Advertisement

Determining Forest Fuel Treatment Levels for the Bitterroot Front Using VDDT

  • Jim Merzenich
  • Werner Kurz
  • Sarah Beukema
  • Mike Arbaugh
  • Susan Schilling
Chapter
Part of the Managing Forest Ecosystems book series (MAFE, volume 7)

Abstract

The Vegetation Dynamics Development Tool (VDDT) simulates changes in vegetative composition and structure resulting from both management activities and natural disturbances. Vegetation is classified into discrete states and pathway diagrams portray progression between states. This paper describes the methods used to evaluate alternative forest fuel treatment strategies for the Bitterroot front region of western Montana using VDDT and discusses the general advantages and limitations of using this type of tool.

Key words

Landscape modelling natural disturbance simulation forest dynamics vegetative succession 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Arbaugh M.J., S. Schilling, J. Merzenich and J.W. van Wagtendonk 2000. A test of the strategic fuels management model VDDT using historical data from Yosemite National Park. Pp. 85–89 in Proceedings: The Joint Fire Sciences Conference and Workshop; Boise, ID; June 15–17, 1999; Vol II.Google Scholar
  2. Arno, S. 1996. The concept: restoring ecological structure and process in ponderosa pine forests. In Proceedings of the use of fire in forest restoration. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-341. Ogden, UT.Google Scholar
  3. Beukema, S.J., and W.A. Kurz. 2000. Vegetation Dynamics Development Tool users’ guide, Version 4.0, ESSA Technologies Ltd., Vancouver, British Columbia.Google Scholar
  4. Finney, M. 2000. Spatial patterns of fuel treatments and some effects on fire growth and behavior. Pp. 127–136 in Proceedings: The Joint Fire Sciences Conference and Workshop; Boise, ID; June 15–17, 1999; Vol. II.Google Scholar
  5. Jones, J.G., J.D. Chew, and H. R. Zuuring. 1999. Applying simulation and optimization to plan fuel treatments at landscape scales. Pp. 229–236 in Proceedings of the Symposium onFire Economics, Planning, and Policy: Bottom Lines; April 5–9, 1999; San Diego, CA; Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GRT-173. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, USDA.Google Scholar
  6. Kurz, W.A., S.J. Beukema, W. Klenner, J.A. Greenough, D.C.E. Robinson, A.D. Sharpe, and T.M. Webb. 2000. TELSA: The Tool for Exploratory Landscape Scenario Analyses, Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 27:227–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Long, D.G., W.J. Hann, P. Morgan, S.C. Bunting, J. Byler, A.E. Harvey, P.F. Hessburg, and R.E. Keane. 1998. Development of Management Scenarios for Modelling Disturbance Regimes in the Interior Columbia River Basin. USDA Forest Service; USDI BLM; Administrative report.Google Scholar
  8. Merzenich, J., W.A. Kurz, S.J. Beukema, M. Arbaugh, and S. Schilling. 1999. Long-range modelling of stochastic disturbances and management treatments using VDDT and TELSA. In Proceedings: Society of American Foresters National Convention: Landscape Analysis Session; Portland, OR; Sep 14, 1999.Google Scholar
  9. Quigley, T.M., and S.J. Arbelbide, eds. 1997. An assessment of ecosystem components in the Interior Columbia Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins, Vol. II. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station and USDI Bureau of Land Management Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405.Google Scholar
  10. Schaaf, M., M. Wiitala, D. Carlton, K. Snell and R. Ottmar. 1999. Modeling the tradeoffs between prescribed fire and wildfire emissions in forest and range land ecosystems. Pp. 1673–1685 in Proc. III International Conference on Forest Fire Research and 14th Conference on Fire and Forest Meteorology; Nov. 16–20, 1998; Lusco-Coimbra, Portugal.Google Scholar
  11. Weise, D.R., R. Kimberlin, M. Arbaugh, J. Chew, J. Merzenich, J.W. van Wagtendonk, and M. Wiitala 2000. A risk-based comparison of potential fuel treatment trade-off models. Pp. 96–102 in Proceedings: The Joint Fire Sciences Conference and Workshop; Boise, ID; June 15–17, 1999; Vol. II.Google Scholar
  12. Wykoff, W.R., N.L. Crookston, and A.R. Stage. 1982. User’s guide to the Stand Prognosis Model. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Ogden, UT, Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-133. 112 p.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jim Merzenich
    • 1
  • Werner Kurz
    • 2
  • Sarah Beukema
    • 2
  • Mike Arbaugh
    • 3
  • Susan Schilling
    • 3
  1. 1.Pacific Northwest RegionUSDA Forest ServicePortlandUSA
  2. 2.ESSA Technologies Ltd.VancouverCanada
  3. 3.Pacific Southwest Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations