North Cascades National Park

Fire Effects Monitoring Annual Report: 2002

Karen Kopper, Fire Ecologist

Cedar Drake, Lead Fire Effects Monitor

Stehekin Valley, North Cascades NPS

North Evans, Lake Roosevelt NRA

Windy Point, John Day Fossil Beds NM

Young Hill, San Juan Islands NHS

Table of Contents Page

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………...4

Section 1: Plot Network Information…………………………………………………………4

Section 2: Fire Effects Status Reports & Analyses………………………………………..… 7

Fire Effects Monitoring at North Cascades NPS…………………………………………..7

NOCA: Monitoring Objectives…………………………………………………………7

NOCA: Minimum Plot Calculations……………………………………………………7

NOCA: Data Analysis…………………………………………………………..……… 8

Five-Year Analysis of Fire Effects……………………………………………………...9

Monitoring of Thinning Effects……………………………………………………….. 10

Fire Effects Monitoring at Lake Roosevelt NRA………………………………………… 11

LARO: Monitoring Objectives……………………………………………………..…. 12

LARO: Minimum Plot Calculations…………………………………………………... 12

Analysis of Thinning at LARO…………………………………………………….…. .12

Fire Effects Monitoring at John Day Fossil Beds NM……………………………………13

JODA: Monitoring Objectives…………………………………………………………14

JODA: Minimum Plot Calculations……………………………………………………14

Fire Effects on Brush Density………………………………………………………….15

Overall Reduction in Western Juniper…………………………………………………16

Native vs. Non-native Grass Cover……………………………………………………16

Fire Effects Monitoring at San Juan Islands NHS………………………………………..17

SAJH: Monitoring Objectives…………………………………………………………17

SAJH: Minimum Plot Calculations……………………………………………………17

Bibliography and References…………………………………………………………..20

Section 3: Program Information……………………………………………………………...21

Staff Participants……………………………………………………………………….21

Length of Season……………………………………………………………………….21

Staff Training…………………………………………………………………………...21

Monitoring Type Information……………………………………………….……………..21

North Cascades Monitoring Types…………………………………………………21
North Cascades and Lake Roosevelt Brush Belts………………………………….22
John Day Fossil Beds Brush Belts…………………………………………………22
All Parks: Conventions…………………………………………………………….23
All Parks: Innovations……………………………………………………………...23
All Parks: Voucher Identification Protocols………………………………………..24

Appendices…………………………………………………………………………………...25

Plot History and Schedule for 2003……………………………………………..…25
NOCA: Mixed Conifer / Burn and Thin FMH-4…………………………………..26
NOCA: Thinning Objectives by Individual Burn-units……………………………29
LARO: Ponderosa Pine / Snowberry FMH-4……………………………………...31
JODA: Big Sagebrush FMH-4…….……………………………………………….34
JODA: Western Juniper Shrubland FMH-4………………………………………..36
SAJH: Garry Oak Woodland FMH-4………………………………………………38
NOCA: GPS Information…………………………………………………………..40
LARO: GPS Information…………………………………………………………...41
JODA: GPS Information……………………………………………………………42
SAJH: GPS Information……………………………………………………………43
Equipment List……………………………………………………………………..44

List of TablesPage

Table 1. Plot Installations……………………………………………………..……….. 4

Table 2. Plot Remeasurements……………………………………………………..…..5

Table 3. (Optional)

