Download
1 / 13
130 likes | 138 Views
WI Natural Resources Board August 2018 Webcast. Agenda item: 4.B.4. Update on WI Deer Metrics System Bob Nack, Section Chief Bureau of Wildlife Management Andy Stoltman, Section Chief Bureau of Applied Forestry. Agenda item: 4.B.4. Wisconsin Deer Metric System.
E N D
WI Natural Resources BoardAugust 2018 Webcast Agenda item: 4.B.4.
Update on WI Deer Metrics SystemBob Nack, Section Chief Bureau of Wildlife ManagementAndy Stoltman, Section ChiefBureau of Applied Forestry Agenda item: 4.B.4.
Wisconsin Deer Metric System www.dnr.wi.gov; keyword: “deer metrics” “How to use” - video tutorial Agenda item: 4.B.4.
Deer Metric Update Agenda item: 4.B.4.
Deer Metric Update Agenda item: 4.B.4.
WiscLand 2.0 • Identify deer range • Describe habitat conditions in the county (FRM data) • Compare herd health to habitat conditions Agenda item: 4.B.4.
FRM: Forest Regeneration Monitoring • In-depth measurements of regeneration: • Deer browse by species • Tree species counts by height class • Re-measurement • Overstory shading and plant competition • Focus on stands that have been harvested or in the past few years • Intense sampling (1 plot/ 5 acres of areas assessed) Agenda item: 4.B.4.
What are we measuring? • Counties with more than 30% forested area • Measurements in Northern Hardwoods, Oak-Hickory, and Pine forest types • Federal, state, county, and private lands will be assessed • 15,867 plots across the state, and resampled on a 3 year cycle (5,289 annually) Agenda item: 4.B.4.
How will the data be used? • The data will have utility at multiple scales • Landscape Level: inform management guidelines and assess long-term trends of Wisconsin’s forest ecology and timber markets • County Level: more intensive sampling allows us to provide county-specific information to CDACs and county resource managers on regeneration trends • Stand Level: provide a more detailed regeneration metric to better assess the success or failure of any given stand Agenda item: 4.B.4.
What are the future goals? • Future plans • Implement the FRM metric into standard forestry monitoring protocols • Partner with other natural resource groups interested in forest regeneration • Early data will be available for CDACs before the next 3-year harvest recommendation period, but some data may be ready earlier • Create palatability index Agenda item: 4.B.4.
Pilot Data Highlights – Bayfield County Forest • ~240 plots were measured representing 1,070 acres of oak forest that had recently been managed. • The average number of stems per acre is 2,093. For oak, the Silviculture handbook guidance is 3,100 stems less than 3 feet tall or 515 greater than 4 feet tall. Neither criteria are met. • The stocking does not meet criterion for conversion to northern hardwoods. • The average browse index is 3.27 (3 is medium (26-50% stems browsed), 4 is high (51-75% stems browsed)). • Approximately 36% of plots had at least 50% of herbaceous or woody competition. • Conclusion: Bayfield County Forest oak forests are not regenerating as expected. Agenda item: 4.B.4.
Pilot Data Highlights – Flambeau River SF • 421 plots were measured in northern hardwoods stands that had been recently managed. • The average number of stems per acre is 14,507. The Silviculture Handbook recommends 2,000 to 5,000 stems of desirable species per acre. This criterion is met for the Flambeau River State Forest. • The browse and competition indices were not collected, but browse was evident. • Conclusion: Flambeau River State Forest are experiencing vigorous regeneration that exceeds the standards for producing fully stocked stands. Agenda item: 4.B.4.
Natural Resources Board Agenda item: 4.B.4.
