United States Department of Agriculture

Forest 

Service

General Technical 

Report NRS-132

Northern 

Research Station April 2014

Silvicultural Guide for Northern 

Hardwoods in the Northeast 

William B. Leak

Mariko Yamasaki

Robbo Holleran 
Visit our homepage at: http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/

Published by: For additional copies:

U.S. FOREST SERVICE U.S. Forest Service 

11 CAMPUS BLVD SUITE 200 Publications Distribution

NEWTOWN SQUARE PA 19073 359 Main Road

Delaware, OH 43015-8640

Fax: (740)368-0152

April 2014 Email: nrspubs@fs.fed.us

Abstract

This revision of the 1987 silvicultural guide (Leak et al. 1987) includes updated and 

expanded silvicultural information on northern hardwoods as well as additional information 

on wildlife habitat and the management of mixed-wood and northern hardwood-oak 

stands. The prescription methodology is simpler and more field-oriented. This guide also 

includes an appendix of familiar tables and charts useful to practicing field foresters. 

Northern hardwood forest types can be managed as even- or uneven-aged stands using 

a variety of silvicultural practices. In planning these practices, there are many factors to 

consider including access, species composition, desired regeneration, wildlife habitat 

needs and environmental concerns. The aim of this document is to provide guidelines 

to assist the manager in choosing the right methods to meet the landowner objectives 

consistent with stand conditions.

The Authors

WILLIAM B. LEAK, research forester, and MARIKO YAMASAKI, research wildlife 

biologist, are with the U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Station, in Durham, NH 

03824.

ROBBO HOLLERAN is a consulting forester in Chester, VT 05143.

Cover Photos

Panorama of group/patch selection harvest, White Mountain National Forest, NH. 

Patches vary in size and shape to efficiently remove the mature, overmature, and 

defective (MOD) timber and create habitat for wildlife such as (clockwise from upper left: 

black bear and cub; bull moose; American woodcock and chick; fisher; and a weasel and 

mouse). Background photo by C. Costello, U.S. Forest Service; wildlife photos © Susan 

C. Morse, Jericho, VT, used with permission. Cover photo collage design by Ken Dudzik, 

U.S. Forest Service.

Manuscript received for publication 16 April 2013
Contents

Purpose and Scope............................................................................. 1

Regional Conditions ............................................................................ 1

Management Objectives...................................................................... 2

Species and Sites................................................................................ 2

Silvicultural Systems............................................................................ 4

Uneven-age Management: Single-tree Selection ................................ 4

Uneven-age Management: Group/Patch Selection............................ 12

Uneven-age Management: Improvement Cutting .............................. 14

Even-age Management ..................................................................... 14

Intermediate Treatments .................................................................... 20

Mixed-wood Stands ........................................................................... 25

Inventory and Prescriptions For Uneven- and Even-age 

Management ................................................................................ 26

Alternative Silvicultural Systems........................................................ 29

Special options .................................................................................. 30

Literature Cited .................................................................................. 32

Appendix............................................................................................ 37
Page intentionally left blank
1

Purpose and Scope

This is the fourth silvicultural guide for northern 

hardwoods (beech-birch-maple) in the Northeast. This 

guide is a revision of the most recent one published 

in 1987 (Leak et al. 1987). This new guide provides 

updated information compiled from decades of research 

and personal experience on approaches and results for 

a complete range of silvicultural practices for timber 

management as well as related implications for wildlife 

habitat development. Additional information on these 

topics, as well as additional forestry related subjects, is 

found in Good Forestry in the Granite State (Bennett 

2010). For detailed discussions of silvicultural systems 

and terminology, please consult texts by Smith et al. 

(1997) and Nyland (2002; reissued 2007).

