United States

Department of

Agriculture

It0 il.“.,

m

T

U S, Forest Service

 Southern Forest

Research Note

so-340

Experiment Station October 1987

Status of Privately Owned Harvested

Timberland in East Oklahoma, 19764986

William H. McWilliams

SUMMARY

Commercial harvesting impacted 1 million acres, or

27 percent of the privately owned timerland in east

Oklahoma between 1976 and 1986. Timberland was

harvested in equal amounts on forest industry land and

nonindustrial private land. Clearcutting was the preferred method of harvest on forest industry land. Nearly

all harvesting on nonindustrial land was conducted as

partial cuts. Stocking of pine on all private lands

exceeded 60 percent in 58 percent of the pine and

mixed pine-hardwood stands harvested during the

period.

Additional keywords: Clearcut, high-grading, pine

regeneration, timber supply.

INTRODUCTION

The Forest Inventory and Analysis Unit (FIA) of

Southern Forest Experiment Station conducts periodic

inventories of forest resources in the Midsouth region

of the United States. Two aspects of these surveysharvesting practices and pine regeneration-track the

status of privately owned timberland. Monitoring of

pine regeneration has become especially important

because of recent findings that softwood inventory has

declined in southeast Oklahoma where softwood removals now exceed growth, and a finding similar to that

for the whole Midsouth region (Birdsey and Bertelson

,1987; USDA-FS 1987).

DATA COLLECTION

Data were collected during the 1986 inventory of east

Oklahoma (fig. 1). Forest acreage and timber volume

data were secured by a systematic sampling method

involving both a forest-nonforest classification on aerial

photographs and on-the-ground measurements of trees

at sample locations. The sample locations were at

intersections of a grid of lines spaced 3 miles apart.

On-the-ground measurements included data describing crop tree removals, management activity,

natural disturbance, and the stocking of well established pine seedlings (6 inches or greater in height).

Sample locations were assigned a code describing any

harvest since previous measurement in 1976. Field

crews used existing plot conditions along with personal

judgment to distinguish between harvesting and other

management activities such as commercial thinning,

precommerical thinning, or stand improvement

cuttings.

HARVESTING

The last 10 to 15 years of forestry in east Oklahoma

have been characterized by increased harvesting of

timberland (Thomas 1985). Twenty-seven percent of

the privately owned east Oklahoma timberland surveyed in 1976 showed evidence in 1986 of commercial

harvesting (table 1). Commercially harvested timberland included stands that underwent clearcuts or

partial cuts. Partially cut stands included those receiving heavy cutting such as diameter-limit cuts (see

Definition of Terms section). The 1 million acres

harvested was split equally between forest industry and

nonindustrial private owners. Forest industry timberland was most heavily impacted, however, as half of the

industry’s holdings showed signs of harvest. This

finding is in line with conditions on forest industry land

in the 1986 forest survey of east Texas (McWilliams and

Skove 1987). Less than 20 percent of the east Oklahoma

nonindustrial private timberland was harvested.

Southern Forest Experiment Station/l-102lO U.S. Postal Services Bldg., 701 Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, La. 70113

Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Serving Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, E. Oklahoma, Tennessee, E. Texas, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands

1
MILES

ov30 40

9

1 -I

M’JSKOGEE I -: ---qiC\ST

\

+i%iiii

1 Pm

LE F%RE

i

/ PITTSBURG

I

r

-- p,,*w,,,\ . v.,P”’

, LATIMER

I

r-- .-_-_--a

Figure l.-- The forest survey regions of east Oklahoma.

William H. MtiWilliams i s research forester, Southern Forest Experiment Station, Forest Service-USDA, Starkville, MS.

2
Table 1 .-Area of timberland harvested’ by ownership class, past forest type, and

method of harvest for private owners, east Oklahoma, 1976-1986

Ownership class

and Total past Total timberland Method of harvest

past forest type timberland harvested Clearcuts Partial cuts2

Forest industry

Pine types

Mixed pine-hardwoods

Hardwood types

Total

Nonindustrial private

Pine types

Mixed pine-hardwoods

Hardwood types

Total

Total private

Pine types

Mixed pine-hardwoods

Hardwood types

Total

________________________ Thousandacres________________________

436.0 254.4 184.1 70.3

281.2 150.4 126.7 23.7

274.1 92.4 63.2 29.2

991.3 497.2 374.0 123.2

265.4 92.4 16.5 75.9

337.1 66.7 12.4 54.3

2,167.0 369.1 17.1 352.0

2.769.5 528.2 46.0 482.2

701.4 346.8 200.6 146.2

618.3 217.1 139.1 78.0

2,441 .l 461.5 80.3 381.2

39760.8 1,025.4 420.0 605.4

‘Excludes precommercial thinnings, commercial thinnings in poletimber stands,

and single-tree selection.

21ncIudes pine selection, diameter-limit, and salvage cuts. Thinnings in poletimber

stands are excluded; heavy thinnings of dominant trees in sawtimber stands are

included.

Cutting patterns of the two ownerships varied considerably in terms of forest types affected and harvest

method used. Nearly two-thirds of harvest activity on

forest industry timberland involved clearcuts in pine

and mixed pine-hardwood stands.

Harvesting on nonindustrial private land was oriented

towards partial cutting. More than 90 percent of the

cutting was conducted in this manner. Almost threefourths of the partial cuts occurred in hardwood stands.

Most of the partial-cut hardwood stands were “highgraded”. High-grading occurs when the most valuable

trees of a stand are selectively removed. Both the value

and vigor of a healthy forest stand are destroyed by

high-grading. This practicecaused asignificant decline

in the percentage of pine and select-oak sawtimber

volume remaining in partial-cut hardwood stands on

nonindustrial land (fig. 2).

For both ownerships combined, the areas harvested

for each of the three forest types were roughly equal,

but stands containing pine timber were most heavily

cut. Forty-three percent of the timberland in pine and

mixed pine-hardwood types was harvested. Only 19

percent of the hardwood type timberland was cut.

PINE REGENERATION

Stocking is quantified by comparing existing tree

stocking, in terms of numbers of trees or basal area, to

“normal” stocking standards used by FIA (see Definition of Terms section). Inventory plots are characterized as understocked or overstocked in relation to

this standard. Pine regeneration on harvested sites can

be assessed by examining the degree of pine stocking

following harvest.

The extent of pine regeneration on harvested pine

and mixed pine-hardwood stands is an important factor

affecting future pinetimber supplies. Fifty-eight percent

of the563,900 acres of these stands that were harvested

exhibited a high stocking of pine following harvest

(table 2). An additional 23 percent was classifed as

having medium pine stocking. Stands with medium

stocking can often be considered as having adequate

pine regeneration since young pine trees usually

dominate hardwoods 10 to 15 yearsafterestablishment.

This process is hastened through hardwood control

measures, especially in stands with considerable

hardwood competition.

Pine regeneration was more successful on forest in3
1976 1986

SELECT OAKS

PINE d OTHER

SOFTWOODS

Figure P.--Distribution of sawtimber volume by species group in partial-cut hardwood stands on nonindustrial private timberland, east Oklahoma, 1976 and 1986.

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

forest type, and pine stocking class forprivate owners, east

Oklahoma, 1976-1986

Ownership class

and

past forest type Total Low

Pine stocking class2

Medium High

_______________ Thousand acres ___---_--------

Forest industry

Pine types 254.4 22.5 29.2 202.7

Mixed pine-hardwoods 150.4 28.8 58.4 63.4

Hardwood types 92.4 28.9 34.6 28.9

Total 497.2 80.0 122.2 295.0

Nonindustrial private

Pine types 92.4 18.2 12.0 82.2

Mixed pine-hardwoods 66.7 36.7 30.0 . . .

Hardwood types 369.1 356.5 12.8

Total 526.2 411.4 54.6 62.2

Total private

Pine types 346.8 40.7 41.2 284.9

Mixed pine-hardwoods 217.1 65.3 66.4 63.4

Hardwood types 461.5 385.4 47.2 28.9

Total 1,025.4 491.4 176.8 357.2

lExcludes precommercial thinning% commercial thinnings in poletimber stands, and single-tree selection.

2Low indicates O-29 percent stocked with pine (all size classes),

medium indicates 30-59 percent stocked with pine (all size classes),

and high indicates 60 percent or greater stocked with pine (all size

classes).

dustry timberland than on nonindustrial private timberland (fig. 3). Eighty-seven percent of the harvested pine

and mixed pine-hardwood timberland owned by forest

industry had medium or high stocking, in contrast to65

percent on nonindustrial tracts.

Regeneration of pure pine stands was quite successful for both ownerships. Only 12 percent of the

harvested pine stands had low pine stocking.

