November 1, 1993  Number 2

An information digest published by the USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station IFSL, P.O. Box 8089, Missoula, MT 59807

• The Importance of Whitebark Pine Ecosystems in Ecosystem Management

• Aerial Surveys of Whitebark Pine: A Possible Tool for Broad Scale Landscape Analysis by Beth Hodder

• Northern Region Genetic Resource Program -- Whitebark Pine Program Summary

• Update on the Glacier View Ranger District's Whitebark Pine Ecosystem Management Project by Dick Davies and Bryan Donner

• Susceptibility of whitebark pine seedlings artificially inoculated with white pine blister rust by Ray J. Hoff

• Spatial pattern of fires within a small roadless area: implications for whitebark pine by Michael Murray, Penny Morgan and Steve Bunting

• Differentiation of whitebark and western white pine by Ray J. Hoff

The Importance of Whitebark Pine Ecosystems in Ecosystem Management

The basic goal of ecosystem management is to manage the land to meet society's needs and values in a manner that is sustainable. The art and science of ecosystem management is based on several key principles. The first principle is that an area must be assessed and managed in the context of the broader system. This applies to our human societies needs and values, as well as other biological and physical attributes of ecosystems. A second key principle is that we understand the function and inter-relationships of ecosystem attributes that we are managing. The third principle is that we conserve native ecosystem processes and attributes. These principles are not new in natural resource management. In fact, they are thoroughly discussed in "lay persons" language in "Sand County Almanac" by Aldo Leopold. Recently these principles of ecosystem management have been addressed in a thorough scientific summary, with application examples, in the Eastside Forest Ecosystem Health Assessment Volume II, which is being published by the Pacific Northwest Station of the Forest Service.

The above paragraph should provide a background for discussion of the importance of the whitebark pine ecosystems in ecosystem management. This ecosystem provides excellent examples relating to the principles of ecosystem management. The whitebark pine ecosystem is typically at the headwaters of hydrologic systems, and whitebark pine itself provides important functions in soil development, transpiration, habitat, and buffering other species from weather events. This ecosystem is connected to adjacent lower elevation systems by fire, insect, disease, and animal-use processes. Adaptations of whitebark pine are similar to other stone pines around the world in high stress environments. Stone pines have provided an important food source for humans, as well as other animals. These ecosystems are also valued by humans as places with high aesthetic and spiritual value. Understanding the broader context of whitebark pine and connected ecosystems at the global, continental, and river basin scales will help us prioritize and develop management treatments that provide sustainable values and uses for society from this ecosystem.

The whitebark pine ecosystem provides a very interesting example of the function and connection of ecosystem processes and attributes. The complex linkage of fire, Clark's nutcracker, and site conditions needed for whitebark pine regeneration is an superb laboratory for scientific study and a classroom for ecosystem education. The relation that whitebark pine has with regeneration of other tree species, succession of nonforest species, and amelioration of the severe environments at timberline are exemplary to the need to manage for ecosystem sustainability rather single resource or species management.

Managing for recovery of whitebark pine in light of its steep decline, due to the suppression of the "natural" fire process and introduction of white pine blister rust, provides an excellent example of the need to conserve "all the pieces" as well as avoid introduction of non-native species. This ecosystem also provides sound evidence that single species (fine filter) conservation strategies, that are not taken in context of spatial and temporal ecosystem processes or attributes (coarse filter), will not only be unsuccessful in recovery of the target species, but may lead to loss or disfunction of other ecosystem processes or attributes.

Society is and will continue to pay a high price for the loss of whitebark pine in these ecosystems. If society determines that whitebark pine is worth the price of recovery, then the longterm cost will be the least if we start soon and design recovery strategies in the context of the broader system. Scientists and managers that have taken a leadership role in improving our understanding and initiating recovery of whitebark pine based on ecosystem principles, should be rewarded for their progressive efforts in management of this valuable resource.