Table 4. Projected Plot Installations……………………………………………………5

Table 5. Workload Difference…………………………………………………..……. 5

Table 6. Number of Plots Treated…………………………………………………..…6

Table 7. Post-treatment Plot Summary………………………………………….…….6

Table 8. Plots Installations by Monitoring Type………………………………………6

Table 9a. NOCA: Minimum Plot Calculations for Primary Variables………….……..8

Table 9b. NOCA: Minimum Plot Calculations for Fuels by Size-class………….…… 8

Table 10. NOCA: Percent Reduction of Trees and Fuel………………………….…... 8

Table 11. LARO: Minimum Plot Calculations for Primary Variables………………..12

Table 12. JODA: Minimum Plot Calculations for Primary Variables………………...14

Table 13. SAJH: Minimum Plot Calculations for Tree Density………………………17

Table 14. SAJH: Minimum Plot Calculations for Fuel Load…………………………18

Table 15. SAJH: Minimum Plot Calculations for Understory Cover by Life-form..…18

Table 16. SAJH: Minimum Plot Calculations for Understory and Brush…………….19

List of FiguresPage

Figure 1. NOCA: Five-year Postburn Effects on Density of Trees………………..….9

Figure 2. NOCA: Five-year Postburn Effects on Basal Area………………………....9

Figure 3. NOCA: Canopy Changes Following Silvicultural Treatments……………..10

Figure 4. NOCA: Basal Area Reduction Following Silvicultural Treatments………..10

Figure 5. LARO: Selective Thinning of Overstory Trees………….…..……………..13

Figure 6. LARO: Thinning of Pole-size Trees……………………………..…………13

Figure 7. JODA: Comparison of Brush Density on Forest and Brush Plots………….15

Figure 8. JODA: Brush Density at Windy Point……………………………………...15

Figure 9. JODA: Brush Density at Picture Gorge…………………………………….15

Figure 10. JODA: Fire Effects on Western Juniper…………………………………..16

Figure 11. JODA: Two Years of Fire Effects on Grass Species Cover………………16

North Cascades National Park

Fire Effects Monitoring Annual Report: 2002

INTRODUCTION

This report serves three functions, which divide the content into three main sections. The first section is based upon a request for information needed to inform national fire planners about the long-term program needs and objectives of the North Cascades fire effects monitoring team. The second section provides fire and resource managers with a progress report of fire effects monitoring activities at the parks within the North Cascades cluster. The portions of section two that are devoted to the North Cascades NPS (NOCA) and John Day Fossilbeds NM (JODA) provide thorough analyses of the effects of prescribed fire on the variables identified in each fire monitoring plan. The Lake Roosevelt NRA (LARO) and San Juan Island NHS (SAJH) portions of section two focus on minimum plot calculations and preliminary data analyses performed prior to the implementation of prescribed fire. Although Whitman Mission NHS (WHMI) is within the North Cascades fire effects monitoring cluster, there is not any current fire effects monitoring activity to address in 2002. Finally, section three is written for the North Cascades fire effects monitoring team as a means of documenting protocols specific to the parks that we oversee.

The 2002 field season was a landmark year for the North Cascades National Park fire effects monitoring team. Our fire ecologist and three-person field crew completed 47 plot reads. A majority of this work was performed in the Stehekin Valley of NOCA, although several pay-periods were devoted to establishment of new plot installations and year-1 post-burn reads at JODA, and one pay period was spent at LARO reading post-thin plots. The fire-effects crew participated in prescribed burns at NOCA and JODA as well as attending wildland fire suppression assignments and several job specific trainings. One of our most exceptional accomplishments was the doubling of our field and herbarium collections, now cumulatively numbering at approximately 550 voucher specimens.

Section 1: PLOT NETWORK INFORMATION

Table 1. Plot installation by plot type.

Park / Number of Plots Previously Installed / Number of Plots Installed
2002 / Total Number Plots
Installed (and Active*)
G / B / F / Total / G / B / F / Total / G / B / F / Total
NOCA / 0 / 0 / 33 (10c) / 33 (10c) / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 27 / 27
JODA / 0 / 12 / 8 / 20 / 0 / 3 / 3 / 6 / 0 / 15 / 11 / 26
LARO / 0 / 0 / 9 / 9 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 9 / 9
SAJH / 0 / 0 / 6 / 6 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 6 / 6
WHMI / 4 / 0 / 0 / 4 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 4 / 0 / 0 / 4
Total / 4 / 12 / 56 (10c) / 72(10c) / 0 / 3 / 3 / 6 / 4 / 15 / 53 / 72

* Several NOCA plots have been rejected because they did not fit the monitoring type. Furthermore, The control plots have

been converted to burn/thin plots or discontinued. See the NOCA 2000 Annual Report for details.

Table 2. Plot remeasurements by plot type for 2002 and 2003.