This guide is intended to provide ample information on 

the major silvicultural problems facing New England 

forests: (1) the need for improved value and diversity 

of species composition (tree and wildlife species) and 

stand structure for a range of objectives through better 

regeneration practices; and (2) the need for improved 

timber quality/value through better marking and 

harvesting practices and control of stocking. Since trees 

grow, forests naturally get too crowded for optimum 

growth. Crowding is the single most important factor 

affecting the health, growth, and vigor of most forest 

trees. Regenerating stands might have 10,000 trees per 

acre, and with natural development, at least 98 percent 

of these trees die by suppression and other natural factors 

by the time the stand reaches maturity. Silviculture 

provides methods to guide stand development by 

selecting the trees that make it to maturity to achieve 

both timber and wildlife objectives, along with creating 

desired stand structure. Also, when it is time to promote 

natural regeneration, the forester can provide conditions 

that are favorable to desired species without resorting to 

artificial regeneration.

This guide differs appreciably from the 1987 version. 

It contains more long-term data and less specific 

prescriptions (i.e., more supportive information and 

fewer rules). It is intended to provide a basis for wellinformed, on-the-ground decisions to meet a wide array 

of owner objectives, financial constraints, markets, 

sites, wildlife habitat and ecological considerations, and 

regulatory limitations. Economic returns and predictions, 

although very important, are omitted, due to situational 

variability and a fluctuating economic climate. However, 

the general approach is to provide low-cost, lowinvestment, and commercially viable options.

Most of the long-term information is from the Bartlett 

Experimental Forest in central New Hampshire, an 

area with granitic soils of moderate productivity but 

with a wide range of site conditions. This information is 

tempered by decades of observations and site evaluation 

research throughout New England and adjacent areas, 

including areas with highly productive calcareous sites.

There are other silvicultural approaches being successfully 

taught and applied in New England (e.g., rehabilitation 

forestry, ecological forestry, and natural disturbance 

silviculture). These approaches are briefly described 

and cited. The guide also summarizes special options 

related to silvicultural practice that should be discussed 

as appropriate with interested landowners (e.g., reserve 

stands, carbon management, use of chemicals and 

others). In assessing silvicultural options for a property, 

these features should be considered along with wildlife 

management opportunities. The wide array of problems, 

objectives, and practices within this resilient forest type 

requires a wide range of options.

Regional Conditions

Northern hardwoods and associated mixed-wood types 

occupy at least 20 million acres in New England and New 

York; similar types occur further west and south, and 

into adjacent Canada. This area is diverse, with different 

problems, markets, soils, species associations, landowner 

goals, and options throughout the range. This diversity also 

creates a resiliency shown by response to past disturbances. 

Forest products include veneer, saw logs, boltwood, 

pulpwood, fuelwood, and biomass. This variety provides 

opportunities to grow and market a variety of species 

and tree qualities, therefore providing for a high level of 

silvicultural practice. These forests also provide habitat 

for more than 200 vertebrate wildlife species, excellent 

summer and winter recreational opportunities, watershed 

protection, and overall biological diversity.
2

Management Objectives

Landowners in the northern hardwood region have many 

reasons for owning forest land. Industrial ownerships 

manage primarily for commercial forest products coupled 

with strategies to maintain wildlife habitat, visuals, and 

water quality. Many forest landowners are primarily 

interested in wildlife habitat, recreation, and esthetics, 

but need some level of income from forest products 

to meet the costs of ownership. Also, some state tax 

abatement programs require active timber management, 

which provides further incentive to manage forest land 

for various goals.

These objectives are often tailored to meet the 

requirements of easements, third party certification, 

and complicated family or corporate ownerships. 

Once objectives are clarified in terms of desired future 

condition, forest structure, economic objectives, and 

various limitations, sound application of silvicultural 

principles can be applied to meet a range of owner 

objectives.

The following silvicultural guidelines are applied on a 

forest stand basis. A stand is an area of fairly uniform 

site, type, and age/size class distribution that can be 

reasonably treated as a silvicultural unit; location and 

frequency of access may also be a consideration in 

defining stands. On small ownerships, a stand may be 5 

to 10 acres. On larger industrial properties, a stand may 

be several hundred acres. Stands are defined and located 

prior to defining the appropriate silvicultural treatments.