Wendel J. Hann, Regional Ecologist, Northern Region, Missoula, MT

Aerial Surveys of Whitebark Pine: A Possible Tool for Broad Scale Landscape Analysis by Beth Hodder

The Glacier View Ranger District (GVRD) joined with Timber, Cooperative Forestry, and Pest Management (TCFPM) in a first-of-its-kind study to determine the feasibility of using aerial surveys for whitebark pine inventory at the landscape level. Tim McConnell, TCFPM, and Beth Hodder, GVRD, flew in a fixed wing aircraft for nine hours in two days, observing over 100,000 acres of potential whitebark pine in the North Fork of the Flathead.

During the aerial survey, Tim sketch mapped polygons representing broad condition classes of whitebark pine. Each polygon contained a code describing its condition class and the percentage of dead whitebark pine. Beth used binoculars to get a closer look at some areas, took photos, and discussed condition classes with Tim.

Using a fixed wing plane offered the opportunity to view vast portions of the district in a relatively short period of time and in a reasonably inexpensive manner (Ferry time for the plane, pilot per diem, and survey time amounted to about $1640).

Some follow up from the survey is taking place. Tim returned to the district office to check his sketch maps against the district's orthophotos and aerial photos and to talk further about the usefulness of this survey. TCFPM also intends to digitize the polygons into GIS and make map overlays. Glacier View personnel plan to check this summer's stand exams and ECODATA plots taken in whitebark pine stands against the flight polygons. Other areas may also be chosen for future ground-truthing, based on findings from the flight.

Although it is too early to determine the success of this type of survey as a tool for broad scale landscape analysis or other ecosystem management projects, district and TCFPM personnel feel the flight proved useful. For example, they found that changes in the whitebark pine ecosystem, or any other ecosystem, manifest themselves when observed from the air; a broader but perhaps more holistic view presents itself when seen in a context much larger than on a stand-by-stand basis.

Also, district personnel have a better idea of where to look for live whitebark pine for future cone collections. The flight maps show several large areas within easy access to roads where cones might be located. A more complete summary detailing the project and some initial observations and conclusions is available from B.Koss:R01F10D07A.

by Lars Halstrom

Whitebark pine, for the most part, is a non commercial species in R-1 even though their are instances where it is being harvested in small amounts today. In the Yellowstone ecosystem, whitebark pine provides the grizzly bear a major food source. In other areas west of the divide, it is seriously affected by white pine blister rust and mountain pine beetles. The 1988 Yellowstone fires consumed a significant amount of whitebark pine and efforts are underway to reforest those acres with whitebark pine grown at the Coeur d'Alene Nursery.

Northern Region whitebark pine tree improvement program was kicked off in 1991 with Ray Hoff's and Jerry Rehfeldt's study plan #28. This plan will assess the genetic variation within families, among families, within populations, and among populations within regions. Study Plan #29 will assess the level and kinds of resistance mechanisms in whitebark pine. Study Plan #30 will 1) establish a natural seed orchard of whitebark pine resistant to blister rust, 2) assess the level and the kinds of resistance responses in the original population of whitebark pine, 3) assess the level and the kinds of resistance responses in the derived population, and 4) select for other traits such as growth rate, form or nut production.

Each forest was given an assignment of selecting 4-5 areas and collecting 10 cones off of 10 trees or 200 cones from 3 squirrel caches in a collection area. So far, the Gallatin, Lewis and Clark, Beaverhead, Deerlodge, Custer, Helena, Bitteroot, and Flathead NF's have made collections. Collections started the last two weeks in August to the first week in September, after the nutcrackers had started feeding on the cones. There was more variability in cone ripening dates in '92 and '93 than '91. Several Forests did not beat the Clark's nutcracker from consuming all the seed. Cone crops varied for each collection area. The 1993 collections did not develop on schedule due to the record low temperatures this past summer. The nutcrackers ruined a lot of seed by trying to extract them before they were ripe. All NF collections should be completed by the fall of 1995.

The Gallatin NF, INT Station and the SAF sponsored a one day workshop in Bozeman, January 22nd, 1991. Approximately 95 people attended from all forests and agencies within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and the Lewis and Clark NF. At this workshop, Ray Hoff handed out forms and pictures of rust cankers on whitebark pine. Stand exam crews working in whitebark pine stands can fill out the forms and send them to him. This will help to identify where the rust is and if their are any resistant trees.

