Bark Beetle Management

Over 41.7 millions of acres of conifer forests have been affected by the bark beetle, since 1997. Since, bark beetles are native insects not subject to eradication and need to be managed as integral parts of the ecosystem. The U.S. Forest Service strategy is a direct control approach, focused on three primary goals: human safety, forest recovery, and long-term forest resiliency, according to the “Western Bark Beetle Strategy,” published on July 11, 2011.

The Forest Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service is undertaking an effort to battle the bark beetle problem as a joint task force. Coordination will occur with State and federal agencies alongside with civilian partners to determine the risk to human safety, communicate the risks to the public, and leverage available partner capacity and funds to increase the scope of projects. With the integration and support from specific programs like Recreation, Road Management, Trail Management, Forest Health Protection, Hazardous Fuels, Facilities Maintenance, Forest Management, Vegetation Management and Salvage Sale, approximately $138 million in agency and supplemental appropriations is expected to fund the overwhelming toll the beetles have inflected on the forests.

Hazard Rating System:
Because outbreaks usually develop in mature to over mature forests, especially in lodgepole pine, large reserves of these forests pose a constant hazard in areas climatically favorable to the different species of the bark beetle. It is very expensive to treat all infestations. Therefore, susceptible stands need to be prioritized on economic or other criteria and control applied only to the most valuable stands. Several hazard rating systems have been developed based on climatic, tree, and stand variables that have significant effects on both beetle survival and distribution. Currently in the western Regions, the Forest Service most often uses the Shore and Safranyik hazard-rating system developed in 1992 which incorporates 3 distinct facets:

* The Susceptibility Index is a measure of stand characteristics which describe their attractiveness to beetles and is based on four variables:

* (S) = P x A x D x L * P = Percent of susceptible pine basal area * A = Age factor * D = Stand density factor * L = Location factor

* The Beetle Pressure Index is related to size and proximity of nearest bark beetle population. Both relative abundance of beetles and their nearness to the stand for which risk is being determined will influence that stand's likelihood of being infested. * The Risk Index is a combination of susceptibility index and beetle pressure index and is a measure of a stand's relative likelihood of sustaining damage from beetle attack in the near future. Risk index is a number, between 0 and 100. Higher numbers, represent higher probability of infestation

Human Safety:
Dead timber can have an enormous impact on areas relative to recreation, wildlife, buildup of fuel, fire hazard, and plant succession. Numerous power lines and municipal water supply reservoirs are also at risk from the dangers of falling dead trees. Human safety concerns have increased as this epidemic has affected high public use areas. The U.S. Forest Service estimates that up to 100,000 dead trees killed by beetles fall to the ground every day in southern Wyoming and northern Colorado. In the western region alone, there are approximately 14,000 miles of roads, trails, and right-of-ways, as well as approximately 1,400 recreation sites that could be affected by falling trees. The first goal of human safety ensures that community infrastructure and people are protected from the hazards of falling bark beetle-killed trees and elevated wildfire potential.

Funding: FY 2011, $84.8 million
Goal Performance measure: FY 2011 - 187,800 Acres of treatment;
FY 2012 - 240,026 Acres of treatment;
FY 2013-2016 - 1,270,199 Acres of treatment.

These funds will develop strategies and infrastructures for removing hazardous trees along the highest priority roads, trails, and recreation sites and facilities. Provide public awareness and warning systems for fallen tree hazards in untreated areas or sites. Conduct research to develop and evaluate various technologies that optimize the use of beetle-killed material, including wood composites, biochemicals, biofuels and biopower.

Forest Recovery:
Healthy forests play a critical role in providing clean water, wildlife habitat, a variety of recreation opportunities and rural jobs. Recovery and re-establish forests damaged by bark beetles are the second goal. By focusing on forests and not the bark beetle, forest management can alter stand conditions that favor buildup of beetle populations. The current infestation has increased fire risk in certain areas and modified wildlife habitats and created the opportunities for establishment of invasive species.

Funding: FY 2011, $5.8 million
Goal Performance measure: FY 2011 - 17,200 Acres of treatment; FY 2012 - 81,676 Acres of treatment;
FY 2013 - 2016 661,250 Acres of treatment.

The objectives the forest service has in place for this goal begins with establishing and maintaining diverse forest cover by planting and seeding new trees to increase forest diversity and recovery; Removal of invasive plants; Strategically placing fuel breaks across the landscape to support the use of prescribed fire to reduce fuel loads for reforestation; and conduct research to determine ecological impacts in terms of changes in function, structure and composition of forested landscapes and the socioeconomic impact to local communities that will lead to improved management decisions for healthy forest reestablishment. However, alternative strategies for reducing losses from the bark beetle must emphasize biologically sound silviculture that includes concern for other resource values

Forest Resiliency:
Prevention is the most effective method of managing bark beetles and related wood-boring insects; in most instances it is the only available control. Resiliency treatments will help prevent and ensure that forests are better able to respond to future bark beetle epidemics, while still maintaining the beetles’ role in forest ecosystems. Thus, being the Forest Service’s third goal.

Funding: FY 2011, $8.5 million
Goal Performance measure: FY 2011 - 36,800 Acres of treatment; FY 2012 - 52,110 Acres of treatment; FY 2013-2016 - 239,327 Acres of treatment.

To increase resistance to bark beetle infestation the Forest Service will utilize silvicultural techniques for stocking control, such as controlled burning, clearcutting, partial cutting (thinning), and salvage cutting. Stocking control refers to forest management operations that alter the number and arrangement of trees within a stand, enabling favorable age class and species diversity to better adapt to disease, drought, pests and wildfires. This also creates openings in continuous forests to allow natural regeneration to occur. The forest service will also conduct research on: the basic biology, phenology, and genetic structure of bark beetle populations as a basis for better predicting their response to a changing climate; the interaction of bark beetles, fire, drought and climate change; and the genetic structure of tree populations that are the host for bark beetles to improve management effectiveness and efficiency. Create a communication plan to explain the purpose of and the need for bark beetle management.

Conclusion:
The Forest Service recognizes the bark beetle epidemic has been expanding, and infestations have accelerated in recent years across the west. The situation requires an increased response across the west and will require prioritized placement of treatments, integrating multiple program funds to achieve the maximum amount of priority treatments. Outputs that likely will be affected would be road and trail maintenance, recreation facility maintenance, and vegetation treatments outside of bark beetle impact areas. The outcomes of implementing this strategy will be avoidance of people being injured by falling trees, safer communities with reduced fire risk, less risk to community infrastructure and high-priority watersheds and helping to ensure more resilient forests.