Species and Sites

Major species and their characteristics are summarized 

in Table 1. Many other species are included as minor 

components of northern hardwood associations, adding 

incredible species diversity. Silvical characteristics are the 

key to understanding silviculture. Practitioners should be 

Species

Shade 

tolerance

Early relative 

height growth

Relative site 

requirements

Natural 

pruning

Good seed crop 

interval (yrs) Sprouting vigor

Sugar maple 

Acer saccharum

moderately 

tolerant

slow to 

moderate

high poor to 

medium

3-7 moderate-small 

stumps

American beech

Fagus grandifolia

very tolerant slow low poor 2-5 moderate-small 

stumps; highroot suckers

Yellow birch

Betula alleghaniensis

intermediate moderate medium to high medium 2-3 low

Paper birch

B. papyrifera

intolerant fast low good 2-3 moderate-small 

stumps

White ash

Fraxinus americana

intermediate 

(more tolerant 

as seedling)

moderate very high good 2-5 moderate to 

high

Red maple

A. rubrum

intermediate moderate low medium 1 high

Aspen

Populus spp.

intolerant very fast low good 4-5 high-root 

suckers

Northern red oak

Quercus rubra

intermediate moderate medium medium 3-5 high

Black cherry

Prunus serotina

intermediate fast low good 1-5 high

Red spruce

Picea rubens

tolerant very slow low poor 3-8 none

Eastern hemlock

Tsuga canadensis

very tolerant very slow low poor 2-4 none

Eastern white pine 

Pinus strobus

intermediate moderate low poor 3-10 none

Table 1.—Silvical characteristics of the important species in northern hardwood forests
3

aware of shade tolerance, regeneration requirements, site 

preference and tolerance, resistance to decay, and insect 

and disease problems for each species in their range. 

Market preferences for species and quality will guide 

economic considerations. Potential for growing larger 

diameter and higher quality saw logs and veneer are 

closely related to site, by species.

Forest types (communities) and related site characteristics 

are in Table 2. However, past disturbances (primarily 

harvesting and land use) may cause significant variability. 

In developing silvicultural prescriptions, it is important 

to be aware of site characteristics and related species 

successional tendencies and silvical characteristics. The 

richest sites supporting sugar maple, ash, and some 

basswood1

 are found on till soils derived from calcareous 

bedrock. These areas usually support a rich ground flora 

with known indicator species. A similar forest type also 

occurs on enriched soils in areas dominated by granite 

or other bedrock sources with low to moderate nutrient 

levels; these soils occur at the base of slopes or terraces, 

with accumulations of organic matter. These rich 

substrates allow for a wider range of silvicultural options. 

However, typical northern hardwoods containing sugar 

maple, yellow birch, and up to perhaps 50 percent 

beech (sometimes more) occur on noncalcareous till 

soils. Beech-red maple types, often with a softwood 

component, are common on noncalcareous sandy tills 

and other lower nutrient sites. Red maple, paper birch, 

and aspen can be reproduced and grown on these sites, 

though expectations for large diameter timber, higher 

quality saw logs and/or rotation age may need to be 

reduced.

Northern red oak is of considerable interest. Red oak 

can develop very high quality saw logs and veneer in 

northern hardwood associations, contributing highly 

to the stand value on both agriculturally disturbed and 

dry or shallow-to-bedrock sites. Red oak regeneration in 

northern hardwood-oak stands is addressed under the 

section on even-age management.

Mixed-wood stands are diverse, including 25 to 65 

percent softwoods, e.g., white pine, hemlock, spruce, 

fir, or cedar. Each of these has silvicultural and wildlife 

characteristics that should be considered in management 

goals. These often occur following harvesting disturbance 

on essentially softwood or variable sites: outwash, 

shallow bedrock, and very shallow (often wet) soils 

underlain with basal till or hardpan. Sometimes past 

agricultural use will produce a softwood component due 

to changes in soil characteristics from grazing, erosion 

or compaction; oak-pine may be a component on these 

disturbed sites. Often, pasture regrowth pine will be 

eventually replaced by hardwoods. Use the white pine 

silvicultural guide (Lancaster and Leak 1978) when 

pine is the featured species, then shift to the hardwood 

guide as hardwoods become more than 50 percent of the 

stocking. Likewise, if stands are more than 50 percent 

hemlock, oak, or spruce-fir, other guides are more 

appropriate. Mixed-woods can be managed to either 

favor a greater proportion of softwoods, hardwoods, or 

maintenance of mixed-wood condition depending on 

specific objectives.