Update on the Glacier View Ranger District's Whitebark Pine Ecosystem Management Project by Dick Davies and Bryan Donner

In the first issue of Nutcracker Notes, we announced the initiation of an Ecosystem Management (EM) project in the 100,000-acre whitebark pine zone of the Glacier View Ranger District. This is one of two EM projects on the Flathead National Forest. The project is being conducted by the Columbia Falls Planning Team, a forest-wide interdisciplinary resource. In this issue, we will present an update of what we have accomplished.

As is the nature with planning teams, we held meetings. These meetings were to set direction and objectives, inform and involve "partners", work on details of data collection, coordinate public involvement ideas, etc. A July kickoff meeting involved people from the SO, RO, and other groups and agencies. From this meeting, we received input from whitebark pine specialists on data needs, state of existing knowledge, trends, objectives, and study designs.

We then initiated a series of public involvement activities. An information leaflet is being put together that will describe the ecology of whitebark pine, Clark's nutcracker, blister rust, mountain pine beetle, bears, fire suppression, etc. The Glacier Institute, a non-profit educational organization headquartered in the Flathead Valley, has submitted a proposal to design and implement an educational program in the local schools about the ecology of whitebark pine. We are currently trying to secure funding for this educational program. Finally, an article describing the ecology of whitebark pine and our proposed study was published in the Flathead National Forest Focus section of the Daily Interlake newspaper.

We have initiated many projects to describe the current and past conditions of the whitebark pine zone. As part of understanding the historical condition of the whitebark pine ecosystem, 1956 timber inventory maps for all of the Glacier View Ranger District are being digitized and attributed for developing a GIS layer. The Flathead National Forest has purchased two additional LANDSAT satellite images from 1985 and 1992. Using this new data, we will be able to detect changes for the project area from our previous 1981 image to 1985, and then to 1992. Also, we mailed a survey out to different federal, state, and private organizations about how each group stores resource data. The goal is to see what data currently exists and how easily that data can be exchanged among cooperating agencies.

Very little current site-specific information exists for whitebark pine in our timber stand database because of its marginal timber value. We have initiated several data collection projects to form a basis for subsequent decision making and alternative selection. We are working with RO Forest Pest Management to map whitebark pine mortality from aerial surveys (see Hodder article this issue). In addition, the planning team has developed a plot design for both ECODATA plots and standard timber stand exams. A four person crew did these stand exams and ECODATA plots on stands across the project area stratifying by elevation and landform. ECODATA plot locations were randomly chosen by the computer, maps were created, and photos were marked with stand delineations. Precise locations of the ECODATA plots on the ground were obtained by using a geographic positioning system. Data entry from this summer's surveys is nearly complete and will be available to cooperating researchers. Information about older stand exams that had whitebark pine recorded on them has been retrieved from the current and history data tapes of R1EDIT data at the Kansas City Computer Center. This R1EDIT data has been loaded into an Oracle database format, allowing for easy access.

The next steps for the planning team will be to analyze information collected during the summer as well as the historical information discussed above. We will assess the need for additional data collection next summer and the formulation of a new data collection scheme. Alternatives for possible management projects will then be formalized. However, the status of the Columbia Falls planning team is currently being discussed by the forest leadership team in light of reduced forest funding. This project may not be continued if the planning team is dissolved and the project is not shifted to another planning team on the forest.

Susceptibility of whitebark pine seedlings artificially inoculated with white pine blister rust by Ray J. Hoff

Three-year-old seedlings from nine stands were inoculated in August 1992. Data presented here is from a September 1993 rust inspection; final data is still a year or two away but the data was encouraging and so I thought I would present it now even though I know the data will change.

There are basically two kinds of stands represented. Those that have had more than 90% mortality caused by blister rust (three stands) and those with low mortality, from none to 60%, average was about 30% (six stands).

Data were as follows:

Needle infection among families within the high mortality stands varied from 2 to 25 spots per meter of needle tissue and the percentage of cankered seedlings varied from 6 to 90%. Family variation for the low mortality stands was 3 to 16 needle spots per meter and 52 to 100% cankered seedlings. One susceptible seedling had 26 cankers. The family with 6% of the seedlings cankered had an average of 25 spots per meter with 97% of the seedlings showing needle spots. This shows that this family, even though highly spotted, has resistance of some kind that has, so far, kept the fungus from infecting the stem.

