An assessment of mountain pine beetle-caused mortality of whitebark pine forests of mountain areas of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Presented by Wally Macfarlane at the "Perth II: Global Change and the World's Mountains" conference in Perth, Scotland in September 2010.

1. An assessment of mountain pine beetle-caused mortality of
whitebark pine forests of the mountain areas of the Greater
Yellowstone Ecosystem
W. W. Macfarlane, J. A. Logan and W.R. Kern
Outline:
1. Overview of whitebark pine
2. System Knowledge: Assessment of
whitebark pine mortality (LAS)
3. Target Knowledge:
Restoration/preservation strategy
(Condition Assessment)
4. Information Knowledge:
Public Engagement: TreeFight and NRDC

2. The Greater Yellowstone
Ecosystem (GYE)

3. A Foundation Species
Watershed – Accumulation and Distribution of Snow, and
Attenuation of Spring Melt

4. A Keystone Species

5. Mountain pine beetle is a native insect
Photo – Jeff Foote

6. Their strength lies in their numbers
and their jaws

7. A Climate Change Issue
©Jeff Hicke 2005
• Winters are becoming mild enough that even adult beetles, a freeze
intolerant stage, are surviving => Spring re-emergence of parent adults.
•Brood produced by re-emerged adults may experience enough thermal
energy to complete the life cycle within the same year of attack.
© Jesse A. Logan 2009
• Due to reduced chemical defenses (vs. lodgepole pine), these surviving 1999
beetles, at even relatively low densities, are able to kill whitebark pine
trees.
•The combination of a warming climate and the vulnerability of whitebark
pine to attacking beetles has resulted in a shift from non-overlapping,
semivoltine (life cycle requiring two years to complete) generations to
overlapping, bi-modal, univoltine (life cycle completed in a single year).
•Resulting in unprecedented levels of outbreaks both in intensity and
spatial distribution (i.e., high-elevation systems).

8. EcoFlight 2007
Resulting in an alarming level of mortality in previously
inhospitable high elevation whitebark pine forests

9. Tree Mortality
Assessment 2009
•We developed and used an aerial
survey method to inventory
mountain pine beetle-related
mortality in whitebark pine, across
the entire GYE.
Landscape Assessment System (LAS)
A collaboration between USDA
Forest Service, GYCC Whitebark
Subcommittee , Geo-Graphics
and NRDC.

10. Flight height: 300-600 m
LAS Aerial Survey Method above ground elevation
A tool for mapping the extent and intensity of MPB-related
mortality in WBP
GYE Study Area and 2009 LAS Flightlines:
•Flightlines consisted of 8,673 km
•Photos were taken at the small
catchment level (a10th of a sub-
watershed)
•A total of 4,653 photos in 2,595
small catchments were captured

11. O -No unusual mountain pine beetle-caused 2 -Multiple spots of red and gray trees
mortality (refers to landscapes that may contain the 1 -Occasional spots of on the landscape
occasional red tree but there is no evidence of mortality red trees on the landscape
expanding to neighboring trees)
LAS Mountain Pine Beetle-related Mortality Categories
3 –Coalescing spots of red and gray 4– “Sea -of -Red” where approximately 95% + 5-6 -Post outbreak forest mortality
trees across the landscape. of the visible forest is dead ratings (gray forest)

12. Small Catchment
Mortality Map

13. Science-Management Partnership
Whitebark Pine Strategy
Condition Assessment Tool
GYCC Whitebark Pine Subcommittee
Assign an ecologically-based ranking for each whitebark pine
stand in the GYE
Model variables include –
1. Stand Type (Dominant versus Mixed)
2. Relative Canopy Cover (Open, Moderate or Closed)
3. LAS MPB-Caused Mortality Rating
Each stand given a numeric value for preservation &
restoration and applied to a map

14. Whitebark Pine
Condition Assessment
Tool
Results: High Priority
Protection
Areas
•Areas on the map are the stands
with the highest numeric rating for
Protection with good access
•The management strategy was to
test the effectiveness of verbenone–
An anti-aggregation pheromone

15. Public Engagement
Tree fight.org
A non-profit organization
•An Integration of Science,
Management & Volunteerism for
Whitebark Pine Conservation
•Summer 2010 involved over
100 volunteers in the study of
using verbenone to attempt to
protect high priority whitebark
pine stands.

20. 2011
Volunteer Naturalist
Project Wild
(NRDC and TreeFight)
Main goal: assess ecological
implications using wildlife
responses to ongoing
whitebark mortality
•At what level of whitebark
mortality does a forest stop
performing certain ecological
functions?
•This will help managers focus
protection and restoration efforts
in areas most likely to maintain/
regain ecological function

21. Summary
•95% of the whitebark pine sub-watersheds in the GYE
are impacted by MPB and about 50% are currently highly
impacted by this on-going outbreak
•Using this mortality information resource managers have
identified priority areas for preservation and restoration
•Using the web, Utube videos and social media we have
drawn people to the plight of the whitebark pine – people
are getting out into this forests and learn about them
•Future research will use volunteer naturalist to inventory
the wildlife responses to the decline of whitebark pine.
Acknowledgments: USDA Forest Service, Natural Resources Defense Council