July 1988
Contents

HIGHLIGHTS ................................................................................................................................ 1

AN OVERVIEW OF EAST OKLAHOMA’S FORESTS .............................................................. .l

TIMBER RESOURCE TRENDS IN EAST OKLAHOMA ........................................................... 4

Timberland Area ...................................................................................................................... .4

Timberland Ownership ............................................................................................................. 5

Species Composition and Forest Type.. .................................................................................. 1

.5

Stand Structure and Age .......................................................................................................... 7

Timber Volume .......................................................................................................................... 8

Growth, Removals, and Mortality ............................................................................................ 9

Timberland Disturbance and Regeneration .......................................................................... 10

TIMBER MANAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR EAST OKLAHOMA.. ............................10

TIMBER RESOURCE OUTLOOK ............................................................................................. 12

TIMBER PRODUCTS OUTPUT ................................................................................................ 13

Saw Logs .................................................................................................................................. 13

Pulpwood ................................................................................................................................. .13

Other Products ........................................................................................................................ 13

Wood Residues ......................................................................................................................... 14

LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................. 14

APPENDIX ................................................................................... . ............................................... 15

Survey Methods ...................................................................................................................... .16

Reliability of the Data ............................................................................................................. 16

Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................. 17

Species List .............................................................................. . ............................................... 20

Standard Tables ...................................................................................................................... 21

i

Timber Resources of East Oklahoma

Richard A. Birdsey and Dennis M. May

HIGHLIGHTS

This report presents the principal findings of the

fifth forest survey of east Oklahoma. To make accurate estimates of forest area, 32,817 photo plots were

classified and 2,767 field plot locations were visited to

verify the photointerpretation. Detailed classifications of timberland are based on measurements and

observations at 1,828 permanent sample plot locations. Field work in east Oklahoma was done between

January and April, 1986. Some highlights of the

survey are listed below.

l Timberland area in east Oklahoma has increased by 10 percent to 4,748 thousand acres, reversal of the 12 percent decline reported between

1966 and 1976.

l Loblolly pine now accounts for 19 percent of all

pines in the State, up from 5 percent in 1976.

l The area of pine plantations has increased from

44 thousand acres in 1976 to 264 thousand acres

in 1986.

l An additional 173 thousand acres of oak-pine

type showed evidence of artificial regeneration.

l Significant shifts occurred in stand-size and

age-class distributions, caused by intensive pine

harvesting and maturing hardwoods.

l The volume of softwood growing stock has not

changed since the last survey.

l The volume of hardwood growing stock increased by 16 percent since the last survey.

l An increase in softwood removals and a decline

in softwood growth caused the growth/removals

ratio to fall below 1.0.

l The average net annual growth of hardwood

growing stock has declined steeply. Removals

have risen, so the hardwood growth/removal

ratio is close to 1.0.

l Average annual mortality has nearly doubled

since the last survey.

l Almost one-third of east Oklahoma’s timberland was significantly disturbed since the last

survey.

l Despite heavy cutting, most pine stands retained adequate stocking.

l East Oklahoma’s timberland is currently producing timber at only 30 percent of maximum potential. More than half of all timberland is less than

60 percent stocked with growing-stock trees.

l Oklahoma’s eastern forests supply more than 50

million cubic feet of timber products each year.

l Production of hardwood saw logs and pulpwood

has increased relative to softwoods in recent

years.

AN OVERVIEW OF EAST

OKLAHOMA’S FORESTS

East Oklahoma is partitioned into two broad resource regions for the forest survey (fig. 1). The Southeast region is 55 percent forested and the Northeast

region is 39 percent forested (table I). Most forest industry in Oklahoma is located in the Southeast region.

The southern portion of this region is part of the West

Gulf Costa1 Plain (fig. 2). North of the Coastal Plain the

Ouachita Mountains and Arkansas Valley and Ridges

extend westward from Arkansas (U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1984). The

Southeast region contains most of Oklahoma’s pine

and oak-pine forests (table II). About 53 percent of the

timberland is classified as upland or bottomland hardwood type (Birdsey and Bertelson 1987a). All of the

State’s National Forest land is located in the Southeast. The proportion of forest cover declines from east

to west (fig. 3).

Table I.-Area by land class and forest resource region, east Oklahoma, 1986

Forest resource region

Land class Total Southeast Northeast

-__----_ Thousartd acres - - - - - - - -

Timberland 4,747.5 3,481.2 1,266.3

Woodland 485.9 367.9 118.0

Reserved timberland 23.0 23.0 0.0

Nonforest land 4,847.6 2,674.7 1,972.g

All land 10,104.o 6,746.a 3,357.2

1
I l-----F I I

i

E .

:

” 3

I I

2
El ~~~~~~ CROSS TIMBERS

I

GRAND PRAIRIE

El . -*,

. \ ‘-‘- .’ CHEROKEE PRAIRIES

m OZARK HIGHLAND

czl :<$p BOSTON MOUNTAINS

*g.:&%-*

m.:.s~?:.: ARKANSAS VALLEY 8r RIDGES

OUCHITA MOUNTAINS

. . .

lrl *:. 1.1 WESTERN COASTAL PLAIN

lsssl BLUESTEM HILLS

wj SOUTHERN HIGH PLAINS

m

8’ ,8

, , ’ CENTRAL ROLLING RED PLAINS

li!sss! CENTRAL ROLLING RED PRAIRIES

Figure 2.-Major land resource areas of Oklahoma (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service 1984).

w
The eastern portion of the Northeast region is physiographically part of the Ozark Highlands and Boston

Mountains that extend westward from Arkansas. The

region’s remaining area is sparsely-forested prairie.

The Northeast region contains mostly oak-hickory

forest types owned by farmers and other individuals

(Birdsey and Bertelson (1987b).

TIMBER RESOURCE TRENDS IN

EAST OKLAHOMA

The forest survey of Oklahoma has traditionally

sampled timberland (formerly “commercial forest

land”) in east Oklahoma. The region includes 18 counties with forests covering an average of 52 percent of

the land surface. Of the total 5,256 thousand acres of

forest, 4,748 thousand acres are classified as timberland, 486 thousand acres are classified as woodland,

and 23 thousand acres are classified as reserved timberland.

Timberland Area

The first forest survey of Oklahoma in 1936 covered

five counties in the Southeast: McCurtain, Pushmataha, LeFlore, Latimer, and Haskell. Forest area was

2,961 thousand acres or 74 percent of the total area.

Fifteen percent of the forest was classified as old

growth. Pine and mixed pine-hardwoods comprised 47

percent of the forest land (Eldredge 1938).

The first complete survey of east Oklahoma in 1956

included 17 counties (U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service 1957). The five counties that were resurveyed had maintained a forest cover of 2,851 thousand acres. Most of the old-growth pine had been cut

and replaced by second-growth pine and mixed pinehardwood. Total timberland acreage in east Oklahoma

in 1956 was 5,184 thousand acres (adjusted to the

current productivity threshold for timberland, and including Bryan County, which was first surveyed in

1976).

By 1966, timberland area declined 5 percent to 4,906

Table II.-Area oftimberland by forest type and resource region, east

Oklahoma, 1986

~__

Forest resource region

Forest type Total Southeast Northeast

___--_______ Thousandacres ----- ----

Loblolly-shortleaf 956.0 939.2 25.8

Oak-pine 757.3 719.2 38.1

Oak-hickory 2,597.l 1487.2 1,109.g

Oak-gum-cypress 358.8 297.9 60.9

Elm-ash-cottonwood 78.4 46.8 31.6

All types 4,747.5 3,481.2 1,266.3

-.

4

LEGEND:

ElLESS

m 25-5

MORE

Figure 3.-Proportion of land area in forest, east Oklahoma, 1986.

thousand acres (adjusted to include Bryan County).

Between 1956 and 1966,396 thosuand acres of timberland were cleared for agriculture and other uses, while

169 thousand acres reverted to timberland (Sternitzke

and Van Sickle 1968).

The decline in timberland acreage intensified between 1966 and 1976. The last survey showed only

4,323 thosuand acres of timberland, a la-percent decline for the lo-year inter-survey period (Murphy

1977). Most of the losses were in the western and

northern parts of the region. A total of 660 thousand

acres of timberland were cleared for agriculture and

other uses, and only 78 thousand acres reverted to timberland.

The current survey reveals a strong reversal of this

trend. Timberland area has increased by 10 percent to

4,748 thousand acres. Clearing of timberland totaled

only 94 thousand acres between 1976 and 1986 (table

III). Reversions of pasture and idle farmland to timberland added 409 thousand acres. Some forest land was

reclassified from woodland (formerly called “unproductive forest”) to timberland. With the exception of

Bryan County, most of the increase in timberland

occurred in the easternmost counties (fig. 4).
LEGEND:

c l INCREASE

Ea INCREASE

• g INCREASE

LESS THAN 5 %

Forest industries own 22 percent of east Oklahoma’s

timberland. Most of the forest industry timberland is

located in LeFlore, McCurtain, Pushmataha Counties.

Forest industry and National Forest owners combined

hold 58 percent of the timberland in these three counties. There has been little change in forest industry

timberland area since 1976.

The area of timberland owned by farmers has inOF 5-25 % creased by 18 percent since 1976. Most reversions were

OF 25 % OR MORES to the upland hardwood type.

Individual and corporate landowners also increased

Table III.-Changes in timberland, east Oklahoma, 1976-1986

Resource

region

Additions from: Diversions to:

Total Net

area’ Timberland Change Total Agriculture Other Total Agriculture Other

-----____________________ Thousandacres----------------- --------------

Southeast 6,988.3 3,481.2 235.1 309.7 293.4 16.3 74.6 20.4 54.2

Northeast 3569.1 1,266.3 189.0 208.7 115.6 93.1 19.7 14.2 5.5

All regions 10,557.4 4,747.5 424.1 518.4 409.0 109.4 94.3 34.7 59.7

‘United States Bureau of the Census, Land and Water Area of the United States. Includes urban, industrial,

highway, noncommercial forest, water, rights-of-way, and other land uses.

timberland area of about 214 thousand acres. All ofthe

National Forest timberland is located in LeFlore and

McCurtain Counties.

their timberland holdings. Miscellaneous private individuals comprise the largest and most diverse group of

east Oklahoma timberland owners, controlling 38

percent of all timberland.

Species Composition and Forest Type

Figure 4.-Change in timberland area, east Oklahoma, 1976-1986.

East Oklahoma’s timberland is dominated by hardwoods that comprise, on average, 74 percent of the

basal area. In the northeast region, 96 percent of the

basal area is in hardwoods, and in the southeast, 66

percent of the basal area is in hardwoods. The most

common hardwood species are white oaks, red oaks,

hickories, and elms. The most common softwood is

shortleaf pine, followed by loblolly pine. Loblolly pine

is increasing in importance as pine plantations gradually replace natural pine stands. In 1976, loblolly pines

accounted for only 5 percent of all pines. By 1986,

loblolly pines accounted for 19 percent of all pines.

Most of the decrease in shortleaf pines occurred in the

2-inch size class, while significant increases in numbers of loblolly pines occurred in the 2- through 8-inch

classes. Timberland Ownership

Public owners hold about 12 percent of east Forest type is based on stocking plurality of individOklahoma’s timberland. There has been little change ual species or species groups. Pine types, defined as

in the area of public timberland over the years. An stands with more than 50-percent stocking in pines,

apparent increase in National Forest timberland is the have increased from 847 thousand acres in 1976 to 956

result of estimating the public forest area from survey thousand acres in 1986. In Oklahoma, the loblollysample plots rather than reporting the enumerated shortleaf type is principally composed of the loblolly

areas. The Ouachita National Forest reports an actual pine and shortleaf pine associations (table IV). The

5
Table W.-Area of timberland by detailed forest type and stand-size class, east Oklahoma, 1986

Detailed All Saplingforest type classes Sawtimber Poletimber seedling Nonstocked

Loblolly pine

Shortleaf pine

Shortleaf pine-oak

Loblolly pine-hardwood

Oak hickory

Post oak-black oak

Oak-hickory-gums

Southern scrub oak

Oak-gum-cypress

Sugarberry-elm-ash

Overcup oak-water hickory

Sycamore-pecan-elm

Other types

All types

____--___________ - -Thousandacres- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

274.6 33.8 51.4 189.4 0.0

675.4 372.1 180.2 123.1 0.0

562.7 215.3, .202.3 139.1 6.0

155.3 5.6 11.3 138.4 0.0

354.6 35.2 64.5 86.6 168.2

752.1 107.6 343.3 194.1 75.2

1,439.g 221.9 651.0 427.4 139.6

46.8 6.2 11.6 6.0 23.0

142.0 71.8 23.5 34.9 11.8

160.2 47.7 62.5 22.9 27.1

38.8 12.0 13.2 0.0 13.6

49.7 19.2 11.5 19.1 , 0.0

122.4 21.2 30.0 59.0 12.1

4,747.5 1,169.6 1,661.3 1,440.o 476.6

shortleaf type accounts for 71 percent of all pine type

acreage. When pine types are classified by stand-size

class, the shift from shortleaf to \oblolly pine becomes

evident. For sawtimber and poletimber stand-sizes,

shortleaf pine accounts for 87 percent of the pine

stands. For sapling and seedling stand-sizes, shortleaf

pine accounts for only 39 percent of the pine stands.

The oak-pine types contain 25-50 percent of stocking

pines. Oak-pine acreage increased from 693 thousand

acres to 757 thousand acres between surveys. Some of

the young oak-pine was regenerated artifically and

will likely shift to the pine plantation category after a

few years. Hardwoods often dominate the stocking in

young pine plantations until the pine seedlings attain

dominance naturally or as a result of hardwood stocking control. A total of 173 thousand acres of oak-pine

type showed evidence of artificial regeneration.

The pine and oak-pine types combined show the

location and relative density of east Oklahoma’s softwood resource (fig. 5). Nearly all of the softwood is

concentrated in four southeastern counties and a surrounding fringe of five counties.

The oak-hickory type contains less than 25-percent

stocking of pines. Oak-hickory has increased the most

between surveys, from 2,357 to 2,597 thousand acres.

The oak-hickory type is composed mainly of the oakhickory, post oak-black oak, and oak-hickory-gum

associations. Some of the oak-hickory, 80 thousand

acres, shows evidence of artificial pine regeneration.

The bottomland hardwood types, principally the

oak-gum-cypress and sugarberry-American elm-green

ash associations, changed little between surveys. The

total area in 1986 was about 437 thousand acres.

LEGEND:

I

LESS THAN 5 PERCENT

@j 5 -35 PERCENT

MORE

Figure 5.-Proportion of timberland classified as pine or oak-pine

forest type, east Oklahoma, 1986.
In summary, the major species shift involves the sive harvesting over the past decade. Timberland held

gradual replacement of shortleaf pine with loblolly by farmer and miscellaneous private owners showed a

pine in intensively-managed pine plantations. For all

forest types, the average showing evidence of artificial

significant decrease in the area of sapling-seedling

stands, and increases in all other classes. This reflects

regeneration jumped from 111 thousand acres in 1976 maturing timber in older stands, and the increase in

to 517 thousand acres in 1986. cropland reversions.

Stand Structure and Age

Some significant shifts appeared in stand-size class

distributions since the last survey. Public timberland

has shifted to the larger size classes (fig. 6). Forest industry holdings, well-balanced in 1976, now have more

than half of all timberland classified as nonstocked or

sampling seedling stand sizes. This shift follows intenSTAND-SIZE CLASS:

NON-STOCKED q POLETIMBER

SAPLING -SEEDLING q SAWTIMBER

-1976- -1986-

5 0 FOREST INDUSTRY

4 0

8

lu 3o

cl

$ 2 0

k

IO

-1976--l986-

5 0 r

OTHER PRIVATE

~ 1976 --1986 -

Figure C-Proportion of timberland by stand-size class and survey

date, by owner, east Oklahoma, 1986.

The current age-class distribution tells much the

same story (table V). For forest industry owners, 41

percent of all timberland has stands less than 10 years

old. Timberland held by other private owners tends to

be more evenly distributed among age classes through

age 60, although there is a noticeable dip in the 21-30

year age class.

The age-class distribution by forest type and stand

origin shows how the pine resource is shifting to

planted instead of natural pine (table VI). For pine and

oak-pine timberland less than 10 years old, 85 percent

of the stands showed evidence of artificial regeneration. The large acreage of hardwood less than 10 years

old has resulted from increased reversions and lack of

adequate pine regeneration after harvest.

Despite an increasing acreage of young pine stands,

the number of 2-inch softwoods has dropped sharply

since 1976 (fig. 7). A healthy increase in the 4- and 6-

inch classes, plus a good regeneration record (see later

discussion), indicates that the effect of the decline in 2-

inch softwoods may be negligible by the next survey.

But should this trend continue, softwood timber production could decline rapidly. The 8- and lo-inch diameter classes showed declines that are the result of

intensive softwood timber harvesting.

The changes in the hardwood diameter distribution

show the aging of most hardwood stands (fig. 8). The

large acreage of reverting pasture is still poorly

stocked and has not yet had time to reverse the trend

of declining numbers of small hardwoods.

Table V.-Area of timberland by age classland owner, east Oklahoma, 1986

Age class

All

owners

Forest Other

Public industry private

__________ Thousandacres------------

O-10 1,221.5 112.0 426.5 683.0

11-20 699.8 72.3 148.4 479.1

21-30 397.6 53.2 76.4 268.0

31-40 688.7 75.3 128.5 464.9

41-50 841.8 109.3 162.5 570.0

51-69 477.9 84.8 51.7 341.4

61-70 166.9 17.3 40.5 109.1

71-80 114.3 29.2 6.0 79.1

81-90 51.0 12.1 0.0 38.9

90+ 88.3 19.8 6.6 62.9

All ages 4,747.5 585.3 1,046.O 3,116.2

_-

‘Mixed-age stands were given the average age of the dominant

stand-size class.

7
407

30 -

20 -

: IO -

: 0 ---

5 -10 -

-20 -

-30

t

Table VI.-Area of timberland by age class’, forest type, and stand origin, east Oklahoma, 1986

Planted Natural Planted Natural Planted Natural

Age class pine pine oak-pine oak-pine hardwood2 hardwood

-

------------------------Thousandacres------------------------

O-10 179.0 23.9 150.4 35.5 80.0 752.7

11-20 73.9 82.9 22.5 91.0 0.0 429.5

21-30 11.3 119.3 0.0 105.5 0.0 161.5

31-40 0.0 215.8 0.0 125.4 0.0 347.5

41-50 0.0 136.3 0.0 100.8 0.0 604.8

51-60 0.0 59.5 0.0 58.3 0.0 360.1

61-70 0.0 36.1 0.0 18.3 0.0 112.5

71-80 0.0 11.6 0.0 24.4 0.0 78.3

81-90 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.3 0.0 31.6

90+ 0.0 6.5 0.0 6.0 0.0 75.8

Allages 264.1 691.8 172.9 584.4 80.0 2,954.3

‘Mrxed-age stands were grven the average age of the dommant stand-size class.

*Most planted hardwood represents pine plantations in which hardwoods comprise more than 75

percent of the stocking.

IIF-----------c--+---+-- I

I

--

1

40 1 I 1 I I t 1 I I I 1

0 2 4 6 6 IO 12 14 16 16 20

DIAMETER CLASS

Figure 7.-Change in number of live softwood trees between surveys,

east Oklahoma, 1976-1986.

Timber Volume

East Oklahoma’s timberland contains 1 .O billion

cubic feet of softwood timber, about the same as reported in 1976. The volume of softwood growing stock

in the 6-inch and 12-inch classes has increased, while

volume in most other classes has decreased (fig. 9).

There has been some shift in volume from shortleaf

pine to loblolly pine (fig. 10). Very little change occurred in the distribution of softwood timber volume

among timber classes (fig. 11).

Forest industry owned more than half of east

Oklahoma’s softwood growing stock in 1976, but by

1986 the proportion dropped to 35 percent. Losses in

softwood volume by forest industry were offset by gains

in the other ownership classes. Of four counties with

the most pine and oak-pine timberland, only Latimer

30 r

2o t

IO -

: o--- 2 r--,-L-L-i- --L-L--h-

$ -10 - 1

-20 -

-30 -

-40 1

I t I 1 I I I I I 1

0 2 4 6 6 IO 12 14 16 IS 20

DIAMETER CLASS

Figure 8.-Change in number of live hardwood trees between surveys, east Oklahoma, 1976-1986.

County showed an increase in the volume of softwood

growing stock.

The volume of hardwood growing stock increased by

16 percent during the inter-survey period. The increase involved all diameter classes, but was especially

pronounced in the 8- and lo-inch poletimber classes

(fig. 12). Oaks and hickories gained the most volume

(fig. IO). The volume of hardwood growing stock increased in all timber classes (fig. 11).

Among owners, forest industry showed a 26 percent

decline in hardwood growing stock, while other private

owners showed a 29 percent increase. Other private

owners control 71 percent of all hardwood growing

stock in east Oklahoma. Much of the hardwood is

located in the same four-county area that has most of

the softwood growing stock, but some other counties,

notably Cherokee and Adair, also contain significant

volumes of hardwood growing stock.

8
250,-

.W”

I

--- 1966

Y

1.

.I ----- 1976

2

P

50- - 1966

DIAMETER CLASS

Figure 9.-Volume of softwood growing stock by tree diameter class,

east Oklahoma, 1966-1986.

SHORTLEAF

LOBLOLLY

OTHER SOFTWOOD

WHITE OAKS

RED OAKS

HICKORIES

m,976

ELMS m1966

ASHES

0 200 400 600 600 1,000

MILLION CUBIC FEET

Figure lO.-Volume of growing stock by species, east Oklahoma,

1976 and 1986.

3,000

m CULL

m POLETIMBER

SAWTIMBER

0

1976 1966 1976 1966

SOFTWOOD HARDWOOD

Figure Il.-Volume of growing stock by class of timber, east Oklahoma, 1976 and 1986.

01 I I I I I I

I

6 6 IO 12 14 16 IS 2 0

DIAMETER CLASS

Figure 12.-Volume of hardwood growing stock by tree diameter

class, east Oklahoma, 1966-1986.