These data indicate that we should be able to make gains in resistance with both stand and family selections. Most important, this is the first indication that the natural regeneration that is present in many clearcuts and/or burns that are adjacent to high blister rust mortality stands do contain resistance; maybe at higher levels than I have dared to guess. If this is true the silvicultural approach of managing this natural regeneration to produce whitebark pine stands resistant to blister rust seems even more possible. See note by Hoff in Nutcracker Notes, Number 1, April 1993.

In many localities in Idaho and Montana, whitebark pine has been decimated by blister rust, leaving just a few individuals per acre. Many of these remnant stands are adjacent to burns or clearcuts, and, in many cases, these openings contain high numbers of whitebark pine seedlings and saplings. There can be little doubt that this regeneration came from parents trees that are resistant to blister rust or, at least, have some genes for resistance that have enabled them to survive while others have died. If the new population had, for example, 500 trees per acre and if resistance to blister rust was just 10%, 50 mature trees would be expected to survive and have higher resistance than there parents. Each generation would add to the gain. What needs to be done is some very careful management. Whitebark pine is a poor competitor and therefore its growing area must be cleaned of other trees or competing shrubs. As a bonus this cleaning would make it possible to grow whitebark pine at somewhat lower elevations similar to its occurrence in the large burns of the past centuries. This would speed up the process of producing a new variety by permitting whitebark pine to reach its full potential growth rate.

Spatial pattern of fires within a small roadless area: implications for whitebark pine by Michael Murray, Penny Morgan and Steve Bunting

Fire has historically maintained populations of whitebark pine, yet fire suppression has likely altered the spatial pattern and frequency of fires in the Northern Rockies. In cooperation with the Intermountain Research Station, we are currently studying these relationships within a small roadless area located on the Beaverhead (Region 1) and Salmon (Region 4) National Forests. The study area straddles the Continental Divide which allows us to look at differences in fire frequency and size, successional patterns, and status of whitebark pine on the two sides of the Divide.

Our objectives are to: 1) describe the historical frequency, size, spatial pattern, and severity of fires in the Salmon/Beaverhead study area, 2) estimate past and present abundance of whitebark pine and determine if this appears linked to fire history, and 3) predict future abundance of whitebark pine based on current status throughout the study area. Our results will be meaningful for fire management within small wilderness areas.

Through a description of the age and composition of forest communities in the study area and aging of fire scars, we can document current and past patterns of fires. In addition, we are using ECODATA procedures to assess community structure and health of whitebark pine. A Geographic Information System (GIS) is being used for spatial analysis of landscapes. We are currently analyzing the preliminary data we collected in this past summer. Next year, we will collect extensive field data with plans to complete analysis and interpretation over the next two years.

Our results will aid managers in further understanding the fire ecology of whitebark pine. The decline of this species highlights a critical need for comprehensive decisions about fire management of small wilderness and roadless lands.

Differentiation of whitebark and western white pine by Ray J. Hoff

Ranges of whitebark and western white pine frequently overlap. Mature trees are quite easy to differentiate because of general morphological differences and of course the cones are very different. However, with young trees, up to 8 feet tall or so, there is an overlap in morphology. Nonetheless, there is a good way to tell them apart. Whitebark pine has from 1 to 4 rows of stomates in the abaxial side of the needle. The abaxial side is the rounded outer side. In western white pine there is just a few stomates at the tip of the needle. This difference was reported by Dunwiddle (1985, Northwest Science); but just like all other biological characters this trait varies. The following data illustrates some of this variation in whitebark pine of Idaho and Montana.