Table 2.—Forest types and associated site characteristics: bedrock source and soils (Leak 1982)

Forest type Characteristic species Bedrock type Soils descriptions

Sugar maple–ash sugar maple, white ash, 

basswood

calcareous well- or moderately well-drained tills

sugar maple, white ash granite, schist enriched

Northern hardwood beech, sugar maple, 

yellow birch

granite, schist well- to moderately well-drained tills 

Beech–red maple beech, red maple granite, schist sandy, loose tills

Mixed-wood hemlock, red spruce, white 

pine, yellow birch, red 

maple

any shallow bedrock; moderately/poorly 

drained basal till or sediments; 

abandoned pasture/cropland

Oak with mixed pine–

hardwood

northern red oak, white 

pine, red maple

any; often with an 

agricultural history

sandy tills, outwash especially

1Scientific names of tree species are reported in Table 1.
4

Silvicultural Systems

Silvicultural systems are planned sequences of practices 

to cope with biological, physical, and economic 

conditions for managing forest stands from establishment 

to maturity or harvest, and potentially continuation 

to manage the succeeding stand (Smith et al. 1997). 

Silvicultural systems are usually defined by the principal 

method of regeneration and the resulting structure of 

the stand. Of course, implementation of these systems 

is impacted by natural disturbances such as wind or ice 

storms. Systems are grouped into two general classes 

based on pattern and sequence of regeneration and the 

resulting stand structure. One system, with variations 

in the practice, creates and/or maintains uneven-aged, 

multi-aged, or all-age stands. The other system and 

variants thereof, creates or maintains stands with one or 

two primary age classes. Alternative approaches are briefly 

described at the end of this guide.

Uneven-age systems consist of single-tree selection 

and group selection (sometimes called group/patch 

to account for larger openings). The stands consist of, 

or develop, at least three age classes. A relatively high 

canopy is maintained over most of the stand. Harvesting 

occurs at somewhat regular intervals, the cutting cycle, 

and harvest entries are regulated so that the stand 

(or groups of stands) is maintained over time. It is 

essential that new age classes are effectively produced 

at nearly every entry. Generally, there are no separate 

cultural operations. Stand improvement with removal 

of defective, low-vigor, or low-value trees occurs as part 

of the harvesting operation, keeping in mind wildlife 

habitat concerns. However, there are instances where 

there could be cultural work within the small even-age 

portions created by group selection.

Even-age systems consist of regeneration harvests or 

pasture abandonment that creates stands with one or 

two primary age classes. These even-age systems include 

clearcutting, patch clearcuts (sometimes defined as 2 

to 10 acres in size), or two age classes created by any of 

several shelterwood approaches. These harvests occur at 

the point of stand maturity, the rotation age. There are 

well-recognized (but optional) intermediate operations 

including noncommercial investments (weeding, 

crop tree release) as well as one or more commercial 

thinnings. Stand improvement takes place as part of these 

intermediate operations.

Various alternative or hybrid systems exist that result 

in essentially two age classes, or more, and do not fit 

traditional uneven-age, or even-age guidelines, but are 

useful and sustainable. As will be discussed at the end of 

the guide, these include rehabilitation forestry, ecological 

forestry, and natural disturbance silviculture. Each of 

these systems can be used to regenerate and grow a full 

range of species and products on a sustainable basis. 

Northern hardwood and associated mixed-wood forests 

are quite variable, and a wide range of approaches are 

effective and practical. This document presents guides 

for getting started. Observe the successes and failures 

of previous generations, test the recommendations on 

specific sites, and apply the concepts discussed in the 

text. Analyze how your stands respond on your sites, and 

be innovative. Northern hardwoods are resilient.