Park / Total Plots to Remeasure 2003 / Total Plots Remeasurement 2002
B / F / Total / B / F / Total
NOCA / 0 / 3
(10T)
(5BP) / 3
(10T)
(5BP) / 0 / 15
(8T)
(3BP) / 15
(8T)
(3BP)
JODA / 9 / 6 / 15 / 6
(3BP) / 3
(3BP) / 9
(6BP)
LARO / 0 / (6T**)
(6BP) / (6T**)
(6BP) / 0 / (6T*) / (6T*)
SAJH / 0 / 6
(6BP) / 6
(6BP) / 0 / 0 / 6
Total / 9 / 15
(10T)
(6T**)
(17BP) / 24
(10T)
(6T**)
(17BP) / 6
(3BP) / 18
(8T)
(6T*)
(6BP) / 24
(8T)
(6T*)
(9BP)

BP = Burn and Immediate Postburn Remeasurements

T = Year-1 Post-thin Remeasurements (Trees & Fuels Only)

T* = Post-thin Trees (Fuels were not read at LARO due to concern that anticipated firewood collecting over the next year

would disturb the fuel transects)

T** = Post-thin Fuels (Fuels transects will be read immediately before Rx-Fire)

Table 4. Projected plot installation.

Park / Plots to be Installed 2003 / Projected Total
G / B / F / Total / G / B / F / Total
NOCA / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 27 / 27
JODA / 0 / 0 / 4 / 4 / 0 / 15 / 15 / 30
LARO / 0 / 0 / 3 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 12 / 12
SAJH / 0 / 0 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 8 / 8
WHMI / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 4 / 0 / 0 / 4

Total

/ 0 / 0 / 9 / 9 / 4 / 15 / 62 / 81

Table 5. Workload difference between your planned workload and actual work accomplished

Workload Difference in 2002
Park / G / B / F / Total
NOCA / n/a / n/a / +4 -4c / +4 -4c
JODA / n/a / 0 / 0 / 0
LARO / n/a / n/a / 0 / 0
WHMI / 0 / n/a / n/a / 0
SAJH / n/a / n/a / 0 / 0

Despite extreme time-constraints, the team was able to complete the majority of anticipated work (Table 5). This was possible because the fire ecologist led the fire-effects monitoring at John Day Fossil Beds while half of the crew performed monitoring activities at the North Cascades simultaneously. This was not an ideal situation, and would not work in the future, because the fire ecologist’s time will be devoted to writing the fire management plan. Four optional control plots were not read this year because there was no time.

Table 6. Number of plots that have burned or otherwise treated.

Park / Total Plots Burned 2002 / Total Plots Burned to Date
B / F / Total / B / F / Total
NOCA / n/a / 3 / 3 / n/a / 16 / 16
JODA / 3 / 3 / 6 / 15 / 9 / 24
Total Plots Thinned 2002 / Total Plots Thinned to Date
B / F / Total / B / F / Total
NOCA / n/a / 11 / 11 / n/a / 22 / 22
LARO / n/a / 3 / 3 / n/a / 9 / 9
SAJH / n/a / 6 / 0 / n/a / 6 / 6

Table 7. Post-treatment plot summary.

North Cascades NPS / B / F / Total

Immediate Post-treatment

/ n/a / 16 / 16
1 Year Post-treatment / n/a / 13, 13M / 13, 13M
2 Year Post-treatment / n/a / 13 / 13
5 Year Post-treatment / n/a / 13 / 13
John Day Fossil Beds NM / B / F / Total
Immediate Post-treatment / 15 / 9 / 24
1 Year Post-treatment / 12 / 6 / 18
2 Year Post-treatment / 6 / 3 / 9
Lake Roosevelt NRA / B / F / Total
Immediate Post-treatment / n/a / 0 / 0
1 Year Post-treatment / n/a / 9M / 9M

M = Mechancial Treatment

Table 8. Number of plots installed by monitoring type in 2002.

Monitoring Type Code / Park / Monitoring Type Name / Plots Installed in 2002 / Total Plots Installed
BARTR1D02 / JODA / Big Sagebrush, Bunchgrass / 3 / 15
FJUOC1D06 / JODA / Juniper, Big Sagebrush / 3 / 11
FPSME1D08 / NOCA / Mixed Conifer (Doug-fir/Ponderosa Pine) / 0 / 27
FPIPO1D10 / LARO / Ponderosa Pine Shrubland / 0 / 9
GCHNA1D04 / WHMI / Grassland / 0 / 4
FQUGA1D02 / SAJH / Garry Oak Woodland / 0 / 6

Section 2. Fire Effects Status Reports & Analyses

Fire Effects Monitoring at North Cascades NPS

Twenty-seven fire effects monitoring plots in the Stehekin Valley are used to monitor the progress of the mechanical thinning and prescribed burning program in the Forest Fuel Reduction Areas (FFRA). The FFRA that have monitoring plots are comprised of four sub-units ranging in size from 116 acres in Orchard/Rainbow to 167 acres in Coon Run. These sub-units are treated for the purposes of hazard fuel reduction and ecological restoration. The Stehekin Valley is an isolated community located 55 miles up Lake Chelan with no escape routes or safety zones other than the lake itself. It is the home of ninety permanent residents, a popular summer tourist location, and a dry Douglas-fir / ponderosa pine forest exacerbated by fire suppression, insects, and disease.