Conversion of hardwood type timberland to pine was

apparent on forest industry land. More than two-thirds

of the harvested hardwood stands (63,500 acres) owned

by forest industries had medium or high stocking of

pine.

CONCLUSIONS

Information on the status of harvested timberland

provides insight into future timber supplies. The heavy

concentration of cutting on forest industry timberland

will certainly impact future availability. Long-term pine

timber supplies from cut-over forest industry stands

should be secure due to successful pine regeneration

in pine and mixed pine-hardwood stands as well as the

conversion of hardwood forests to pine. However, a

continued investment in stand management will most

likely be needed to ensure future merchantability of

regenerated stands. Furthermore, 10 to 15 years will

pass before these stands become marketable for-timber

products. Nonindustrial forests will most likely undergo

increased cutting when less supply is available from

forest industry timberland in the short-term future.

4
FOREST INDUSTRY NONINDUSTRIAL PRIVATE

LOW PINE MEDIUM PINE

STOCK ING STOCKING

Figure 3.-Status of privately-owned pine and mixed pine-hardwood type timberland, east Oklahoma, 1976 to 1966.

,DEFlNlTlON OF TERMS

F/A.-Forest Inventory and Analysis unit of the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern

Forest Experiment Station.

forest type.-A classification of FIA plots according

to the relative stocking of pine and hardwood trees

tallied.

Pine: Forests in which pine species comprise the

plurality of all live tree stocking.

Mixed pine-hardwoods: Forests in which pines comprise 25 to50 percent of the stocking, and hardwood

speciescomprisethepluralityofalllivetreestocking.

Hardwood: Forests in which hardwood species,

singly or in combination, comprise a plurality of all

live tree stocking, except where pines comprise 25

to50 percentof thestocking (see previousdefinition

for mixed pine-hardwoods).

Harvesting.-A classification assigned to FIA plots

that have undergone some form of crop tree removal

since the last survey. Precommercial thinning% commercial thinnings in poletimber stands, and the removal

of a small number of trees for firewood, posts, or other

products are excluded.

Clearcut: Stands that undergo removal of all utilizable and/or nonutilizable trees.

Seed tree and shelterwood: Heavy cutting of a

stand with a small number of crop trees left to

provide seed or shade to establish a new stand.

Partial cut: Pine-selection cuts, diameter-limit cutting, highgrading, or any other sawtimber cutting

practice that leaves a residual stand of potential

crop trees and/orcull trees. Thinnings in poletimber

stands are excluded; heavy thinnings of dominant

trees in sawtimber stands are included.

Salvage: Removal of damaged or salvable dead

trees, often leaving a gap in the stand.

Pine stocking c/ass.-A classification of timberland

according to the degree of live pine tree stocking. All

size classes are included.

High stocking: 60 percent or greater stocked with

pine.

Medium stocking: 30 to 59 percent stocked with

pine.

Low stocking: 0 to 29 percent stocked with pine.

Stocking.-A measurement of the extent to which the

growth potential of the site is utilized by trees or

preempted by vegetative cover. Stocking is determined

by comparing the stand density in terms of number of

trees or basal area with a specified standard. The

tabulation below shows the density standard in terms of

trees per acre, by size class, required for full stocking:

D.b.h. Number of trees

(inches) per acre

seedlings 600

2 560

4 460

6 340

8 240

10 155

12 115

14 90

16 72

18 60

20 51

22 42

24 36

26 31

28 27

30 24

5
Timberland-Land at least 16.7 percent stocked by ’

forest trees of any size, or formerly having such tree

cover, capable of producing crops of industrial wood. .*

Land that is currently developed for nonforest use or

withdrawn from timber utilization through statute or

administrative regulation is excluded.

LITERATURE CITED

Birdsey, R. A.; Bertelson, 0. F. 1987. Forest statistics for

southeast Oklahoma counties. Resour. Bull. SO-l 19.

New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station;

30 p.

McWilliams, W.H.; Skove, D. J. 1987. Status of privately

owned harvested timberland in east Texas 1975

1986. Res. Note SO-338. New Orleans, LA: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern

Forest Experiment Station; 6 p.

Thomas, C. E. 1985. Oklahoma midcycle survey shows

change in forest resource trends. Resour. Bull. SO100. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; Southern Forest Experiment

Station; 19 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. The

South’s fourth forest: alternatives for the future. Govt.

Print. Off., Washington, D.C. (in press).

6