PUBLIC FOREST OTHER

INDUSTRY PRIVATE

OWNER

ALL

OWNERS

Figure 13.-Ratio of softwood growth to removals by ownership

class, east Oklahoma, 1976 and 1986.

Growth, Removals, and Mortality

Average net annual growth of softwood growing

stock has declined from 56 to 46 million cubic feet since

1976. Almost all of the decline occurred on forest

industry timberland. Other private owners showed a

slight increase in average net annual growth.

While net growth was declining, annual softwood

removals have increased from 47 to 54 million cubic

feet. Most of the increase was on forest industry timberland. Declining net growth and increasing removals of softwood have resulted in an unfavorable growth

and drain situation (fig. 13). The softwood growth/

removals ratio has dropped below 1.0 for all owners

combined, chiefly because of the very low ratio on forest

industry timberland.

Although the total volume of softwood growing stock

was essentially unchanged between 1976 and 1986,

the average rate of change was negative (table (VII).

Growth has been declining and removals increasing

over the period. Should these conditions persist, a

substantial decline in softwood inventory would be inevitable.

9
Table VII.- Components of annual change in the volume of growing stock by species group and resource region, east Oklahoma, 1976-1986

Resource Species

region group

Growth Growth

Survivor on on Cull Timberland Landclearing Net

growth Ingrowth’ removals mortality increment Mortality removals removals change

Southeast

Northeast

East Oklahoma

._________________________ -Millioncubicfeetperyear---------------------------- ____

Softwood 31.6 7.9 8.8 0.8 -0.8 -3.0 -50.5 -1.6 -6.8

Hardwood 24.6 5.7 3.4 2.4 -4.0 -11.1 -22.4 -2.6 -4.0

Total 56.2 13.5 12.2 3.3 -4.9 -14.0 -72.9 -4.2 -10.8

Softwood 1.4 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 -0.1 -3.7 -0.0 -1.6

Hardwood 17.9 2.5 0.6 0.9 -0.4 -3.6 -2.7 -2.4 12.8

Total 19.3 2.6 1.3 1.0 -0.3 -3.7 -6.4 -2.4 11.4

Softwood 33.0 8.0 9.5 0.8 -0.8 -3.1 -54.2 -1.6 -8.4

Hardwood 42.5 8.2 4.0 3.3 -4.4 -14.7 -25.1 -5.0 8.8

Total

‘Includes ongrowth trees

75.5 16.1 13.5 4.3 -5.2 -17.7 -79.3 -6.6 0.6

6

fj&f#j 1976

m 1966

PUBLIC FOREST OTHER ALL

INDUSTRY PRIVATE OWNERS

OWNER

Figure 14.-Ratio of hardwood growth to removals by ownership

class, east Oklahoma, 1976 and 1986,

Average net annual growth of hardwood growing

stock has plunged from 61 million cubic feet to 39

million cubic feet. All ownership classes shared some of

the decline.

Hardwood removals increased substantially, from

an annual rate of 17 million cubic feet in 1976 to 30

million cubic feet in 1986. Declining growth and increasing removals have caused a steep drop in the

growth/removal ratio (fig. 14). The ratio declined for all

ownership groups, but only forest industry has a ratio

below 1.0.

One factor contributing to a declining net annual

growth is an increase in mortality. For all species,

average annual mortality nearly doubled, from 9 million cubic feet to 17 million cubic feet. The principal

causes of mortality were disease and weather.

Net annual growth has also been slowed by an

increase in the number of rough and rotten trees, and

by an increase in the average of poorly-stocked timber

stands. In 1976, 2.1 million acres or 48 percent of all

timberland were less than 60 percent stocked with

growing-stock trees. By 1986, 2.9 million acres or 60

percent of all timberland were less than 60 percent

stocked with growing-stock trees. Most poorly stocked

stands are in the hardwood types.

Timberland Disturbance and Regeneration

Almost one-third of east Oklahoma’s timberland,

excluding additions, was significantly disturbed since

the last survey (table VIII). The most common disturbance was partial cutting, followed by clearcuts and

other management practices. Clearcuts were most

common on forest industry timberland, while partial

cutting was the most common disturbance on other

private timberland.

The pine and oak-pine types were most likely to be

disturbed (table (IX). More than half of all pine type

timberland was disturbed, and 40 percent of the oakpine timberland was disturbed. Clearcutting was most

often practiced in pine and oak-pine timberland. Partial cutting affected all types, but affected the most

acreage in the upland hardwood type group.

Despite heavy cutting, most pine stands retained

adequate stocking (table X). About three-fourths of all

harvested pine stands were in the highest pine stocking class. Forest industry owners were a little more

successful in regenerating pine than other private

owners. Most hardwood stands were not regenerated

to pine. Those that were planted with pine roughly

offset the pine stands that were not adequately regenerated.

TIMBER MANAGEMENT

OPPORTUNITIES FOR EAST OKLAHOMA

East Oklahoma’s timberland is currently producing

timber at only 30 percent of maximum potential (table

XI>. Most timberland fails to achieve full growth potential for two reasons: poor stocking, and a high proportion of cull tree stocking. To some extent these conditions are inherent to Oklahoma’s timberland because

of the prevalence of low-productivity sites, especially

north and west of the coastal plain counties. In addition, standards used by the forest survey to measure

stocking adequacy may not be appropriate for timberland in the northern and western counties of east

Oklahoma because the standards are based on average

stand conditions across the South.

10
Table VIII.-Area of timberland by disturbance class and ownership class, east

Oklahoma, 1986

Disturbance

class

All

owners Public

Forest

industry

__.-

Other

private

------ ------ Thousandacres_______

No disturbance 2,862.3 342.4 452.4

Clearcut 456.4 36.4 374.0

Partial cut 660.7 55.3 123.2

. Other management 171.8 48.3 79.5

Natural disturbance 74.5 6.6 11.3

Additions to timberland 521.8 96.3 5.6

All classes 4,747.5 585.3 1,046.O

- - - . _

2,067.4

46.0

482.2

44.0

56.7

419.9

3,116.2

Table IX.-Area of timberland by disturbance class and past forest type, east Oklahoma, 1986

Disturbance All

class types Pine

Oakpine

Upland

hardwood

Bottomland

hardwood

__________________ -Thousand acres-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

No disturbance 2,862.3 436.4 431.3 1,688.O 306.4

Clearcut 456.4 206.6 151.6 82.0 16.4

Partial cut 660.7 175.9 90.5 307.5 86.8

Other management 171.8 57.9 40.6 67.4 6.0

Natural disturbance 74.5 5.6 0.0 63.3 5.6

All c@sesl 4,225.7 882.4 714.0 2,208.2 421.0

LExcluding reversions

Table X.-Area of timberland harvested’ by ownership class, past

forest type, and pine-stocking class: east Oklahoma,

19761986

Ownership class

and

past forest type

All

classes

Pine stocking class

Low Meduim High

Public

Pine types

Oak-pine

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -Thousand acres-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

35.7 6.0 12.0 17.7

25.0 6.0 6.0 12.9

Hardwood types 31.0 19.4 6.0 5.6

Total 91.7 31.4 24.0 36.2

Forest industry

Pine types

Oak-pine

254.4 22.5 29.2 202.7

150.4 28.6 58.4 63.4

Hardwood types 92.4 28.9 34.6 28.9

Total 497.2 80.0 122.2 295.0

Other private

Pine types

Oak-nine

92.4 18.2 12.0 62.2

66.7 36.7 30.0 0.0

Hardwood types 369.1 356.5 12.6 0.0

Total 528.2 378.9 54.6 62.2

Ail owners

Pine types

Oak-nine

382.5 46.7 53.2 282.6

242.1 71.3 94.4 76.3

Hardwood types 492.5 404.8 53.2 34.5

Total 1,117.l 522.8 200.8 393.4

‘Includes clearcuts and partial cuts.

Xow indicates O-30 percent stocked pine. Medium indicates 30-60

percent stocked with pine. High indicates 60+ percent stocked with

pine.

Table XI.-Periodic annual netgrowth and potential productivity’ of

timberland by resource region, east Oklahoma, 1976-

1986

Resource

region

Potential

productivity

Net

growth

Growth as

percent of

potential

- -Cubic feet per acre per year - - Percent

Southeast 62.7 18.6 3 0

Northeast 52.1 15.6 3 0

East Oklahoma 60.1 17.8 3 0

‘Based on site class.

As mentioned earlier, 60 percent of all timberland

has less than 60 percent stocking of growing-stock

trees, the minimum threshold for adequate stocking.

Furthermore, 76 percent of all timberland has more

than 30 percent stocking of rough and rotten trees. The

situation is much worse for hardwoods than for softwoods: 11 percent of all softwood basal area is classified as rough or rotten, while 57 percent of all hardwood basal area is in rough and rotten trees.

Management opportunities for east Oklahoma pine

timberland were computed from data on stocking of

growing-stock trees, stocking of cull trees, stand-size

class, timber volume, presence of damaged and offsite

trees, and presence of inhibiting vegetation. Key stocking thresholds are 60 percent for adequate stocking

with growing-stock trees, and 30 percent for significant competition from cull trees.

11
Most pine plantations are in relatively good shape

and require no treatment (table XII). The most common prescriptions would be control of competing vegetation, followed by regeneration of some poorlystocked stands. Natural pine stands are in similar

condition on the average, except that harvest would be

recommended for those stands carrying high volume.

The mixed pine-hardwoods tend to be poorly stocked

or stocked with cull trees. Only 28 percent of the mixed

stands fell in the “no treatment” category. Most of the

351 thousand acres with a regeneration treatment

opportunity actually have between 30 and 60 percent

stocking of growing-stock trees. Crop tree release

might be more appropriate for marginally-stocked

oak-pine and there would be a high probability that

these stands would attain full stocking over time

(Birdsey and Pitcher 1986).

If the criteria for pine management opportunities

were used for hardwoods, most stands would require

regeneration or stocking control because of the low

average stand density and high site occupancy by

rough and rotten trees. About 65 percent of all hardwood stands is poorly stocked, and another 23 percent

has significant competition from cull trees. But full

stocking according to forest survey standards may be

an unrealistic expectation. Furthermore, individual

trees tend to have poorer form with low stocking. It

might be more realistic to manage the current hardwood forests for products other than the traditional

saw log.

Because of the uncertainty about the applicability of

management opportunity criteria, no specific recommendations for east Oklahoma’s hardwoods will be

made in this report. Nevertheless, it is extremely important to note that nearly 1.3 million acres have

hardwood stands less than 20 years old. Although

these stands have high cull tree occupancy, the average tree has not yet reached a large size. There may

now be some excellent opportunities to control stand

composition, both species and quality, at an early age.

TIMBER RESOURCE OUTLOOK

East Oklahoma’s increasing timberland base sends a

strong signal that forestry will continue to be important. Timberland shifts since 1966 have mostly involved hardwood types. The pine region has been less

volatile but there are prospects for large acreage shifts

among owners as forest industries restructure their

timberland holdings. Little permanent clearing of pine

timberland has been made, most pine harvests are

followed by adequate regeneration.