Uneven-age Management: 

Single-tree Selection

This method is the harvesting of single trees, or very 

small groups, generally separated from one another, so 

that a continuous crown canopy is maintained coupled 

with a range of diameter classes (Fig. 1). The application 

of this system requires specification on: 1) stand density 

and structure; 2) marking guidelines; and 3) cutting 

cycle (the time interval between harvest entries). The 

evaluation of single-tree selection approaches involves: 

1) regeneration (species composition); 2) growth and 

yield; and 3) quality development. The chief advantages 

of single-tree selection are that it is a light touch on the 

landscape for those concerned about maintaining an 

unbroken forested appearance, and it provides maximum 

flexibility in choosing trees to take or leave. The system 

is best applied where the current stand contains an 

adequate stocking of quality trees with a component of 

quality sawtimber. It has been used to convert essentially 

even-aged stands to uneven-aged. Single-tree selection: 1) 

regenerates primarily tolerant species: beech (with some 

softwood) on mediocre sites, sugar maple on excellent 

sites with a possible concern regarding species diversity; 

2) maintains a suite of wildlife species associated only 
5

with mature forest (Table 3 and 4); and 3) relies on main 

canopy trees recruited from understory stems that may 

have been suppressed. It is important to be watchful for 

bole/root damage from logging operations, a problem 

that can be minimized by careful choice of machinery 

and access.

With true single-tree selection, it is important to remove 

a portion of the unacceptable growing stock on each 

entry and to maintain a component of vigorous growing 

stock in both the upper and lower crown classes. Also, 

stocking needs to be low enough in some portions to 

create effective regeneration. Since overstory trees are 

eventually accumulated from the mid and lower canopies, 

previous suppression can affect the vigor and quality of 

these potential overstory trees.

Stand Density and Structure

Table 5 shows results from a study of stand density 

and structure (Leak and Gove 2008) on the Bartlett 

Experimental Forest (hereafter referred to as Bartlett.) 

This stand began as an even-age stand but developed an 

understory over time. Stand structure (a range in tree 

sizes) develops rapidly in even-age northern hardwoods, 

especially after a harvest. In general, the best growth 

results occurred with residual basal areas of 60 to 80 ft2

/

acre (trees >4.5 inches diameter breast height [d.b.h.]) 

with at least 25 to 30 ft2 of sawtimber (trees >10.5 inches 

d.b.h.). However, due to differences in species and vigor of 

the growing stock, growth responses were quite variable. 

Note in Table 5 that growth of poletimber is much greater 

under 60 ft2 residual basal area as compared to 80 ft2

, 

i.e., lower basal areas result in a much more responsive 

understory. This stand was beech-red maple on a sandy till 

site, so the specifications on residual sawtimber basal area 

should be considered a minimum. On good/excellent sites 

such as enriched sites or calcareous tills, residual sawtimber 

basal areas of 50 to 60 ft2

 with 80 ft2 total basal area are 

quite feasible. Within this range, it is important to leave 

vigorous trees with high potential quality—commonly 

called acceptable growing stock (AGS) as discussed under 

Marking Guides (page 9). It is more important to leave 

vigorous trees with quality potential than to follow strict 

guidelines on basal area.

Earlier guides (Leak et al. 1987) stressed the importance 

of following a reverse J-shaped stand structure (number 

of trees by d.b.h. class) characterized by a constant 

quotient between numbers of trees in successive d.b.h. 

classes (q-factor). For example, a quotient of 1.5 would 

have about 30 ft2 of poletimber, 20 ft2 of small sawtimber 

and 20 ft2

 of ≥ 16 inches trees retained after harvest.

