IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v244y2012icp93-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simulating the effects of the southern pine beetle on regional dynamics 60 years into the future

Author

Listed:
  • Costanza, Jennifer K.
  • Hulcr, Jiri
  • Koch, Frank H.
  • Earnhardt, Todd
  • McKerrow, Alexa J.
  • Dunn, Rob R.
  • Collazo, Jaime A.

Abstract

We developed a spatially explicit model that simulated future southern pine beetle (Dendroctonus frontalis, SPB) dynamics and pine forest management for a real landscape over 60 years to inform regional forest management. The SPB has a considerable effect on forest dynamics in the Southeastern United States, especially in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) stands that are managed for timber production. Regional outbreaks of SPB occur in bursts resulting in elimination of entire stands and major economic loss. These outbreaks are often interspersed with decades of inactivity, making long-term modeling of SPB dynamics challenging. Forest management techniques, including thinning, have proven effective and are often recommended as a way to prevent SPB attack, yet the robustness of current management practices to long-term SPB dynamics has not been examined. We used data from previously documented SPB infestations and forest inventory data to model four scenarios of SPB dynamics and pine forest management. We incorporated two levels of beetle pressure: a background low level, and a higher level in which SPB had the potential to spread among pine stands. For each level of beetle pressure, we modeled two scenarios of forest management: one assuming forests would be managed continuously via thinning, and one with a reduction in thinning. For our study area in Georgia, Florida, and Alabama, we found that beetle pressure and forest management both influenced the landscape effects of SPB. Under increased SPB pressure, even with continuous management, the area of pine forests affected across the region was six times greater than under baseline SPB levels. However, under high SPB pressure, continuous management decreased the area affected by nearly half compared with reduced management. By incorporating a range of forest and SPB dynamics over long time scales, our results extend previous modeling studies, and inform forest managers and policy-makers about the potential future effects of SPB. Our model can also be used to investigate the effects of additional scenarios on SPB dynamics, such as alternative management or climate change.