The Stehekin Valley was bustling with more fire effects monitoring activity than it had since the initial fire effects monitoring plot installations in 1997 (See Appendix A: Plot History and Schedule). This was largely due to the copious mechanical thinning operations in the FFRA over the previous year, as well as the maturing of many plots to the fifth-year post-burn status. Furthermore, the fire management team successfully burned 116 acres in the Orchard/Rainbow sub-unit during the spring and fall of 2002. The FEM staff was able to work with the ignition crew on both burns and collect the burn data for all three FEM plots that were within the burn-unit (Orchard/ Rainbow subunit 5).

NOCA: Monitoring Objectives

The density and size distribution of trees in the individual sub-units is varied enough that individual prescriptions were developed for each sub-unit in the Forest Fuel Reduction / Firewood Management Plan. In order to develop the monitoring objectives, the desired stand densities for the individual sub-units are weighed by their acreage so that the overall objective for the FFRA can be defined by their combined average (Appendix C). The fire effects monitoring plots are distributed throughout the sub-units in order to accurately monitor the overall objectives. The monitoring and management objectives listed below can be found in the FMH-4 monitoring type sheet (Appendix B).

Management Objectives (Restoration):

1)Decrease standing live trees in pole-size class and smaller by 50-85% by 1 year post-burn and post-thin,

2)Reduce overstory tree density by 30 – 60% by 1 year post-burn and post-thin,

3)Reduce total basal area by 40 - 60% by 1 year post-burn and post-thin,

4)Individual numbers of exotic species to increase by no more than 20% by 2nd year post-burn,

5)Increase vegetative ground cover by 10-30% by 2nd year post-burn,

6)Reduce fuel loading of 1-hour fuels 55-90%; reduce 10-hour fuels 45-65%; 100-hour 15-35%; 1,000 hour fuels 0-20%.

Monitoring Objectives: Effects of thinning and prescribed fire: total fuel load; density of overstory and pole-size trees, and seedling regeneration in restoration phase.

NOCA: Minimum Plot Calculations

The minimum plot numbers have been achieved to monitor the density, basal area and total fuel-load reduction for the Stehekin Valley FFRA at the 90% level of confidence (Table 9a). Although it has never been a requirement of the monitoring plots to monitor the objectives for the individual sub-units within the FFRA, we have achieved the minimum plots required to monitor at the 80% level of confidence in the Company Creek Sub-unit. Finally, we have achieved minimum plots numbers to monitor the individual downed woody fuel classes at the 80% level of confidence (Table 9b)

Table 9a. Results of minimum plot calculations for monitoring variables by sub-unit and total forest fuel reduction area.

NOCA

R=25 / Overstory Tree Percent Reduction: Trees/Acre / Pole-size Tree Percent Reduction: Trees/Acre / Overstory Basal Area Reduction: Ft2 / Acre / Total Fuel Load Reduction: Tons / Acre

Sub-unit

/ CI = 80% / CI = 90% / CI = 80% / CI = 90% / CI = 80% / CI = 90% / CI = 80% / CI = 90%
Boulder (n=4) / 15 / 32 / 2* / 4* / 1* / 2* / 6 / 12
Orchard (n=4) / 6 / 13 / 21 / 44 / 2* / 5 / 1* / 3*
Company (n=14) / 5* / 8* / 11* / 19 / 2* / 4* / 3* / 5*
Coon Run (n=5) / 8 / 15 / 14 / 27 / 23 / 45 / 3* / 6
FFRA (n=27) / 5* / 9* / 14* / 23* / 6* / 9* / 3* / 6*

* = Minimum Plot Numbers Achieved

Table 9b. Results of minimum plot calculations for monitoring fuel-load reduction by size-class.

