photo of Colorado sagebrush shrubland landscape

Macro Review: Southern Piedmont Dry Oak (-Pine) Forest [BpS 1360]

LANDFIRE mapped the Southern Piedmont Dry Oak (-Pine) Forest Biophysical Setting (BpS) on nearly 26 million acres across seven different map zones (46, 48, 54, 57, 59, 60, 61) in the Eastern/Southeastern U.S. using a single state-and-transition model and description. The purpose of this macro-review is to determine whether different model variants representing individual map zones or groups of map zones are needed across this large geography. Your input is needed to answer key questions about this widespread, fire-adapted BpS. Thank you.

Review Instructions

Review the resources shown at the right and answer as many of the following questions as possible. Detailed information and supporting citations are encouraged.

Review Options

There are several options for providing your review comments. Choose the option that works best for you:

  1. Create a separate document with your comments, but be specific about which model(s) your comments apply to.
  2. Place comments directly in the relevant BpS document(s) using Track Changes.
  3. Compose an email with your comments, but again be specific about which model(s) your comments apply to.
  4. Contact Jim Smith to schedule a facilitated review via phone/webinar.

Submit all reviews to landfire@tnc.org

Key Questions
  1. Examine the BpS extent map in the first tab of the model information spreadsheet. In your opinion, does this BpS actually occur in each of these map zones?
  2. Is a single state-and-transition model adequate for all these map zones? Why or why not?
  3. Do the results of the state-and-transition model seem appropriate for all of these map zones (i.e., is there too much succession class D, too much/too little fire, missing native disturbances, etc.)? Why or why not? See the Model Results tab in the spreadsheet. The Succession Class Definitions tab and the Model Description Document.
  4. Is a single BpS description appropriate for all of these map zones? See the current Model Description Document.
  5. Which map zones or groups of map zones, if any, should have unique state-and-transition models and descriptions?
  6. How would you modify the parameters (e.g. Replacement Fire Return Interval), of the state-and-transition models if necessary for a specific map zone or group of map zones? See the Model Parameters tab in the spreadsheet.
  7. Do you any have any suggestions about the Southern Piedmont Dry Oak (-Pine) BpS that are not covered by the questions above?

What happens next?

Thanks for your review! The LANDFIRE team will review your comments as soon as possible and contact you with any questions. All comments and suggestions will be documented and made available to the public, but the LANDFIRE team will make the final decision on how review comments are incorporated into the revised BpS model set. Look for revised descriptions and models available online in 2016.