Applegate River Watershed Forest Simulation Project

Applegate River Watershed Forest Simulation Project conference call 2-20-98 11:45 am.

Present: Norm Johnson,  Chris Maguire, Debbie Johnson, David Graetz (GIS assistance, graduate student),
Lou Beer (working on FVS, graduate student), Jim Agee, Ellen Goheen (pathologist for federal lands,
will be handling insects on this model), Todd Kesterson

Notes taken by Todd Kesterson, Applegate River Watershed Council ph: 899-9982 (Watershed Council Office)
fax: 899-1256 E-mail: arwc@mind.net

All agreed  that Thurs. community meetings were less confrontational than we expected.

Admitting that the model has flaws was valuable to all. 

The idea is that this is a model that we are all working on together.  People get concerned that they may not
have a say in model.  We need to make sure that they do.  

Norm liked having 2 community meetings given different groups of people.

Agencies haven't had anything on table for long term planning, so now people have much interest in the issue.

3-11/ 3-12 meeting.  Norm will stay w/ Chris Bratt.  Norm has to leave by 6 pm on 3-12 (has to be back home by 11 pm).
Meeting can run 5-6 hrs (11-5 or 5:30?)

Approach (in general) is to not use federal moneys for project and to get most guidance from partnership

Ellen wants to use FVS since it is useful for modeling bark beetle mortality.   We won't use bark beetle models as is,
but will use "guts" of events monitoring.  
50 yrs of mortality data from this area can be input into model.  Pine bark beetle and true fir beetle will be incorporated.

Agenda:
1) commitment Norm made on maps

Norm wants to setup capability to put all map layers on website and to post work as it is done on website-
-hopefully within 10 days.  

Potentially aggregate private land at finer detail than other lands.  David felt that we could possibly keep
the detail across the landscape.  But they're not sure what detail can be kept at this moment.   

2) FVS vs. Organon.  
FVS is preferred by some organizations. FVS isn't as well calibrated for S. Oregon.   Jim felt that some concern
over FVS is just rumor.  Ellen is doing comparison of the two.  
Norm decided that FVS will be used. 


Jim thought that doing brief overview of project at each meeting was and will continue to be useful.

Getting a model up and running by summer is the goal.  What is done with it and how it will effect policy is
a big issue to address later, but public input is essential.

Jim feels that we have to better study the successional stages in the area before we can accurately model them.  

Jim's concerned about regeneration in model and the ability to shut off this regeneration process (otherwise there
may be a solid block of wood generated in understory).  

Chris: wildlife issues.
For most wildlife species, we will look at "we did this and this is what happened".
T&E species will be more tightly integrated to landscape Landscape connectivity vs. fragmentation
Snag component

Aquatic habitat is very important to incorporate.  


AP concerns:

Discussion of public access to the system.  I emphasized public concern that in reality, the computer will
not be as accessible to public as it will be to agencies.  
Norm felt that the agencies don't really want new models and that it would be a surprise and a change if they
actually do want this.  But access to the model will need to be priority as time goes on.

Can other model data (like World Wildlife Fund model) be incorporated into this?  Norm felt that they could,
but we need hard data.  Have someone from that project contact him.  Talk to Chris Bratt.

Can assumptions be modified over time?
Modification will require significant expertise, but can be done.  Cannot be done by a person in AP.
Changes will probably have to be made at OSU.

I mentioned concern of AP that model will be misused and that partnership name will be attached to it.
Norm was very interested in this.  He wants me to think about how we might like the intent of the goals
to be incorporated into model, and how much distance we want to keep from this model (on website, etc.).
Norm felt that the models he has built were not really useful, so 
there isn't much to worry about (joking).  But he recognized the concern and the reluctance of community
groups to work with these types of models for these reasons.   
"When you're not influential, you're ignored.  When you are influential, you're misused."