Trade‐offs of forest management scenarios on forest carbon exchange and threatened and endangered species habitat

Abstract

Management of forest lands under climate warming poses challenges to managers, some of which are difficult to predict. Examining the trade‐offs associated with forest stewardship choices is essential to avoid consequences associated with loss of natural capital. We utilized LANDIS‐II process model simulations for three forested sites located in disparate parts of the United States with the purpose of understanding the trade‐offs imposed by management choices under climate warming and associated wildfire. There were only small trade‐offs that emerged from the simulations, between habitat area for threatened and endangered species (TES), net ecosystem exchange for CO2 (NEE), and risk of wildfire. Stand management in the form of thinning and prescribed burning typically increased NEE while simultaneously increasing habitat for TES, while reducing the risk of wildfire. These benefits were also observed under a climate warming scenario; however, the benefits were greatly outweighed by the negative impacts of warming on both TES habitat and NEE. Balancing these ecosystem services via thinning and burning treatments is a strategic approach to mitigate risks of wildfire both currently and under a warming future climate.

Managing for biodiversity: The effects of climate, management and natural disturbance on wildlife species richness

“…At the scale of the pixel, potential species richness responded positively to mechanical thinning across all climate and forest management scenarios and prescribed fire except for when the historical climate was used. This aligns with findings from other studies that have found stable or increasing habitat for species with forest thinning (Demarais et al, 2017;Verschuyl et al, 2011) and prescribed burning McDowell et al, 2021;Sitters et al, 2015). But we observed lower potential species richness at the landscape level for the management scenarios that incorporated more thinning and prescribed burning (BMS and RCMS) compared with the MMS.…”

“…LDSMs have now advanced to predict future vegetation under a changing climate while accounting for stochasticity and uncertainty (Scheller et al, 2018), making them highly effective for understanding the potential outcomes of (1) climate scenarios, (2) management scenarios, and (3) the interaction of climate and management on wildlife habitat and biodiversity (e.g. McDowell et al, 2021; Nitschke et al, 2020). Model outputs can be used to produce spatially explicit maps of vegetation types and conditions, seral stage, biomass, carbon, and disturbance frequency and intensity.…”