Due to very heavy cutting in recent years, coupled

with currently low growth rates, the volume of softwood growing stock is expected to decline slightly.

Removals will fall off rapidly, however, as few pine

stands with harvest opportunities still remain. After

a short-lived decline, volume and growth should increase rapidly as the current large area of young pine

plantations reaches the merchantability threshold. An

increasingly rapid shift from natural shortleaf pine to

plantation-grown loblolly pine is also expected.

The hardwood outlook is both less stable and less

optimistic. Land-use shifts are difficult to predict, but

the current agricultural crisis largely precludes significant land clearing for crops in the near future.

Recent declines in the numbers of small hardwood

trees, and increases in the larger size classes, indicate

that much of the hardwood resource is maturing.

Declining volumes in smaller trees will counteract

increases in the larger trees. Removals will not likely

go up much because so much of the timberland is poorly

stocked or stocked with poor-quality trees. The current

balance between growth and removals will probably be

maintained for some time; thus, volume should stabilize at current levels.

At some point, the large acreage of hardwoods less

than 20 years old will become a significant factor.

Growth and volume will then increase rapidly as these

young stands begin to contain merchantable-size timber.

Table XII.-Area of timberland by management opportunity class for pine forest

types, ‘east Oklahoma, 1986

Management All

opportunity pine

class types

Planted

pine

Forest type

Natural

pine

Oak

pine

_----____---_ Thousandacres-------------

Regeneration 472.8 28.6 93.6 350.6

Conversion 23.0 11.7 0.0 11.3

Poletimber thinning 23.6 5.6 18.0 0.0

Other stocking control 310.2 34.6 99.9 175.7

Harvest 46.8 0.0 41.2 5.6

Salvage 18.2 0.0 18.2 0.0

No treatment 818.7 183.7 421.0 214.0

All classes 1,713.2 264.1 691.8 757.3

12
TIMBER PRODUCTS OUTPUT.

Oklahoma’s eastern forests supply more than 50 million cubic feet of timber products per year to the forest

products industry. Although most of the timber product output is comprised of softwoods, the proportion of

softwoods to the total output has been declining, falling from 80 percent in 1975 to 75 percent in 1984.

Almost all of the softwood harvest originates from the

southestern counties of the State, while the hardwood

harvest is distributed among the eastern counties of

the State. Saw logs and pulpwood are by far the most

common products harvested from Oklahoma’s eastern

forests, accounting for more than three-quarters of the

annual harvest. Veneer logs, poles, posts, and miscellaneous products make up the remainder of the annual

harvest.

Saw Logs

Oklahoma’s saw-log production has stabilized at an

annual rate of about 31 million cubic feet (fig. 15).

Although the majority of the saw-log harvest is comprised of softwoods, hardwood saw-logs have been

gaining favor. Between 1975 and 1984, the proportion

of the total saw-log harvest represented by softwoods

fell from 82 percent to 71 percent. Shortleaf pine is the

predominant softwood species harvested, and the oaks

account for the majority of the hardwood harvest. Most

of Oklahoma’s saw-log production is processed into

lumber within the State. A few large mills process

more than 85 percent of all saw-log receipts. These

large mills process mostly pine saw-logs, while the

smaller sawmills mainly process hardwoods. However, the proportion of hardwoods being processed by

large sawmills has been increasing, climbing from 8

percent of total saw-log receipts in 1975 to 22 percent

in 1984.

Pulpwood

Only a small number of pulpmills draw roundwood

from Oklahoma’s eastern forests. Consequently, any

changes in the pulpwood consumption rate of one or

more of these mills (caused by pulping capacity increases, market conditions, labor relations, etc.) will

have a major impact upon the yearly production of

pulpwood from Oklahoma, as depicted in figure 16.

Although the State’s pulpwood production has fluctuated over the survey period, on the whole, pulpwood

production increased by 65 percent between 1975 and

1985. Another and probably more significant trend has

been the increasing importance of hardwoods in meeting the demand for pulping fiber. Between 1975 and

1985, the proportion of hardwood furnish to the total

pulpwood production almost doubled, increasing from

16 percent to 29 percent, while the actual volume of

hardwood furnish tripled.

Other Products

Oklahoma’s production of veneer logs has experienced a general downward trend. Between 1975 and

1984, veneer-log production fell by 18 percent (fig. 15).

Almost all of the veneer log production is comprised of

softwoods, with minor amounts of hardwood, mostly

40 r

m 1975 1978 lfxssi 1984

SAW LOGS VENEER POLES 8 POSTS MISCELLANEOUS

PRODUCTS

Figure 15.-Roundwood production by product, east Oklahoma, 1975.1984.

13
800

SOFTWOOD m HARDWOOD

2 600

5

ig 400

2

z

h 200

0

1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984

YEAR

Figure 16.-Pulpwood production, east Oklahoma, 19751984.

pecan and walnut, shipped out of state for processing.

In contrast to the drop in veneer-log production, pole

and post production between 1975 and 1984 tripled

(fig. 15). In the same time period, the amount of the

pole and post harvest retained and processed within

the State increased sixfold. All of the pole and most of

the post production is comprised of softwoods. The

output of miscellaneous products, such as furniture

and handle stock, charcoal wood, and excelsior bolts,

has been a relatively minor component of Oklahoma’s

timber harvest, representing about 1 percent of the

total timber product output (fig. 15).

Wood Residues

In converting roundwood into primary products,

Oklahoma’s forest industries have been generating

increasing quantities of wood residues. Between 1975

and 1984, wood residue generation increased 68 percent from 28 to 47 million cubic feet. This is due in part

to: advances in technology (chip-n-saws, merchandisers, and onsite chippers), increasing acceptance of

wood residues as a source of pulping fiber, and inconsistent responses to the annual pulpwood production

surveys. Coarse residues such as slabs, edgings, and

cull pieces comprise more than three-quarters of the

total wood residue production. Fine residues such as

sawdust and shavings make up the remainder. Approximately 95 percent of all wood residues are converted into byproducts. The majority of coarse residues

are converted into pulping fiber, while the majority of

fine residues are utilized as fuel. In addition, 90 percent of the bark generated by Oklahoma’s primary

forest industries is also burned as fuel.

LITERATURE CITED

Birdsey, Richard A.; Bertelson, Daniel F. Forest statistics for Southeast Oklahoma Counties-1986. For.

Serv. Res. Bull. SO-119. New Orleans, LA: U.S. De14

partment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern

Forest Experiment Station; 1987a. 30~.

Birdsey, Richard A.; Bertelson, Daniel F. Forest statis-

%ics for Northeast Oklahoma Counties-1986. For.

Serv. Res. Bull. SO-120. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern

Forest Experiment Station; 198713. 30~.

Birdsey, Richard A.; Pitcher, J.A. Management op

tions for poorly stocked stands in the South Central

United States. Southern Jour. of Applied Forestry

10(2):73-77; 1986.

Eldredge, 1.F” Forest resources of Southeast Oklahoma. Forest Survey Release No. 37. New Orleans,

LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Southern Forest Experiment Station; 1938. 25~.

May, Dennis M. Forest growth of Mississippi’s north

unit-a case study of the southern forest survey’s

growth estimation procedures. Research Paper SO134 New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment

Station; 1988. 9p.

Murphy, Paul A. East Oklahoma forests; trends and

outlook. Resource Bulletin SO-63. New Orleans, LA:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Southern Forest Experiment Station; 1977. 20~.

Sternitzke, Herbert S.; Van Sickle, Charles C. East

Oklahoma forests. Resource Bulletin SO-14. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station; 1968.

32~.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Forests of east Oklahoma, 1955-56. Forest Survey Release No. 79. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station; 1957. 34~.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service. Oklahoma resources ‘inventory, 1982. Stillwater, Oklahoma: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Soil Conservation Service; 1984. 84~.
15
Survey Methods

Forest resource statistics were obtained by a sampling method employing a forest-nonforest classification on aerial photography and on-the-ground measurements of trees at sample locations. Inventory volume and area statistics are required to give precise

answers at the State level to one standard deviation of

the total, equal to 1 percent per million acres of forest

land and to 5 percent per billion cubic feet. The estimate of timberland acreage is based on the photointerpretation of recent aerial photography using dot

counts on specific plot locations as to a forest or nonforest classification. These dot counts yield the proportion of forest to nonforest areas in each county. Forest

area changes are then determined from field observations of permanent 3- by 3-mile grid (measurement

plots) locations. Additional plots (intensification

plots), for classifying points as to forest or nonforest

condition only, are used further to reduce the sampling

error for forest area. The field classifications of these

two types of plots (3x3 and intensification) are used to

correct photointerpretation errors and adjust the

county timberland acreage estimate that comes from

the dot counts associated with each plot location in the

county. The intensity level of the 3- by 3-mile grid

layout of permanent measurement plots gives each

sample plot an expansion factor representing, on average, 5,760 acres per plot.

Volume estimates come entirely from the 3- by S-mile

grid permanent sample plots and measurements of

individual trees on these plots. The plots established

by the prior survey were remeasured to determine the

elements of change. In Oklahoma, 10 points were

measured at each plot location. Trees 5.0 inches in

diameter and larger were selected with a 37.5 factor

prism, thus each tree selected with the prism represented 3.75 square feet of basal area. Trees smaller

than 5.0 inches in diameter were tallied on a l/275 acre

circular plot fixed around the first 3 points of the lopoint cluster.

Forest- survey uses a satellite point system with a

large factor prism to get a representative sample of

stand conditions at each plot location. This eliminates

the effect that vegetation clumping and open gaps

would induce if only one point or one fixed plot were

used at each plot location.

Volumes in Oklahoma were derived from deterministic measurements of trees on all sample locations.

These deterministic measurements include diameter

at breast height, total height, bole length, log length,

and four upper stem diameters. Volumes for these

trees were computed using Smalian’s formula. Volume

equations were developed for seven species groups and

these equations were used to estimate volumes at time

of removal or death for trees that did not survive the

remeasurement period, and to estimate the past volume for nongrowth trees (see definitions). Procedures

for estimating growth are documented elsewhere (May

1988).

Reliability of the Data

A relative standard of accuracy has been incorporated into the forest survey. This satisfies user demands, eliminates as much as possible any elements of

error-either human or from instrumentation-and

permits the control of costs within prescribed economic

limits.

The first type of error, estimating error, involves

three basic areas: (1) biased error, caused by instruments not properly calibrated, (2) compensating error,

caused by instruments of moderate precision and (3)

accidental error, caused by human error in measuring

and compiling. All of these are held to a minimum by

a system that incorporates training, check plots, and

an edit (consistency) check. Field personnel undergo

training for 3 to 4 months under the guidance of fieldexperienced personnel. Field work is checked by supervisors. In Oklahoma 4 percent of the plots were field

checked for errors. Editing checks in the office screen

out logical and data entry errors on all plots. It is not

possible to evaluate estimating error statistically but

Table XIII.-Sampling errors for estimates of total timberland area, volume, net

annualgrowth (1976-1986), and annual removals (1976-1986), east

Oklahoma.