NOCA R=25

/ 1-Hour Fuels / 10-Hour Fuels / 100-Hour Fuels / 1000-Hour Fuels
CI = 80% / CI = 90% / CI = 80% / CI = 90% / CI = 80% / CI = 90% / CI = 80% / CI = 90%
FFRA (n=27) / 6* / 10* / 10* / 17* / 24* / 40 / 22* / 36

NOCA: Data Analysis

There is a significant suite of fire effects monitoring plots that can be used for data analysis now that thinning and prescribed fire management projects are well underway. Some of the most interesting analyses have been derived from the fifth-year post-burn plots and the immediate post-thin plots. The results of these analyses are recorded in Table 10 and interpreted in more depth in Figures 1 through 4.

Table 10.Percent reduction of trees and total fuels. Red font indicates that desired reduction has not been met yet. Blue font indicates that the desired condition has been met.

Plot Read / Overstory Tree Density
(80% C.I) / Pole-size Tree Density
(80% C.I) / Overstory Basal Area
(80% C.I)
Pre / Post / Change / Pre / Post / Change / Pre / Post / Change
Fifth-Year Postburn (n=10) / 96.6 / 82.8 / -14.3% / 74.6 / 43.0 / -42.4% / 125.1 / 110.6 / -11%
1-Year Post-thin (n=13) / 130.7 / 92.5 / -29.2% / 64.5 / 20.9 / -67.7% / 145.1 / 125.2 / -13.7%

One of the adaptive management strategies that was adopted following the Five-Year Review of the Forest Fuel Reduction / Firewood Management Plan in the year 2000 was the conversion of “burn-only” units (FPSME1D08 monitoring type) to thin and burn units. This strategy was implemented due to general consensus among the peer review team members that prescribed burning without thinning was not meeting management objectives in a timely manner. The comparison of the effects of thinning or burning on tree density and basal area (Table 10) support these conclusions. It is apparent that the implementation of thinning in all units, as necessary, is expediting the achievement of primary management objectives for hazard fuel reduction.

Five-Year Analysis of Fire Effects

The effects of burning without thinning are depicted in a five-year analysis (Figure 1). In the first year following the prescribed burns there was an overall 17% reduction of trees; 32% reduction of Douglas-fir pole-size trees, 24% reduction of ponderosa pine overstory trees, 7 % reduction of Douglas-fir overstory trees and 0% reduction in ponderosa pine pole-size trees. By five years post-burn there was an overall 27% reduction of trees from the pre-burn condition; 60% reduction of overstory ponderosa pine, 46% reduction of pole-size ponderosa pine, 42 % reduction of pole-size Douglas-fir, and 9% reduction of overstory Douglas-fir.

Although Stehekin is a dry Douglas-fir forest type, which typically contains a significant amount of ponderosa pine (Franklin and Dyrness, 1988), fire suppression and selective harvesting of ponderosa pine have increased the proportion of Douglas-fir to ponderosa pine substantially (Ohlson and Schellhaas). As is apparent from the five-year post-burn analysis, a greater percentage of the remaining ponderosa pine had died within five years of treatment than Douglas-fir. This mortality can not be attributed entirely to prescribed burning, although the mortality occurring within the first year may suggest that the older ponderosa pine trees were unable to withstand the re-introduction of fire after more than 80 years of fire suppression. This effect reconfirms our general supposition that it is unrealistic to maintain the larger ponderosa pine while reducing the Douglas-fir overstory through prescribed burning alone. It is expected that through the use of thinning prior to prescribed fire, that more of the larger ponderosa pine may be maintained, however, this is not a stated objective.

A similar trend is evident in the analysis of basal area reduction over a five-year period (Figure 2). The percentage of basal area reduction was greatest for overstory ponderosa pine, as would be expected, given the small number of overstory ponderosa pine in the

preburn stand. Even more importantly, although the basal area continued to decrease for five years following burning, it only declined by 12% in total. This shows that we are moving slowly towards our desired future condition through prescribed fire alone.

The five-year postburn analysis of fire effects helps us to predict long term changes in the forest canopy following prescribed fire. In the case of the analyses of tree density and basal area reduction, the rate of decline allows us to steer towards our desired future condition more effectively. For instance, we can expect a continuing, and yet slower decline in basal area between the second and fifth year post-burn since there was a 6% decrease in basal area by year two, and another 6% decrease in basal area by year five.

Decline in tree density slowed even more dramatically, given that there was a 21% decline in tree density by year two postburn, and still only an additional 6% decline between years two and five following the burn. Although the initial decline in both basal area and tree density would probably not be as great if the areas were thinned before burning, the rate of decline between years two and five might be similar in both cases.