Suggested Citation

  • Costanza, Jennifer K. & Hulcr, Jiri & Koch, Frank H. & Earnhardt, Todd & McKerrow, Alexa J. & Dunn, Rob R. & Collazo, Jaime A., 2012. "Simulating the effects of the southern pine beetle on regional dynamics 60 years into the future," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 244(C), pages 93-103.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:244:y:2012:i:c:p:93-103
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.06.037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380012003407
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.06.037?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. A. Kurz & C. C. Dymond & G. Stinson & G. J. Rampley & E. T. Neilson & A. L. Carroll & T. Ebata & L. Safranyik, 2008. "Mountain pine beetle and forest carbon feedback to climate change," Nature, Nature, vol. 452(7190), pages 987-990, April.
    2. Strand, Eva K. & Vierling, Lee A. & Bunting, Stephen C., 2009. "A spatially explicit model to predict future landscape composition of aspen woodlands under various management scenarios," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(2), pages 175-191.
    3. Provencher, Louis & Forbis, Tara A. & Frid, Leonardo & Medlyn, Gary, 2007. "Comparing alternative management strategies of fire, grazing, and weed control using spatial modeling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 209(2), pages 249-263.
    4. Price, James I. & McCollum, Daniel W. & Berrens, Robert P., 2010. "Insect infestation and residential property values: A hedonic analysis of the mountain pine beetle epidemic," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 415-422, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Roessiger, Joerg & Griess, Verena C. & Härtl, Fabian & Clasen, Christian & Knoke, Thomas, 2013. "How economic performance of a stand increases due to decreased failure risk associated with the admixing of species," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 255(C), pages 58-69.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Bell, Lauren A. & Champ, Patricia A. & White, Eric M., 2013. "Estimating the Economic Value of Recreation Losses in Rocky Mountain National Park Due to a Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9.
    2. Metsaranta, J.M. & Kurz, W.A., 2012. "Inter-annual variability of ecosystem production in boreal jack pine forests (1975–2004) estimated from tree-ring data using CBM-CFS3," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 111-123.
    3. Xie, Yalin & Lei, Xiangdong & Shi, Jingning, 2020. "Impacts of climate change on biological rotation of Larix olgensis plantations for timber production and carbon storage in northeast China using the 3-PGmix model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 435(C).
    4. Sohngen, Brent & Tian, Xiaohui, 2016. "Global climate change impacts on forests and markets," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 18-26.
    5. Zhen Xu & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2013. "Living with Wildfire: The Impact of Historic Fires on Property Values in Kelowna, BC," Working Papers 2013-05, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
    6. Zhiyuan Xiang & Meifang Zhao & U. S. Ogbodo, 2020. "Accumulation of Urban Insect Pests in China: 50 Years’ Observations on Camphor Tree ( Cinnamomum camphora )," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, February.
    7. Swanepoel, G.D. & Hadrich, Joleen & Goemans, Christopher, 2015. "Estimating the Contribution of Groundwater Irrigation to Farmland Values in Phillips County, Colorado," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2015, pages 1-14.
    8. Chubaty, Alex M. & Roitberg, Bernard D. & Li, Chao, 2009. "A dynamic host selection model for mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(9), pages 1241-1250.
    9. Bryan K. Mignone & Matthew D. Hurteau & Yihsu Chen & Brent Sohngen, 2009. "Carbon offsets, reversal risk and US climate policy," CAMA Working Papers 2009-19, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    10. Patrick J. Comer & Jon C. Hak & Marion S. Reid & Stephanie L. Auer & Keith A. Schulz & Healy H. Hamilton & Regan L. Smyth & Matthew M. Kling, 2019. "Habitat Climate Change Vulnerability Index Applied to Major Vegetation Types of the Western Interior United States," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-27, July.
    11. Keskitalo, E. Carina H. & Pettersson, Maria & Ambjörnsson, Emmeline Laszlo & Davis, Emily Jane, 2016. "Agenda-setting and framing of policy solutions for forest pests in Canada and Sweden: Avoiding beetle outbreaks?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 59-68.
    12. Czaja, Michael R. & Bright, Alan D. & Cottrell, Stuart P., 2016. "Integrative complexity, beliefs, and attitudes: Application to prescribed fire," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 54-61.
    13. Kovacs, Kent & West, Grant & Nowak, David J. & Haight, Robert G., 2022. "Tree cover and property values in the United States: A national meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    14. Ayaovi Locoh & Évelyne Thiffault & Simon Barnabé, 2022. "Sustainability Impact Assessment of Forest Bioenergy Value Chains in Quebec (Canada)—A ToSIA Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-21, September.
    15. Inglis, Nicole C. & Vukomanovic, Jelena, 2020. "Climate change disproportionately affects visual quality of cultural ecosystem services in a mountain region," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    16. Huang, Cho-ying & Asner, Gregory P. & Barger, Nichole N., 2012. "Modeling regional variation in net primary production of pinyon–juniper ecosystems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 82-92.
    17. Bonneau, Mathieu & Johnson, Fred A. & Romagosa, Christina M., 2016. "Spatially explicit control of invasive species using a reaction–diffusion model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 15-24.
    18. Thavasi, V. & Ramakrishna, S., 2009. "Asia energy mixes from socio-economic and environmental perspectives," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4240-4250, November.
    19. Joan P. Casas-Ruiz & Pascal Bodmer & Kelly Ann Bona & David Butman & Mathilde Couturier & Erik J. S. Emilson & Kerri Finlay & Hélène Genet & Daniel Hayes & Jan Karlsson & David Paré & Changhui Peng & , 2023. "Integrating terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems to constrain estimates of land-atmosphere carbon exchange," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    20. Ronny Rotbarth & Egbert H. Nes & Marten Scheffer & Jane Uhd Jepsen & Ole Petter Laksforsmo Vindstad & Chi Xu & Milena Holmgren, 2023. "Northern expansion is not compensating for southern declines in North American boreal forests," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:244:y:2012:i:c:p:93-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.