Item

Timberland area

Growing stock

Volume

Net annual growth

Annual removal

Sawtimber

Volume

Net annual growth

Annual removals

Total

4,747.5

2,219.l

84.4

83.9

6,688.5

311.4

285.7

Percent

Unit sampling error

Thousand acres 0.7

Million cubic feet 4.3

Million cubic feet 5.2

Million cubic feet 7.2

Million cubic feet 5.5

Million cubic feet 7.7

Million cubic feet 8.6

16
Table m.-Sampling error to which estimates are liable, 2 chances out of 3, east Oklahoma, 1986

Sampling

error’

Timberland

area

Growing stock

Net

annual Annual

Volume growth removals

Sawtimber

- -

Net

annual Annual

Volume growth removals

Percent

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Thousand acres - - - Million cubic feet- - - - - - Million board feet 2 - - -

2,326.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

581.6 . . . ..* . . . . . . . . . . . .

258.5 . . . . . . .., . . . . . . . . .

145.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

93.1 1,641.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23.3 410.3 22.8 43.5 2,023.3 184.6 211.3

10.3 182.4 10.1 19.3 899.2 82.1 93.9

5.8 106.2 5.7 10.9 505.8 46.2 52.8

3.7 65.6 3.6 7.0 323.7 29.5 33.8

‘By random sampling formula.

21nternational l/4-inch rule.

the Forest Inventory and Analysis Unit holds it, to a

minimum by adequate training, experienced supervision, and emphasis on careful work.

The second type of error, sampling error, is the error

associated with natural and expected deviation of the

sample mean from the true population mean. Thus, the

deviation is susceptible to a mathematical evaluation

of the probability of error. Sampling errors for State

totals are based on one standard deviation (table XIII).

That is, the chances are 2 out of 3 that if the results of

a 100 percent census were known the sample results

would be within the limits indicated.

Estimates smaller then State totals will have resultant larger sampling errors. The smaller the area

examined, the larger the sampling error. In addition,

as area or volume totals are stratified by forest type,

species, diameter class, ownership, or other subunits,

the sampling error increases and is greatest for the

smallest divisions. The magnitude of this increase is

depicted in table XIV and shows the sampling error to

which the estimates are liable, 2 chances out of 3.

Definition of Terms

Forest Land Classes

Forest Land-Land at least 16.7 percent stocked by

forest trees of any size, or formerly having such tree

cover, and not currently developed for nonforest uses.

Minimum area considered for classification is 1 acre.

Forest land is divided into commercial categories: timberland, deferred timberland; and noncommercial

categories: productive-reserved forest land, unproductive forest land.

Timberland-Forest land that is producing, or is

capable of producing, crops of industrial wood and not

withdrawn from timber utilization. Timberland is

synonymous with “commercial forest land” in prior

reports.

Deferred Timberland-National forest land that

meets productivity standards for timberland but is

under study for possible inclusion in the wilderness

system.

Productive-Reserved Forest Land-Productive public

forest land withdrawn from timber utilization through

statute or administrative regulations.

Unproductive Forest Land-Forest land incapable of

yielding crops of industrial wood because of adverse

site conditions.

Tree Classes

Commercial Species-Tree species currently or prospectively suitable for industrial wood products. Excluded are noncommercial species. See species list.

Noncommercial Species-Tree species of typical

small size, poor form, or inferior quality which normally do not develop into trees suitable for industrial

wood products. See species list.

Growing Stock Trees-Live trees of commercial species classified as sawtimber, poletimber, sapling, and

seedlings. Trees must have a 12-foot butt log now or

prospectively to be classed as growing stock.

Rough Trees-Live trees of commercial species that

are unmerchantable for saw logs currently or potentially because of roughness or poor form in the butt log.

Also included are all live trees of noncommercial species.

Rotten Trees-Live trees of commercial species that

are unmerchantable for saw logs currently or potentially because of rot deduction in the butt log.

17
Cull Trees--Rough or rotten trees.

Hardwoods-Dicotyledonous trees, usually broadleaved and deciduous.

Softwoods-Coniferous trees, usually evergreen,

having needle or scalelike leaves.

Live Trees-All trees alive. Included are all size

classes and all tree classes.

Salvable Dead Trees-Standing or down dead trees

that were formerly growing stock and are considered

merchantable.

Forest Types

LongZeafiSZash Pine-Forests in which longleaf or

slash pine, singly or in combination, comprise a plurality of the stocking. Common associates include other

southern pines, oak, and gum.

Loblolly-Shortleaf Pine-Forests in which pine and

eastern redcedar (except longleaf or slash pine), singly

or in combination, comprise a plurality of the stocking.

Common associates include oak, hickory, and gum.

Oak-Pine-Forests in which hardwoods (usually upland oaks) comprise a plurality of the stocking, but in

which softwoods, except cypress, comprise 25-49 percent of the stocking. Common associates include gum,

hickory, and yellow-poplar.

Qub-Hkhy-Forests in which upland oaks or hickorgr, singly or in wmMriatio84 compriece 8 phw&y af

the stocking except where pines cdmprit4e 2!XO percent, in which case the stand would be classified oakpine. Common associates include yellow-popular, elm,

maple, and black walnut.

Oak-Gum-Cypress-Bottomland forests in which

tupelo, blackgum, sweetgum, oaks, or southern cypress, singly or in combination, comprise a plurality of

stocking except where pines comprise 25-50 percent, in

which case the stand would be classified oak-pine.

Common associates include cottonwood, willow, ash,

elm, hackberry, and maple.

Elm-Ash-Cottonwood-Forest in which elm, ash, cottonwood, singly or in combination comprise a plurality

of the stocking. Common associates include willow,

sycamore, beech, and maple.

Nontyped-Timberland currently unoccupied with

any live trees or seedlings, e.g., very recent clearcut

areas.

Dimension Classes of Trees

Sawtimber Trees-Trees 9.0 inches and larger in

d.b.h. for softwoods and 11.0 inches and larger for

hardwoods.

Poletimber Trees-Trees 5.0 inches to 8.9 inches in

d.b.h. for softwoods and 5.0 to 10.9 inches d.b.h. for

hardwoods.

Seedlings 600 16 72

2 560 18 60

4 460 20 51

6 340 22 42

8 240 24 36

10 155 26 31

12 115 28 27

14 90 30 24

Volume

Saplings-Trees 1 .O inch to 4.9 inches in d.b.h. Volume of Cull-The volume of sound wood in the

Seedlings-Trees which are less than 1.0 inch in bole of rough and rotten trees.

d.b.h. Volume of Growing Stock-Volume of sound wood in

Rough, Rotten, and Salvable Dead Trees-See “tree

classes.n

Stand-Size Classes

Sawtimber Stands-Stands at least 16.7 percent

stocked with growing-stock trees, half or more of this

stocking in sawtimber or poletimber trees, and with

sawtimber stocking at least equal to poletimber stocking.

Poletimber Stands--Stands at least 16.7 percent

stocked with growing-stock trees, half or more of this

stocking in sawtimber or poletimber trees, and with

poletimber trees, and with poletimber stocking exceeding that of sawtimber stocking.

Sapling-Seepling Stands-Stands at least 16.7 percent stocked with growing-stock trees, more than half

of this stocking in saplings or seedlings.

Nonstocked Stands-Stands less than 16.7 percent

stocked with growing-stock trees.

Stocking

Stocking is a measure of the extent to which the

growth potential of the site is utilized by trees or

preempted byvegetation cover.Stocking is determined

by comparing the stand density in terms of number of

trees or basal girea with a specified standard. !l’here-

$a, Autl st&ingis 100 percent of the stocking standard.

Defined below are arbitrarily defined stocking categories.

Understocked-Stands 0 to 60 percent stocked.

Optimally stockedatands 60 to 100 percent

stocked.

Overstocked-Stands greater than 100 percent

stocked.

The tabulation below shows the density standard in

terms of trees per acre, by size class, required for full

stocking.

D.b.h.

(inches)

Number

of trees

D.b.h. Number

(inches) of trees

18
the bole of sawtimber and poletimber trees from a lfoot stump to a minimum 4.0-inch top outside bark or

to the point where the central stem breaks into limbs.

Rough, rotten, and noncommercial trees are excluded.

Volume of Sawtimber-Net volume of the saw-log

portion of live sawtimber trees in board feet of the

International rule (l/4-inch kern). Net volume equals

gross volume less deductions for rot, sweep, and other

defects that affect use for lumber to the point where the

central stem breaks into limbs. Rough, rotten, and

noncommercial trees are excluded.

Volume of Timber-The volume of sound wood in the

bole of growing stock, rough, rotten, and salvable dead

trees 5.0 inches and larger in d.b.h. from stump to a

minimum 4.0-inch top outside bark, or to the point

where the central stem breaks into limbs.

Growth Classes

Gross Growth-Total increase in stand volume computed on growing-stock trees. Gross growth equals

survivor growth plus ingrowth plus growth on removals plus growth on mortality plus cull increment.

Net Growth-Increase in stand volume, computed on

growing-stock trees. Net growth is equal to gross

growth minus mortality.

Net Change-Increase or decrease in stand volume,

computed on growing-stock trees. Net change is equal

to net growth minus removals.

Classes of Trees Used in Growth Computations

Survivor Trees-Merchantable-and-in at time 1 (previous inventory) and time 2 (current inventory).

Ingrowth Trees-Submerchantable-and-in at time 1

and merchantable-and-in at time 2.

Ongrowth Trees-Submerchantable-and-out at time

1 and merchantable-and-in at time 2; included with

ingrowth component for growth computation.

Nongrowth Trees-Merchantable-and-out at time 1

and merchantable-and-in at time 2; included with

survivor growth for growth computation.

Removal Trees-Merchantable-and-in at time 1 and

removed prior to time 2.

Mortality Trees-Merchantable-and-in at time 1 and

dead prior to time 2.

Ownership Classes

Natio& Forest Land-Federal lands which have

been l@ally designated as National I%res&s or pnr=

chase units, and other lands under the administration

of the Porest Service, including experimental areas.

Other Federal Lund-Federal lands other than National Forests; lands administered by the Bureau of

Land Management and Indian Lands.

State, County, and Municipal Lands-Lands owned

by the States, counties, and local public agencies or

municipalities, or lands leased to these governmental

units for 50 years or more.

Forest Industry Land-Lands owned by companies or

individuals operating wood-using plants (either primary or secondary).

Farmer Owned Land-Lands operated as a unit of 10

acres or more from which the sale of agricultural

products total $1,000 or more annually.

Nonindustrial Private Land-Individual-Lands privately owned by individuals other than forest industry, farmer owned, or miscellaneous private corporations.

Nonindustrial Private Land-Corporate-Lands privately owned by private corporations other than forest

industry and incorporated farms.

Miscellaneous Definitions

Agricultural Land-Agricultural land is land used

primarily for the production of crops or livestock.

Basal Area-The area in square feet of the cross

section at breast height of a single tree or of all trees in

a stand, usually expressed in square feet per acre.

Cull Increment-The net volume in growing-stock

trees that change tree class during a specified period.

D.b.h. (Diameter at breast height)-Tree diameter in

inches, outside bark;-measured at 4 112 feet above

groudd.

Diameter Classes-The 2-inch diameter classes extend from1 .ti inch below to 0.9 inches above the stated

midpoint.Thus, 12-inch class included trees 11 .O inches

through 12.9 inches d.b.h.

