Volin, Jeffrey Ward, Harshana Wedagedara, Robert T Fahey
A growing proportion of forested landscapes are interspersed with human infrastructure, such as utility lines and roads, increasing the potential for tree-failure consequences due to storms and other causes. Utilities and other institutions have strong incentives to reduce such interactions and allocate substantial resources to risk reduction, but trees and forests in densely populated landscapes also provide significant amenities to society. We present a generalized framework for “Stormwise” forest management, focused on resistance of roadside forests to storms, based on elements of arboricultural and silvicultural practice and tree biomechanics and architecture. We detail results of a multidisciplinary research program focused on management outcomes, opportunities and barriers to implementation, and allocation of investment based on physical and social landscape characteristics. We discuss initial findings, the potential for widespread adoption of resilience-focused management in roadside and infrastructure-adjacent forests, and the importance of such work, considering a changing climate. Study Implications: The research and implementation program we detail here illustrates the potential for “Stormwise” forest management to reduce storm-damage recovery costs, result in fewer and shorter-duration power and transportation interruptions, and allow for low-investment ground-based management in future forest entries. We illustrate a multifaceted, interdisciplinary research program that links the geospatial, social, and biophysical components of understanding forest infrastructure systems. We illustrate how implementation of Stormwise management has the potential to benefit stakeholders such as residents and utilities, offset the substantial economic costs of tree-related power outages, and reduce societal disruptions associated with interactions between trees and infrastructure during storms.
{"title":"Stormwise: Innovative Forest Management to Promote Storm Resistance in Roadside Forests","authors":"Thomas Worthley, Amanda Bunce, Anita T Morzillo, Chandi Witharana, Zhe Zhu, Jacob Cabral, Emlyn Crocker, Nicholas Cranmer, Steven DiFalco, Daniel Hale, Durga Joshi, Danielle P Kloster, Nancy Marek, Jason Parent, Julia Rogers, Mark Rudnicki, Kexin Song, John Volin, Jeffrey Ward, Harshana Wedagedara, Robert T Fahey","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvae011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae011","url":null,"abstract":"A growing proportion of forested landscapes are interspersed with human infrastructure, such as utility lines and roads, increasing the potential for tree-failure consequences due to storms and other causes. Utilities and other institutions have strong incentives to reduce such interactions and allocate substantial resources to risk reduction, but trees and forests in densely populated landscapes also provide significant amenities to society. We present a generalized framework for “Stormwise” forest management, focused on resistance of roadside forests to storms, based on elements of arboricultural and silvicultural practice and tree biomechanics and architecture. We detail results of a multidisciplinary research program focused on management outcomes, opportunities and barriers to implementation, and allocation of investment based on physical and social landscape characteristics. We discuss initial findings, the potential for widespread adoption of resilience-focused management in roadside and infrastructure-adjacent forests, and the importance of such work, considering a changing climate. Study Implications: The research and implementation program we detail here illustrates the potential for “Stormwise” forest management to reduce storm-damage recovery costs, result in fewer and shorter-duration power and transportation interruptions, and allow for low-investment ground-based management in future forest entries. We illustrate a multifaceted, interdisciplinary research program that links the geospatial, social, and biophysical components of understanding forest infrastructure systems. We illustrate how implementation of Stormwise management has the potential to benefit stakeholders such as residents and utilities, offset the substantial economic costs of tree-related power outages, and reduce societal disruptions associated with interactions between trees and infrastructure during storms.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140831917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Hannah L C Brown, Antony S Cheng, Nehalem C Clark, Andrew W Slack, Brett H Wolk
This qualitative case study evaluates manager and researcher perceptions of the impact of a place-based, collaborative knowledge co-development process and examines the outcomes of that co-development for changes to management approaches. The USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report 373 (GTR-373) is a codeveloped science synthesis that functions as a boundary object providing a framework for planning, designing, and implementing management action for restoration of ponderosa and dry mixed-conifer forests. The process of creating and socializing the GTR-373 framework fostered continual knowledge exchange and engagement between researchers and managers across different organizations and levels of decision-making. This built trust in the information, improved justification for management action, developed a common foundation for cross-boundary implementation, and increased communication. The framework has been applied across jurisdictions and has been used as a foundational tool for training staff and designing projects. However, adapting the GTR-373 framework across scales remains challenging. Study Implications: This qualitative case study evaluates a co-development process in which researchers and managers from multiple organizations and agencies collaborated to produce a science-informed restoration framework to support forest management on the Colorado Front Range (GTR-373). The process built trust, improved justification for management action, developed a common foundation for implementation, and increased communication. However, cross-boundary management across spatial scales remains challenging, and managers interpret information through organizational mandates and site-specific context. Sustained collaboration between researchers and land managers can help make science actionable and relevant at the appropriate scale for planning and management across expertise and jurisdictional boundaries.
