Estimating historical forest density from land‐survey data: a response to Baker and Williams (2018)

Levine, Carrie R.; Cogbill, Charles V.; Collins, Brandon M.; Larson, Andrew J.; Lutz, James A.; North, Malcolm P.; Restaino, Christina; Safford, Hugh D.; Stephens, Scott L.; Battles, John J.

doi:10.1002/eap.1968

Cited by 10 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Levine et al. (; LE hereafter) claim our landscape‐scale method for reconstructing historical forests fails, based on updated modern tests in six disjunct small plots, half located in highly altered forests, but here we show our method works even at these inadequate sites. LE is a correction of Levine et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Estimating historical forest density from land‐survey data: Response

Baker

Williams

2019

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Estimating historical forest density from land‐survey data: Response

Baker

Williams

2019

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, due to the lack of a correction factor that accounts for the number of trees used to estimate density at individual sampling points, methods developed by Williams and Baker (2011) overestimated tree densities by 24-667% for contemporary stands with known densities (Levine et al 2017(Levine et al , 2019. Levine et al (2017Levine et al ( , 2019 enabled independent evaluation of their methods and data by archiving all GLO estimator code and data on publicly accessible websites; data and code supporting Williams and Baker (2011) are not similarly accessible (Stephens et al 2021). Independently validated methods for estimating tree density from point data were shown to yield estimates that were less biased (Levine et al 2017) as well as more consistent with tree-ring reconstructions and less than half as large (Johnston et al 2018) as those produced using Williams and Baker (2011) methods.…”

Section: Misrepresented Historical Forest Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence for widespread changes in the structure, composition, and fire regimes of western North American forests

Hagmann

Hessburg

Prichard

et al. 2021

Ecological Applications

Self Cite

218

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implementation of wildfire-and climate-adaptation strategies in seasonally dry forests of western North America is impeded by numerous constraints and uncertainties. After more than a century of resource and land use change, some question the need for proactive management, particularly given novel social, ecological, and climatic conditions. To address this question, we first provide a framework for assessing changes in landscape conditions and fire regimes. Using this framework, we then evaluate evidence of change and lack of change in contemporary conditions relative to those maintained by active fire regimes, i.e., those uninterrupted by a century or more of human-induced fire exclusion. The cumulative results of more than a century of research document a persistent and substantial fire deficit and widespread alterations to ecological structures and functions. These changes are not necessarily apparent at all spatial scales or in all dimensions of fire regimes and forest and nonforest conditions. Nonetheless, loss of the once abundant influence of low-and moderate-KEYWORDS

show abstract

“…[2018], Levine et al. [2019]). That said, these large‐scale historical timber surveys are a robust source of quantitative data that require very few assumptions to generate forest structure and composition metrics (Hagmann et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These areas with low live overstory cover can be quite important for maintaining high biodiversity (White et al 2015). These limitations further emphasize that all historical forest reconstructions, including this one, are incomplete (e.g., Collins et al [2018], Levine et al [2019]). That said, these large-scale historical timber surveys are a robust source of quantitative data that require very few assumptions to generate forest structure and composition metrics (Hagmann et al 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mixed‐conifer forest reference conditions for privately owned timberland in the southern Cascade Range

Collins

Bernal

York

et al. 2021

Ecological Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The overwhelming majority of information on historical forest conditions in western North America comes from public lands, which may provide an incomplete description of historical landscapes. In this study we made use of an archive containing extensive timber survey data collected in the early 1920s from privately owned forestland. These data covered over 50,000 ha and effectively represent a 19% sample of the entire area. The historical forest conditions reconstructed from these data fit the classic model of frequent‐fire forests: large trees, low density, and pine‐dominated. However, unlike other large‐scale forest reconstructions, our study area exhibited relatively low overall variability in forest structure and composition across the historical landscape. Despite having low variability, our analyses revealed evidence of biophysical controls on tree density and pine fraction. Annual climatic variables most strongly explained the range in historical tree densities, whereas historical pine fraction was explained by a combination of topographic and climatic variables. Contemporary forest inventory data collected from both public and private lands within the same general area, albeit not a direct remeasurement, revealed substantial increases in tree density and greatly reduced pine fractions relative to historical conditions. Contemporary forests exhibited a far greater range in these conditions than what existed historically. These findings suggest that private forestland managed with multiaged silviculture may be similar to public forestland with respect to departure in forest structure and compositions from that of historical forests. However, there may be differences between management objectives that favor timber production, more typical on private lands, vs. those that favor restoration, increasingly supported on public lands.

show abstract

Estimating historical forest density from land‐survey data: a response to Baker and Williams (2018)

Cited by 10 publications

References 30 publications

Estimating historical forest density from land‐survey data: Response

Estimating historical forest density from land‐survey data: Response

Evidence for widespread changes in the structure, composition, and fire regimes of western North American forests

Mixed‐conifer forest reference conditions for privately owned timberland in the southern Cascade Range

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About