Log Grades-A classification of logs based on external characteristics as indicators of quality or value.

Mortality-Number or sound-wood volume of live

trees dying from natural causes during a specified

period.

Plantations-Stands evidenced by regeneration from

planting or seeding. Forest Survey categorizes plantations by forest type based upon plot tally.

Saw-Log Portion-That part of the bole of a sawtimber tree between a l-foot stump and the saw-log top.

Saw-Log Top-The point on the bole of a sawtimber

tree above which a saw log cannot be produced. The

minimum saw-log top is 7.0 inches diameter outside

bark (d.o.b.1 for softwoods and 9.0 inches d.o.b. for

hardwoods,

Bite t2hms-A &ssifcation af forest land in terms

dpc@entW eapa&y to grow crops of industrial wood.

Timber RemouaZs-The net volume of growing-stock

trees removed from the inventory by harvesting or

cultural operations such as timber-stand improvement, land clearing, or change in land use.

Tree Grade-The grade assigned to the entire log

length of a sawtimber tree, which is based upon the

grade of the butt-log portion (the first 16 feet) only. In

19
past surveys, a log grade was assigned to each upper

log based upon log grade standards.

Upper-stem Portion-That part of the main stem or

fork of a sawtimber tree above the saw-log top to a

diameter outside bark of 4.0 inches to the point where

the main stem or fork breaks into limbs.

Species List

Scientific and common names of tree species sampled

in Oklahoma’.

Commercial Species

Genus

Softwoods

Juniperus

Pinus

Taxodium

Hardwoods

Genus

Acer

Bet&a

Carya

Cel tis

Gornus

Diospyros

Fagus

Fraxinus

Gleditsia

Gymnocladus

Rex

Juglans

Liquidambar

Species Common Name

viginiana eastern redcedar

echinata shortleaf pine

taeda loblolly pine

distichum var.

distichum baldcypress

Species Common Name

barbatum

negundo

rubrum var.

rubrum

saccharinurn

saccharum

nigra

sP*

aquatica

illinoensis

laevigata

occidentalis

florida

virginiana

grandifolia

americana

Pennsylvania

aquatica

triacanthus

dioicus

opaca

nigra

styraciflua

Florida maple

boxelder

red maple

silver maple

sugar maple

river birch

hickory

water hickory

pecan

sugarberry

hackberry

flowering dogwood

common persimmon

American beech

white ash

green ash

water locust

honey locust

Kentucky coffeetree

American holly

black walnut

sweet gum

‘Names according to: Little, Elbert L., Jr. Checklist of United

States Trees (Native and Naturalized). 1978. U.S. Dept. Agr. Handbook No. 541,375~.

Maclura

Morus

Nyssa

Plantanus

Popul us

Prunus

Quercus

pomifera

rubra

aquatica

occidentalis

sp.

serotina

alba

bicolor

falcata var.

falcata

falcata var.

pagodifolia

laurifolia

lyrata

macrocarpa

Osage-orange

red mulberry

water tupelo

American sycamore

cottonwood

black cherry

white oak

swamp white oak

southern red oak

cherrybark oak

laurel oak

overcup oak

bur oak

muehlenbergii chinkapin oak

Robinia

Salix

Sassafras

Tilia

Ulmus

nigra

nuttallii

palustris

phellos

shumardii

stellata var.

stellata

velutina

pseudoacacia

sp.

albidum

heterophylla

alata

americana

crassifolia

rubra

serotina

thomassii

Noncommercial Species

Genus

Anelanchier

Bumelia

Carpinus

Castanea

Cercis

Cotinus

Cra taegus

Morus

Ostrya

Planera

Prunus

Quercus

Vaccinium

Species

sp.

sp.

caroliniana

sp.

canadensis

obovatus

sp.

alba

virginiana

aquatica

sp.

incana

marilandica

arboreum

water oak

nut t all oak

pin oak

willow oak

Shumard oak

post oak

black oak

black locust

willow

sassafras

white basswood

winged elm

American elm

cedar elm

slippery elm

September elm

Rock elm

Common Name

serviceberry

chittamwood, gum

bumelia

bluebeech, American

hornbeam

chinkapin

eastern redbud

smoketree

hawthorn

white mulberry

eastern hophornbeam, ironwood

water-elm

plums, cherries

bluejack oak

blackjack oak

sparkleberry

20
1. -Area by land classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2. -Area of timberland by ownership classes . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3. -Area of timberland by stand size and ownership

classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

4. -Area of timberland by stand volume and ownership

classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

5. -Area of timberland by percent growing-stock trees

and cull trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

6. -Average basal area of live trees on timberland by

ownership, tree class, species, and tree size class . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

7. -Area of timberland by site and ownership classes .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

8. -Area of timberland by forest types and ownership

classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

9. -Area of noncommercial forest land by forest types

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

10. -Number of growing-stock trees on timberland by

detailed species and diameter class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

11. - Volume of timber on timberland by classes of timber

and by softwoods and hardwoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

12. -Volume of growing stock and sawtimber on timberland by ownership classes and by softwoods and

hardwoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

13. -Volume of growing stock on timberland by detailed

species and diameter class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

14. -Volume of sawtimber on timberland by species and

diameter class ,.....................................,................ 27

15. -Volume of sawtimber on timberland by species and

tree grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...*..... 27

16. -Average net annual growth and average annual

removals of growing stock on timberland by species

,....................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

17. -Net annual growth and removals of growing stock

on timberland by ownership classes and by softwoods and hardwoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

18. -Average net annual growth and average annual

removals of sawtimber on timberland by species

,..................*.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...* . . . . . ..*..................... 28

19. - Periodic net annual growth and removals of sawtimber on timberland by ownership classes and by

softwoods and hardwoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

20. -Average annual mortality of growing stock and

sawtimber on timberland by species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

21. -Average annual mortality of growing stock and

sawtimber on timberland by ownership classes and

by softwoods and hardwoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

22. -Average annual mortality of growing stock and

sawtimber on timberland by causes of death and by

softwoods and hardwoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..a.......... 29

21
Table 1 .-Area by land classes, east Oklahoma, 1986

Land class Area

Forest

Commercial

Timberland

Deferred timberland

Noncommercial

Productive-reserved

Unproductive

Total forest

Nonforest

Cropland’

Other

Thousand acres

4,747.5

. . .

23.0

485.9

5,256.4

1,985.7

2.861.9 ~I~

Total nonforest 4,847.6

All land” 10104.0

‘U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1982

Census of &riculture, Volume 1 : State and County Data.

2Bureau of Census, 1980.

Table 2.-Area of timberland dy ownership classes, east Oklahoma,

1986

Ownership class Area

Public:

National forest

Other federal

State

county

Total public

Private

Forest industry

Farmer

Miscellaneous private

Individual

Corporate

Total private

All ownerships

Thousand acres

242.6

221.4

114.7

6.6

585.3

1,046.O

1,295.6

1,604.2

216.4

1 .

4,747.5

Table 3.-Area of timberland by stand size and ownership classes, east Oklahoma, 1986

Stand size class

All National Other Forest Miscellaneous

ownerships forest public industry Farmer private

Sawtimber

Poletimber stands

Sapling and seedling

Nonstocked areas

All classes

__---____________. -Thousand acms- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

1,169.6 123.1 110.3 226.8 327.4 328.0

1,661.3 66.0 121.2 284.5 440.7 749.0

1,440.o 53.5 92.8 500.2 351.2 442.3

476.6 . . . 18.4 34.5 176.3 247.3

4,747.5 242.6 342.7 1,046.O 1,295.6 1,820.7

Table 4.-Area of timberland by stand volume and ownership classes, east Oklahoma, 1986

Stand volume All National Other Forest Miscellaneous

per acre ownerships forest public industry Farmer private

Board feet

Less than 1,500

1,600 to 5,000

Mom than 5,000

All classes

-_----_________ - - - -Thousand acres- _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

3,419.g 107.4 245.1 715.4 941.5 1,410.6

1,039.a 72.0 74.8 244.2 297.9 350.9

287.8 63.2 22.8 86.6 56.2 69.1

4,747.5 242.6 342.7 1,046.O 1295.6 1,820.7

22
Table B.-Area of timberland by percent growing-stock trees and cull trees, east Oklahoma, 1986

Cull trees

percent stocking

Growing-stock

Trees Total O-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60+

Percent stocking __________________________ _ -Thousand acres- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ O-10 179.7 ‘.. 1.9 18.4 6.8 6.0 . . . 148.5

10-20 465.3 ... ... 6.9 9.7 28.8 107.5 312.5

20-30 470.5 6.4 ... a 11.7 19.8 22.1 83.2 327.4

30-40 548.6 6.0 12.4 4.6 36.3 111.6 85.2 292.5

40-50 628.0 .*. ... 23.5 50.6 153.5 188.4 212.0

50-60 571.5 6.0 16.5 39.8 102.2 118.9 202.2 85.9

60-70 459.4 ..* 16.6 82.9 125.2 133.4 59.3 42.1

70-80 430.8 6.0 42.0 122.6 94.3 87.7 41.6 36.7

80-90 400.8 24.0 59.5 153.2 77.3 41.1 28.5 17.3

go-100 257.2 23.7 100.8 62.3 46.6 17.6 6.2 . . .

100-110 161.4 10.5 47.8 61.1 24.3 17.6 . . . . . .

110-120 82.6 23.9 17.8 18.4 22.5 . . . . . . .

120-130 50.8 17.2 16.9 16.7 . . . . . . . . . . . .

130-140 17.7 17.7 *.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

140-150 23.3 6.0 17.3 ... . . . . . . . . . . . .

150-160 . . . . . . . . . ..* . . . . . . . . . . . .

160+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total 4,747.5 147.3 347.5 622.1 615.7 738.1 802.0 1,474.g

Table B.-Average basal area of live trees on timberland by ownership, tree class, species, and tree size class, east Oklahoma, 1986

Owner and All

tree classes species

Softwood Hardwood

Sapling & Sapling &

seedling Poletimber Sawtimber seedling Poletimber Sawtimber

National forest

Growing stock

Rough and rotten

Total

Other public

Growing stock

Rough and rotten

Total

Forest industry

Growing stock

Rough and rotten

Total

Farmer

Growing stock

Rough and rotten

Total

Miscellaneous private

Growing stock

Rough and rotten

Total

All owners

Growing stock

Rough and rotten

Total

------------------- ---------- Square feetper acre ________________________ ___ _____

62.9 6.9 11.0 21.8 5.4 7.9 10.0

29.3 3.2 0.3 0.6 9.7 7.4 8.1

92.2 10.1 11.2 22.4 15.1 15.3 18.1

35.5 0.9 3.7 6.0 4.6 10.3 10.0

35.1 0.5 0.6 0.3 11.2 9.7 12.8

70.6 1.5 4.3 6.3 15.8 20.1 22.7

39.0 7.3 8.0 10.3 3.5 6.7 3.2

16.2 1.9 0.5 0.4 6.6 3.6 3.0

55.2 9.2 8.5 10.7 10.1 10.3 6.3

32.7 1.3 1.7 3.7 4.4 12.3 9.3

32.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 8.5 10.3 12.8

65.0 1.6 1.9 3.9 12.9 22.6 22.1

34.4 3.0 4.0 6.3 4.1 11.1 6.1

35.1 1.0 0.5 0.4 10.2 12.0 11.1

69.5 4.0 4.4 6.6 14.2 23.1 17.2

36.5 3.5 4.6 7.2 4.1 10.2 6.8

29.9 1.1 0.4 0.3 9.0 9.3 9.7

66.4 4.6 5.0 7.6 13.1 19.5 16.5

2 3
Table T.--Area of timberland by site and ownership classes, east Oklahoma, 1986

Site class

All National

ownerships forest

Other

public

Forest

industry Farmer

Miscellaneous

private

165 ft or more

120 to 165 ft

85 to 120 ft

50 to 85 ft

Less than 50 ft

All classes

--------__-____-___

16.4 5.6

127.1 33.8

386.6 22.9

2,359.B 95.8

1,857.6 84.5

4,747.5 242.6

Thousand acres _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

5.1 5.6 . . . . . .