{"title":"Creating Boundary Objects Supports Knowledge Co-development Processes: A Case Study Evaluation from the Colorado Front Range","authors":"Hannah L C Brown, Antony S Cheng, Nehalem C Clark, Andrew W Slack, Brett H Wolk","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvae010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae010","url":null,"abstract":"This qualitative case study evaluates manager and researcher perceptions of the impact of a place-based, collaborative knowledge co-development process and examines the outcomes of that co-development for changes to management approaches. The USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report 373 (GTR-373) is a codeveloped science synthesis that functions as a boundary object providing a framework for planning, designing, and implementing management action for restoration of ponderosa and dry mixed-conifer forests. The process of creating and socializing the GTR-373 framework fostered continual knowledge exchange and engagement between researchers and managers across different organizations and levels of decision-making. This built trust in the information, improved justification for management action, developed a common foundation for cross-boundary implementation, and increased communication. The framework has been applied across jurisdictions and has been used as a foundational tool for training staff and designing projects. However, adapting the GTR-373 framework across scales remains challenging. Study Implications: This qualitative case study evaluates a co-development process in which researchers and managers from multiple organizations and agencies collaborated to produce a science-informed restoration framework to support forest management on the Colorado Front Range (GTR-373). The process built trust, improved justification for management action, developed a common foundation for implementation, and increased communication. However, cross-boundary management across spatial scales remains challenging, and managers interpret information through organizational mandates and site-specific context. Sustained collaboration between researchers and land managers can help make science actionable and relevant at the appropriate scale for planning and management across expertise and jurisdictional boundaries.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140812507","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Donald W. Floyd, Kelsey Alexander, Charles Burley, Arthur W. Cooper, Arthur DuFault, Ross W. Gorte, Sharon G. Haines, Bruce B. Hronek, Chadwick D. Oliver, Edward W. Shepard
It is unlikely, given the often-contentious history of the national forests, that incremental change in their administration can resolve fundamental differences in values. So concludes a task force appointed by the Society of American Foresters (SAF) to review federal forest management; its analysis and recommendations have been published in Forest of Discord: Options for Governing Our National Forests and Federal Public Lands. Whereas the Committee of Scientists was asked to stay within the framework of current laws and regulations, the SAF analysts were not so constrained. The following excerpts from Forest of Discord summarize the reasons that fundamental legislative and regulatory change is warranted and consider the purpose of having national forests and public lands.
{"title":"Choosing a Forest Vision","authors":"Donald W. Floyd, Kelsey Alexander, Charles Burley, Arthur W. Cooper, Arthur DuFault, Ross W. Gorte, Sharon G. Haines, Bruce B. Hronek, Chadwick D. Oliver, Edward W. Shepard","doi":"10.1093/jof/97.5.44","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/97.5.44","url":null,"abstract":"It is unlikely, given the often-contentious history of the national forests, that incremental change in their administration can resolve fundamental differences in values. So concludes a task force appointed by the Society of American Foresters (SAF) to review federal forest management; its analysis and recommendations have been published in Forest of Discord: Options for Governing Our National Forests and Federal Public Lands. Whereas the Committee of Scientists was asked to stay within the framework of current laws and regulations, the SAF analysts were not so constrained. The following excerpts from Forest of Discord summarize the reasons that fundamental legislative and regulatory change is warranted and consider the purpose of having national forests and public lands.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140574333","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
With demands on forests rapidly increasing, research is vital to help forest managers improve productivity, understand human as well as biological effects of forest development, and anticipate future demands on the resource. Research programs must be backed by good dissemination systems, and international cooperation is essential.
{"title":"World Forestry: The World's Forests Tomorrow: Will We Be Ready?","authors":"R. Max Peterson","doi":"10.1093/jof/80.1.30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/80.1.30","url":null,"abstract":"With demands on forests rapidly increasing, research is vital to help forest managers improve productivity, understand human as well as biological effects of forest development, and anticipate future demands on the resource. Research programs must be backed by good dissemination systems, and international cooperation is essential.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"107 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140574362","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A personal note from the SAF president to the membership.
SAF 主席给会员的个人说明。
{"title":"Commentary: A Personal Note","authors":"John H. Beuter","doi":"10.1093/jof/102.5.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/102.5.1","url":null,"abstract":"A personal note from the SAF president to the membership.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140590891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：