Fire Learning Network Field Guide March 2012 Edition Copyright 2012 The Nature Conservancy The Fire Learning Network is part of the “Promoting Ecosystem Resiliency through Collaboration: Landscapes, Learning and Restoration” cooperative agreement among The Nature Conservancy, USDA Forest Service and agencies of the Department of the Interior (Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Fish & Wildlife Service, National Park Service). For more information about the network, please visit www.conservationgateway.org/topic/fire-learning-network Network Contacts FLN Director Lynn Decker [email protected] (801) 320-0524 USDA Forest Service Tim Melchert [email protected] (208) 387-5512 Dept. of the Interior Erik Christiansen [email protected] (208) 334-1559 Field Guide Editor Liz Rank [email protected] (801) 320-0524 Acknowledgements Thanks are extended to the numerous landscape leaders and partners who provided text, photos and review for this document, and for the valuable work they do in the field. Thanks also to the rest of The Nature Conservancy Fire Team for support of this project and all of the network’s efforts: Jeremy Bailey, Lynn Decker, Wendy Fulks, Blane Heumann, Mary Huffman, Heather Montanye and Greg Seamon. Photo Credits Front cover: (top, left to right) Craig Bienz/TNC, Liz Rank/TNC, Mike Melnechuk/TNC; (bottom, left to right) Bart C. Kicklighter/USFS, Susanne Hickey/TNC, John Andre/USFS, Elaine York/TNC Above: (left to right) Liz Rank/TNC, Alison Higgins/TNC Back cover: (top, left to right) Josh Smith/ Watershed Research & Training Center, Jenny Case/TNC, Jason Ahern/TNC; (bottom, left to right) Susanne Hickey/TNC; Glenn Pollock/TNC; Dean M. Simon/NC Wildlife Resources Commission Contents U.S. Fire Learning Network 1 An introduction to the network and its goals and approach – Map of landscapes Washington Dry Forests Fire Learning Network 5 Sinlahekin Ecosystem Restoration Landscape – Tapash Sustainable Forest Collaborative Northwest Fire Learning Network 11 Rogue Basin – Upper Deschutes Basin – Lakeview Stewardship Unit / Fremont-Winema National Forest California Klamath-Siskiyou Fire Learning Network 19 Trinity Mountains – Western Klamath Mountains Great Plains Fire Learning Network 25 Loess Hills – Lower Loup Rivers – Refugio-Goliad Prairie South Central Fire Learning Network 33 Big Piney Woodland Ecosystem Project – Blacklands Ecosystem Restoration Project – Bobtail Oak Woodland Restoration Project – Buffalo National River – Indiana Bat Habitat Restoration Project – Land Between the Lakes – Lower Ouachita – Novaculite Uplift – St. Francis National Forest Ecosystem Restoration Project – Upland Forest Ecosystem Restoration Project – White Rock Ecosystem Restoration Project – Wildlife Management Areas (Gene Rush, Gulf Mountain, Harold Alexander, Hobbs, Loafer’s Glory, Madison County, Petit Jean) Appalachian Fire Learning Network 49 Allegheny Highlands – Allegheny Border – Cumberland River – Keystone Appalachians – Southwest Virginia Southern Blue Ridge Fire Learning Network 59 Balsam Mountains – Central Blue Ridge Escarpment – Great Smoky & Unaka Mountains – New River Headwaters – Nantahala Mountains – Northern Escarpment– Southern Blue Ridge Escarpment – South Mountains Florida-Caribbean Fire Learning Network 75 Bahamas – Central Florida – Cuba – Dominican Republic – Jamaica – Puerto Rico – South Florida – St. Lucia – Trinidad & Tobago Additional Demonstration Landscapes 87 Centennial Valley – FireScape Monterey – Jemez Climate Change Adaptation Project – Parashant Partnership – Yakima Basin Shrub-Steppe and Fire Project Appendices 98 A: Landscapes with Various Partner Types B: Landscapes with Forest Service Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Projects C: Landscapes that are Conservancy Restoring America’s Forests Demonstration Sites D: Lead & Partner Contact List FIRE LEARNING NETWORK: PARTNERS RESTORING FIRE-ADAPTED ECOSYSTEMS ACROSS AMERICA The Fire Learning Network (FLN) is a system of landscape-scale collaborative projects that work to accelerate the restoration of fire-adapted ecosystems at local, regional and national scales. Collaborative planning, implementa- tion, adaptive management and sharing lessons learned are at the core of the Network. Participants have a common desire to learn and to share their results and insights with one another; this allows landscape teams to more rapidly overcome barriers to sustainable and integrated ecological, social and economic solutions for the long-term conser- vation of these important lands. A Network of Landscapes “We’re now looking at long-term, landscape Landscapes in the FLN typically are large areas—the planning from a different perspective … looking median landscape size is over 400,000 acres—and at our district at a