. . . 28.5 34.9 30.0

34.4 182.5 55.8 91.0

149.9 670.4 615.6 828.2

153.3 158.9 589.3 871.6

342.7 1,046.O 1,295.6 1,820.7

..__

Table B.-Area of timberland by forest types and ownership classes, east Oklahoma, 1986

Type

All

ownerships

National

forest

Other

public

Forest

industry

Miscellaneous

Farmer private

---- __-______________ Thousandacres ____ _ _________ ___ ___ _ _

Loblolly-shortleaf pine 956.0 106.2 42.2 492.6 92.6 222.4

Oak-pine 757.3 60.0 36.5 294.9 90.8 275.1

Oak-hickory 2,597.l 65.2 189.2 236.7 901.6 1,205.5

Oak-gum-cypress 358.8 11.3 45.6 22.9 173.9 105.1

Elm-ash-cottonwood 78.4 . . . 29.1 . . . 36.7 12.6

All classes 4,747.5 242.6 342.7 1,046.O 1,295.6 1,820.7

Table O.-Area of noncommercial forest land by forest types, east

Oklahoma, 1986

‘be

All

areas

Productive

reserved Unproductive

areas areas

.--____ Thousand acres - - - - - - _ -

Loblolly-shortleaf pine 14.1 14.1 . . .

Softwood total 14.1 14.1 . . .

Oak-hickory

Hardwood total

All types

494.8 8.9 485.9

494.8 8.9 485.9

308.Y x3.0 485.Y

24
Table lO.-Number ofgrowing-stock trees on timberland by detailed species and diameter class, east Oklahoma, 1986

Species

All

classes

5.0-

6.9

7.0-

8.9

Diameter class (inches at breast height)

9.0- 11.0- 13.0- 15.0- 17.0-

10.9 12.9 14.9 16.9 18.9

19.0-

20.9

21.0-

28.9

29.0&

larger

Shortleaf pine

Loblolly pine

Redcedar

Total softwoods

-________-~----------------~--~---~~ Thousandtrees __-------------_-__ ______ _ ____

112,259 43,645 27,818 18,662 12,727 6,051 2,397 745 164 5 0 ...

19,458 14,549 2,244 767 716 488 216 217 7 9 181 “.

2,670 1,534 802 173 6 3 8 6 ... 13 *.. .** . . .

134,387 59,728 30,864 19,602 13,507 6,625 2,613 975 243 231 . . .

<

Select white oaks

Select red oaks

Other white oaks

Other red oaks

Sweet pecan

Water hickory

Other hickories

Persimmon

Hard maple

Soft maple

Boxelder

Sweetgum

Blackgum

White ash

Other ashes

Sycamore

Cottonwood

Basswood

Willow

Black walnut

Black cherry

American elm

Other elms

River birch

Hackberry

Black locusts

Other locusts

Sassafras

Other commercial

Total hardwoods

2,762

1,620

8,163

5,584

9 9

. . .

3,789

. . .

42

127

9 5

363

214

426

464

272

330

. . .

30

37

130

358

1,619

..*

781

. . .

945

861

3,429

3,106

3 1

. . .

1,613

25

27

9 4

. . .

255

179

168

473

204

198

. . .

572

495

2,160

2,128

9 2

. . .

920

. . .

4 5

4 6

3 6

222

232

173

133

5 1

111

. . .

4 0

4 9

2 0

138

201

37

188

. . .

22

. . .

353

251

970

1,106

1 7

. . .

401

. . .

73

85

123

351

11

. . .

21

. . .

83

138

118

225

55

5

2 9

‘...

16,803 7,394 4,427

9,697 3,954 2,051

68,333 34,763 18,266

34,477 11,982 9,291

783 319 142

5 . . . . . .

31,296 16,642 7,784

666 640 .”

114 . . . . . .

1,373 793 215

483 202 132

2,489 1,066 416

1,928 675 467

2,456 1,001 575

4,899 1,937 1,578

1,466 320 407

2.044 451 631

5 4 ... 5 4

313 155 ...,

249 .‘. 73

435 112 123

2,165 1,160 211

9,741 5,259 2,142

290 135 87

3,317 1,275 836

102 102 ...

678 ‘.. 342

532 407 70

349 196 102 51 . . . . . .

197,537 90,942 50,421 27,650 12,521 8,ill 4,002 1,868 1,002 956 6 3

. . .

33

3 3

182

431

. . .

178

. . .

5 6

. . .

. . .

3 9

1 8

9 5

116

6 3

141

117

30

. . .

65

1 5

1 7

5 3

4 9

1 7

4 8

. . .

191

204

340

693

1 4

. . .

9 6

. . .

. . .

. . .

240

5 4

1 9

.*.

. . .

. . .

4 8

12

2 4

125

1 6

5 2

. . .

1 3

1 4

. . .

1 5

11

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

5 9

. . .

. . .

33

2 0

3 2

4 8

63

. . .

11

11

. . .

30

20

. . .

11

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

2 4

. . .

6

1 6

2 7

173

. . .

. . .

1 8

. . .

1 6

9

1 4

. . .

. . .

. . .

*..

. . .

3

3 9

. . .

1 0

3

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

5

4

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

.*.

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

All species 331,924 150,670 81,285 47,252 26,028 14,736 6,615 2,843 1,245 1,187 6 3

Table Il.-Volume of timber on timberland by classes of timber and

by softwoods and hardwoods, east Oklahoma, 1986

Class of timber All species Softwood Hardwood

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Million cubic feet- - - - - - - - -

Sawtimber trees:

Saw-log portion lJ55.7 647.5 508.2

Upper-stem portion 153.7 73.4 80.3

Total 1.309.4 720.9 588.5

Poletimber trees 909.7 276.5 633.2

All growing stock 2,219.l 997.4 1,221.7

Rough trees 705.7 33.4 672.3

Rotten trees 138.2 2.5 135.7

Salvable dead trees 24.6 6.6 18.0

All timber 3,087.6 1,039.g 2,047.7

25
Table Ia.-Volume of growing stock and sawtimber on timberland by ownership classes and by softwoods and

hardwoods, east Oklahoma, 1986

Ownership class

Growing stock Sawtimber

All species softwood Hardwood All species Softwood Hardwood

--__-. Million cubic feet - - - - - - -

National forest 249.5 169.0 80.5

Other public 175.7 56.7 119.1

Forest industry 507.1 349.9 157.2

Farmer 548.2 124.6 423.6

Miscellaneous private 738.6 297.2 441.4

All ownerships 2,219.l 997.4 1,221.7

_____-_-- Million board feet - . - - - - -

985.8 712.2 273.5

604.2 191.6 412.7

1,594.4 1,264.l 330.3

1,540.2 489.2 1,051.l

1,963.8 1,023.l 940.7

6,688.5 3,680.2 3,008.3

Table 13.-Volume of growing stock on timberland by species and diameter class, east Oklahoma, 1986

Species

Diameter class (inches at breast height)

All 5.0- 7.0- 9.0- ll.O- 13.0- 15.0- 17.0- 19.0- X0- 29.0&

classes 6.9 8.9 10.9 12.9 14.9 16.9 18.9 20.9 28.9 larger

--

Shortleaf pine

Loblolly pine

Redcedar

Total softwoods

_---____________________________ Million cubic feet _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ -

875.8 94.7 145.4 191.1 195.8 136.6 71.2 29.1 8.3 3.6 ...

110.8 21.8 8.5 8.5 12.8 13.2 8.4 11.2 6.4 19.9 ..’

10.8 3.1 3.0 1.8 0.9 1.6 ... 0.5 . . . . . . . . .

997.4 119.6 157.0 201.3 209.5 151.4 79.7 40.8 14.7 23.4 ..,

Select white oaks

Select red oaks

Other white oaks

Other red oaks

Sweet pecan

Water hickory

Other hickories

Persimmon

Hard maple

Soft maple

Boxelder

Sweetgum

Blackgum

White ash

Other ashes

Sycamore

Cottonwood

Basswood

Willow

Black walnut

Black cherry

American elm

Other elms

River birch

Hackberry

Blask locust

Other locusts

Sassafras

Other commercial

Total hardwoods

115.8

88.5

310.6

272.3

10.1

0.5

145.9

1.6

1.5

11.1

3.2

24.0

16.9

16.8

38.1

23.8

40.9

0.2

4.1

3.8

2.9

14.3

45.2

2.5

18.9

0.3

5.1

1.4

19.5

8.9

68.7

24.5

0.8

. . .

29.2

1.2

. . .

1.7

0.5

2.1

1.6

2.8

5.1

1.3

0.8

22.4 25.6

10.4 14.4

75.6 59.0

42.5 45.7

0.7 0.7

. . . . . .

33.4 29.1

13.7

12.2

37.8

42.0

0.4

. . .

19.9

0.4

0.4

1.5

. . .

4.9

2.1

2.0

6.4

4.3

3.3

. . .

12.5 8.0

9.8 7.5

33.1 19.5

40.0 27.0

1.8 0.6

. . . . . .

18.0 9.9

. . . . .

0.4

1.1

1.0

3.2

1.5

3.4

4.9

3.1

3.2

. . .

0.2

0.3

0.9

2.9

12.9

. . .

. . .

0.7

1.0

0.8

5.2

4.5

3.0

2.7

1.4

2.7

. . .

6.7

6.7

8.6

22.6

0.5

. . .

3.1

. . .

. . .

2.8

4.1

3.7

15.3

0.4

. . .

1.1

. . .

. . .

1.1

0.6

2.3

1.9

2.4

9.0

3.0

3.2

0.2

. . . .

0.3

0.6

0.8

9.7

0.4

3.0

..*

. . .

1.2

0.4

3.2

3.4

1.4

3.7

4.0

1.3

. . .

0.2

. . .

0.3

2.0

10.7

0.2

2.4

0.3

. . .

0.8

. . . *..

1.0 1.9

0.9 0.6

0.4 0.4

2.4 1.3

4.1 1.1

0.9 0.4

3.9 1.5

. . . . . .

1.6

0.4

5.5

. . .

1.9

0.3

0.3

. . .

0.4

0.4

2.2

5.1

. . .

2.3

.,.

0.6

. . .

. . .

0.4

. . .

. . .