There were two needles that had no stomates in the abaxil side, however, there were stomates on the other four needles within the fascicle. Thus, all the seedings in my sample had at least one row of stomates in the abaxial side of the needle. Here are the data for western white pine:

All the seedlings from Montana, Idaho, British Columbia and Washington can be easily differentiated by the presence or absence of stomata rows in the abaxial side of the needle. Even for the longest stomata row (22-Idaho) the stomata row occurred in the top quarter of the needle. There were three stands in Oregon and five stands in California that had at least one row of stomates that went from the tip to the center of the needle. However, the basal one-quarter to one-third of the needles in these eight stands did not have stomates. So, if California whitebark pine are the same as Idaho-Montana, for this stomata trait, differentiation can be made by looking at the basal portion the needle. Isn't biodiversity fun?

Hoff, R.J. 1992. How to recognize blister rust infection on whitebark pine. USDA Forest Service Research Note INT-406. 7 pg.

McCaughey, W., and K.J. McDonald (Compilers). Proceedings of the Workshop: Management of whitebark pine ecosystems - An international and regional perspective. April 23, 1993, Bozeman, MT. A compilation of abstracts from speakers at the workshop.

Schmidt, W.C. 1993. Effect of white pine blister rust on western wilderness.

Paper presented at American Forestry: An evolving tradition session at the SAF National Convention, Richmond, VA, Oct. 25-28. 1992.

This is an early announcement of a workshop on whitebark pine to be held in Glacier National Park on May 3, 1994. This workshop will probably be sponsored by the Glacier National Park, Flathead National Forest, Society of American Foresters, and the Intermountain Station. It will be the seventh in a series of workshops and symposia relating to whitebark pine ecology and management. It's a one day event held in the Glacier Park Community Center at the Park's headquarters. Both management and research topics will be covered. Details of this workshop will be posted through the whitebark pine electronic mailing list and the next issue of Nutcracker Notes.

Dick Davies and Bryan Donner; Glacier View District, Flathead National Forest, P.O. Box W, Columbia Falls, MT 59912 (B.DONNER:R01F10D07A)

Lars Halstrom, Gallatin National Forest, Bozeman Ranger District, 601 Nikles, Box C, Bozeman, MT 59715. (L.HALSTROM:R01F10D01A)

Wendel Hann, Northern Region, P.O. Box 7669, Missoula, MT 59807 (W.HANN:R01A)

Beth Hodder; Glacier View District, Flathead National Forest, P.O. Box W, Columbia Falls, MT 59912 (B.KOSS:R01F10D07A)

Ray Hoff, FSL, 1221 So. Main St., Moscow, ID 83843 (R.HOFF:S22L04A)

Michael Murray, Steve Bunting, and Penny Morgan, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences, Moscow, ID 83843, (208)885-6536 (M.MURRAY:S22L04A, P.MORGAN:S22L01A).

NUTCRACKER NOTES is a vehicle for the dispersal of information on all facets of whitebark pine ecosystems. Summaries of research results and management projects in whitebark pine forests are presented to provide readers state-of-the-art information. Observations and ideas about whitebark pine ecosystems are also welcome. Many whitebark pine landscapes are experiencing profound changes. Recent studies have shown dramatic declines in whitebark pine populations in Northwest Montana and Northern Idaho. The purpose of this newsletter is to distribute timely information so that land managers and scientists can understand and deal with these changes. Issues of NUTCRACKER NOTES will be numbered and published 1-3 times a year depending on available material.

Submission of Articles: Everyone is invited to submit news briefs to NUTCRACKER NOTES. These articles should be mailed to Nutcracker Notes, c/o Bob Keane, Intermountain Fire Sciences Lab, P.O. Box 8089, Missoula, MT 59807. If possible, they should be submitted electronically to B.KEANE:S22L01A over the Data General, or written to a floppy disc (WordPerfect text processing) and then mailed. You are encouraged to submit articles to improve this information network.

Newsletter Format: Articles submitted to NUTCRACKER NOTES will be presented in the newsletter under three main categories: Management News and Notes, Research News and Notes, and Publication and Events Alert. Management News describes current activities, problems, observations, conditions planned or implemented by land management agencies in whitebark pine forests. Research News describes current or planned research projects in these ecosystems. Publication and Events Alert is simply a list of current events and published information that may be of interest to readers of the newsletter. At the end of the newsletter the reader will find a complete list of all authors that submitted articles along with their addresses. At times there may be an editorial at the beginning of the newsletter to highlight important topics. Bob Keane, Editor