landscape level rather than include multiple ownerships and numerous stakehold- just specific areas or specific treatments … and ers. Landscapes coalesce around ecological challenges started a really strong collaboration process.” such as altered fire regimes or invasion by non-native FLN landscape leader, BLM, species, and work toward culturally and ecologically ap- on what the FLN has changed propriate, integrated, all lands restoration. Participants form their own partnerships to become networks and define their own landscape boundaries and priorities. Network partnerships include federal, state, local and tribal governments, along with private landowners and community members. Washington Yakima Basin Dry Forests Shrub-Steppe & Fire Project Centennial Valley Northwest California Klamath-Siskiyou Great Plains Central Appalachians FireScape Monterey Parashant Jemez Southern Partnership Mountains South Central Blue Ridge Great Plains Florida-Caribbean Fire & Invasives Landscapes active in 2011 are shown in color; those that have been active in the FLN at other times since its inception in 2002 are shown in white 1 Fire Learning Network Field Guide The FLN Model In the Fire Learning Network process, partici- pants establish collaborative goals, determine actions, and direct resources to gain the great- est conservation results. It is a highly success- ful iterative and adaptive approach that oper- ates at multiple scales and has been employed in diverse geographic and cultural settings to meet a wide variety of landscape goals. This approach and the methods to implement it allow the practitioner community to share experience and learning across geographies and to improve integrated fire management practices over time. Among other things, Fire Learning Network products facilitate effective NEPA preparation at multiple scales and fire management plan development, contribute to The FLN’s planning methods are based on the Open Standards for forest and land management plans, guide state Conservation. According to research conducted by Bruce Goldstein and county plans, and inform policy. and colleagues, the Network can best be conceived of as a multiscalar As the FLN has evolved and landscape process of iterative adaptive management. partnerships have matured, some landscapes Diagram adapted from Butler, W. H. and B. E. Goldstein (2010). “The have applied collaborative methods to address US Fire Learning Network: Springing a Rigidity Trap through Multisca- restoration challenges in a variety of other ways lar Collaborative Networks.” Ecology and Society 15(3):21. as well. Advanced networks have developed new models to scale up efforts with their partners, and to address larger issues than those originally conceived. For example, the South Central FLN has scaled-up at the state level, developing close partnerships with state agen- cies and laying the groundwork for significant state and federal restoration funding that they are using to imple- ment restoration treatments across the state of Arkansas. The Centennial FLN in Montana is addressing the issue of uncertainty and lack of agreement over optimal treatment types by setting up restoration demonstration projects across several habitat types; their workshops are a series of field visits, where partners discuss and learn together, with the evidence right before them. Across the Great Plains grasslands, as in many places, skilled fire capacity is a limiting factor; landscapes in the Great Plains FLN, working with national training staff, have reached out to local fire practitioners like ranchers and volunteer fire departments and engaged them, finding the overlap between the needs of ecological burning for habitat, ranching, and community safety. And in the Jemez Mountains, numerous projects, from climate change adaptation to salamander research, are integrated in the same landscape; the FLN provides the core of collaborative relationships that feed—and link—many of these projects. FLN Numbers ~ 2002-2011 15 regional networks 163 landscapes 162 million acres 1,125 partners 39 states (plus Puerto Rico) 6 foreign countries 1 innovation project 358,000 acres treated > $16.4 million in restoration & other funds leveraged (includes CFLRP to FLNs) Partners from eight landscapes in six countries dealing with the interactions between fire and invasive species at an herbicide demonstration at a Florida-Caribbean regional workshop © Lourdes Bernier/Puerto Rico DNER March 2012 2 Connection and Credibility Regardless of the details of how an FLN functions or what its goals are, when asked to reflect, leaders and partners had very similar conclusions about what is most valuable about the FLN. The process is very good. The science is very good. Financial support is always helpful. DOI