0.5

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

1.5

0.2

0.7

3.8

0.6

3.0

. . .

0.3

0.2

. . .

0.4

0.5

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

3.5

. . .

. . .

1.7

0.9

1.2

2.5

5.0

. . .

0.4

0.5

. . .

1.5

0.5

..*

0.3

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

4.4

8.6

4.6

11.9

3.7

0.5

2.4

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

1.7

. . .

0.2

1.2

2.7

17.9

. . .

. . .

0.8

. . .

0.7

0.5

0.6

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . . 1.4 0.7 0.5

1,221.7 i86.0 225.9.3 162.2 151.0 98.8 59.5 45.5 62.3

0.2

6.0

. . .

‘0.9

0.5

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

1.1

0.6

. . .

. . .

. . .

.*.

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

All species 2,219.l 305.5 382.9 422.6 371.7 302.4 178.4 100.3 60.2 85.8 9.2

26
Table 14.-‘Volume of sawtimber on timberland by species and diameter class, east Oklahoma, 1986

Species

Shortleaf pine

Loblolly pine

Redcedar

Total softwoods

Diameter class (inches at breast height)

All 90 110 130 150 170 190 21 0 29.0&

classes

10:9- 12:9- 14:9- 1i9- 1i9- 20:9-

L- 2i9- larger___~~

---------________-_____________

,__ Million board feet - - - - - - _ - -- _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

3204.9 831.3 983.5 738.8 407.7 170.0 50.5 23.0 . . .

454.7 37.7 63.2 71.8 48.7 67.1 41.9 124.3 . . .

20.6 6.9 3.8 7.7 . . . 2.3 . . . . . . . . .

3,680.2 876.0 1,050.4 818.2 456.4 239.4 92.5 147.4 . . .

Select white oaks 242.9 ... 59.2 60.7 42.9 38.1 16.4 24.7 0.9

Select red oaks 290.0 ... 55.6 48.3 39.7 37.9 23.3 51.7 33.5

Other white oaks 557.8 ... 179.8 171.0 108.3 48.7 22.2 27.8 . . .

Other red oaks 801.3 ... 172.7 200.4 139.4 123.8 88.9 70.5 5.5

Sweet pecan 38.9 ... 1.3 9.5 2.6 2.8 2.4 18.1 2.2

Water hickory 2.8 .** . . . . . . ..* . . . . . . 2.8 . . .

Other hickories 269.7 ... 87.4 89.9 53.7 16.7 6.4 15.6 . . .

Persimmon 1.6 ... 1.6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hard maple 6.3 1.. 2.0 4.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . .*.

Soft maple 36.4 ..’ 5.2 5.5 5.7 . . . 20.0 . . . . . .

Boxelder 6.1 ... . . . 3.9 2.2 ‘.. . . . . . . . .

Sweetgum 80.4 ‘.. 20.7 24.6 17.2 8.2 . . . 9.6 . . .

Blackgum 57.2 “. 8.8 19.7 17.3 1.2 10.2 . . . . . .

White ash 42.7 ..’ 8.2 15.9 7.9 4.3 4.8 1.6 . . .

Other ashes 95.3 . . . 27.3 12.1 19.7 22.9 6.7 6.6 . . .

Sycamore 81.9 . . . 17.0 6.1 21.2 3.4 14.1 16.3 3.8

Cottonwood 197.3 . . . 13.2 12.3 5.9 18.1 32.2 112.3 3.4

Willow 17.5 . . . . . . 4.1 9.8 1.7 1.9 . . . . . .

Black walnut 16.8 . . . 1.0 3.6 3.4 1.4 2.9 4.5 . . .

Black cherry 5.6 . . . 1.4 2.0 2.2 . . . . . . . . . . . .

American elm 45.0 *.. 11.0 13.0 6.2 2.2 8.8 3.8 . . .

Other elms 61.6 ... 24.6 21.5 6.5 2.5 2.9 3.6 .

River birch 10.7 ... . . . 4.5 2.3 . . . . . . 3.9 . . .

Hackberry 36.5 ... 9.4 18.4 7.4 . . . 1.4 . . . . . .

Other locusts 6.0 ..* 2.3 1.5 2.2 . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total hardwoods Y,lJ08.3 . . . 709.7 752.7 523.8 334.0 265.5 373.5 49.2

All species 6,688.5 876.0 1,760.l 1,570.g 980.1 573.4 358.0 520.9 49.2

Table 15.-Volume of sawtimber on timberland by species and tree grade, east Oklahoma, 1986

Species All grades Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4

Yellow pines

__________________-- Million board feet- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - -

3,659.5 451.3 781.0 2,427.3 .‘.

Redcedar 20.6 20.6 . . . . . . . . .

Total softwoods 3,680.2 471.9 - 781 .o 2,427.3 ...

Select white-red oaks

Other white-red oaks

Hickory

Hard maple

Sweetgum

Tupelo and blackgum

Ash-walnut-black cherry

Other hardwoods

Total hardwoods

532.9 52.0 134.3 198.2 148.4

1,359.l 45.5 190.3 603.7 519.7

311.4 15.0 49.0 132.9 114.5

6.3 . . . . . . . . . 6.3

80.4 4.4 23.7 36.7 15.6

57.2 3.3 17.5 25.2 11.1

160.4 36.9 42.5 72.7 8.3

500.6 155.1 122.2 161.0 62.3

3,008.3 312.2 579.5 1,230.4 886.2

All species 6,688.5 784.1 1,360.5 3,657.7 886.2

2 7
Table 16.-Average net annual growth and average annual removals ofgrowing stock on timberland, by species, east Oklahoma, 1986

Species Growth Removals

Yellow pines

Cypress

Redcedar

Total softwoods

_ _ _ _ _ Million cubic feet- - - - - - -

45.2 53.8

. . . 0.1

0.7 0.5

45.9 54.4

Select white-red oaks 7.1

Other white-red oaks 21.7

Hickory 4.1

Hard maple 0.1

Sweetgum 0.6

Tupelo and blackgum 0.1

Ash-walnut-black cherry 2.1

Other hardwoods 2.7

Total hardwoods 38.5

All species 84.4 83.9

3.2

17.0

3.5

. . .

1.4

0.5

0.9

3.1

29.5

Table 17.-Net annual growth and removals of growing stock on timberland by ownership classes and by

-

softwoods and hardwoods, east Oklahoma, 1986

Net annual growth Annual removals

Ownership class W species Softwood Hardwood All species Softwood Hardwood

-_ ------_____________ Millioncubicfeet ------_-_ ___----------- --

National forest 7.5 5.7 1.8 4.3 2.7 1.6

Other public 7.7 2.2 5.5 2.2 0.9 1.2

Forest industry 22.0 17.4 4.6 50.7 40.0 10.7

Farmer 19.1 5.4 13.7 11.3 1.2 10.2

Miscellaneous private 28.2 15.3 12.9 15.4 9.6 5.8

All ownerships 84.4 45.9 38.5 83.9 54.4 29.5

Table Id.-Average net annual growth and average annual removals of sawtimber on timberland, by species, east Oklahoma, 1986

Species Growth Removals

Yellow pines

Cypress

Redcedar

Total softwoods

_ _ _ --Million board feet- - - - -

188.1 203.6

0.1 0.4

0.5 0.2

188.7 204.2

Select white-red oaks 22.0

Other white-red oaks 62.1

Hickory 9.0

Hard maple 0.5

Sweetgum 4.2

Tupelo and blackgum 0.9

Ash-walnut-black cherry 8.3

Other hardwoods 15.8

Total hardwoods 122.7

8.8

44.7

10.8

.*.

4.3

2.0

1.5

-3%

All species 311.4 285.7

28
Table lg.-Net annualgrowth and removals of iawtimber on timberland by ownership classes and by softwoods and

hardwoods, east Oklahoma, 1986

Ownership class

Net annual growth Annual removals

All species Softwood Hardwood All species Softwood llardwood

-

National forest

Other public

Forest industry

Farmer

______________________ - - -Million board feet- _ _ _ - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

32.7 26.3 6.4 12.9 9.5 3.5

33.1 8.8 24.3 4.5 2.3 2.1

77.5 66.9 10.6 183.3 155.3 28.0

74.0 26.1 47.9 38.9 4.1 34.8

Miscellaneous private 94.1 60.5 33.6 46.1 33.0 13.1

All ownerships 311.4 188.7 122.7 285.7 204.2 81.5

Table 20.-Average annual mortality ofgrowing stock and sawtimber on timberland, by species,

east Oklahoma, 1986

Yellow pines

Total softwoods

Select white-red oaks

Other white-red oaks

Hickory

Sweetgum

Tupelo and blackgum

Ash-walnut-black cherry

Other hardwoods

Total hardwoods

All species

Growing stock Sawtimber

Million cubic feet Million board feet

2.8 8.2

2.8 8.2

1.2 3.4

4.5 9.5

2.1 6.6

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

0.6 1.2

5.7 19.8

14.1 40.6

16.9 48.8

Table al-Average annual mortality ofgrowing stock and sawtimber on timberland by ownership classes and by

softwoods and hardwoods, east Oklahoma, 1986

Ownership class

Growing-stock Sawtimber

All species Softwood Hardwood All species Softwood Hardwood

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -Million cubic feet- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 - -Million board feet- - - - - - - -

National forest 0.8 0.4 0.4 2.4 1.5 0.9

Other public 1.6 . . . 1.6 5.3 0.2 5.1

Forest industry 3.4 1.4 2.0 11.7 4.1 7.7

Farmer 4.2 0.1 4.1 10.0 0.5 9.5

Miscellaneous private 6.9 0.8 6.1 19.3 1.9 17.4

All ownerships 16.9 2.8 14.1 48.8 8.2 40.6

Table 22-Average annual mortality of growing stock and sawtimber on timberland by causes of death and by

softwoods and hardwoods, east Oklahoma, 1986

Ownership class

Growing-stock

All species Soitwood

-___

Sawtimber

Hardwood All species Softwood Hardwood

Bark beetles

Other insects

Disease

Fire

Beaver

Weather

Suppression

Other

All causes

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ -Million cubic feet- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -Million board feet- - - - - - - -

0.8 0.8 . . . 3.1 3.1 . . . 0.1 0.1 . . . . . . . . . . . .

11.5 0.9 10.5 31.4 2.2 29.3

0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 . . .

0.3 . . . 0.3 0.2 . . . 0.2

2.8 0.6 2.3 11.9 2.3 9.6

0.1 0.1 0.1 . . . . . . . . .

0.7 0.1 0.6 2.0 0.5 1.5

16.9 2.8 14.1 48.8 8.2 40.6
Birdsey, Richard A.; and May, Dennis M. 1988. Timber resources of east

Oklahoma. Resour. Bull SO-135. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station.

29p.

Presents the principal findings of the fifth forest survey of east

Oklahoma and the changes that have occurred since earlier surveys.

Trends in forest area, ownership, forest type, stand structure, stocking, timber volume, growth, removals, mortality, management opportunities, and timber products output are discussed.

Additional keywords: forest inventory, tree distribution, basal

area.

* “. S. GWERNMEN’I’ YHlNTlNG OPl’lCt’: 1988 - 566019 / 85014

_,.”