Figure 1.—Single-tree selection 

on granitic till showing the typical 

heavy beech regeneration. On 

richer soils (e.g., derived from 

calcareous bedrock), there would 

be a much higher proportion of 

sugar maple. Photo by M. Yamasaki, 

U.S. Forest Service.
6

Table 3.—Hardwoods habitat characteristics that provide structural/species diversity for various categories of vertebrate 

species

Wildlife species group and example 

species Habitat characteristics References

Forest wildlife diversity—broad-winged 

hawk (Buteo platypterus), barred owl 

(Strix varia), red-eyed vireo (Vireo 

olivaceus), mourning warbler (Oporornis 

philadelphia), snowshoe hare (Lepus 

americanus), moose (Alces alces)

forest-dominated landscapes; regulated, evenage management with a range of clearcut sizes; 

full-length rotations with < 10 percent of area in an 

unmanaged state; group/patch and some individual 

tree selection; maintain/improve softwoods as 

inclusions and stands; identify and work with the 

variety of within-stand habitat features 

DeGraaf et al. 2005

DeGraaf et al. 2006

Cavity-dwelling wildlife—pileated 

woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), 

brown creeper (Certhia americana), 

northern log-eared bat (Myotis 

septentrionalis), fisher (Pekania 

pennanti), and weasels (Mustela sp.)

Live and dead trees with cavities in a range of sizes, 

and in larger branches; shelter sites under exfoliated 

bark plates; foraging sites

DeGraaf and Shigo 1985

Tubbs et al. 1987

Yamasaki and Leak 2006

Herps

Terrestrial salamanders, e.g.,

red-backed salamander (Plethodon 

cinereus) 

managed and unmanaged forest stands; 

subterranean refugia 

DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2002

McKenny et al. 2006

Hocking et al. 2013

Mole salamanders (Ambystoma sp.)

and wood frogs (Lithobates sylvaticus)

maintain a forest matrix (all ages/size classes) 

at the landscape-scale, subterranean refugia; 

vernal pools within both managed and unmanaged 

stands; variable buffer distances; maintain coarse 

woody material in clearcut units; maintain pool 

characteristics including shade over the pools

Calhoun and deMaynadier 2004

Hermann et al. 2005

Veysey et al. 2009

Freidenfelds et al. 2011 

Birds

Ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) and 

American woodcock (Scolopax minor)

aspen/birch/mixed hardwoods; four age/size classes 

in 2 to 10 acre stands within 40-acre areas; mature 

softwood inclusions/stands for winter cover; natural 

appearing, permanent forest openings 

Wildlife Management Institute 2012a

Wildlife Management Institute 2012b

Ruffed Grouse Society 2013

Gilbart, M. 2012

Early-successional breeding birds—

chestnut-sided warbler (Setophaga 

pensylvanica), common yellowthroat 

(Geothlypis trichas)

clearcuts > 5 acres and some benefit from large 

group/patch selection; greatest use in the first 10 

to 12 years post-cut; periodic cuts every 10 to 12 

years to maintain this ephemeral habitat; diverse 

permanent forest openings

Costello et al. 2000

DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2003

Schlossberg and King 2007; 2009

King et al. 2009

King et al. 2011

Early- and later-successional postfledging habitat—Swainson’s thrush 

(Catharus ustulatus), red-eyed vireo 

(Vireo olivaceus), black-throated green 

warbler (S. virens)

patch clearcuts 5 acres and greater; dense mix of 

hardwood species plus fruit-producing species (e.g., 

pin cherry, raspberries); periodic cuts every 10 to 12 

years to maintain this ephemeral habitat; permanent 

forest opening component

King et al. 2011

Chandler et al. 2012

Later-successional breeding birds—

black-throated blue warbler (S. 

caerulescens), black-throated green 

warbler (S. virens), scarlet tanager 

(Piranga olivacea)

mature, overmature, and uneven-aged forest using 

both single-tree selection as well as even-age 

management; importance of forest structure

King and DeGraaf 2000

DeGraaf 1991

DeGraaf et al. 1998

Yamasaki 2013

Maximizing bird species numbers in a 

single stand

low-density shelterwoods provide both partial 

canopy as well as dense shrub/regeneration layer; 

reduce residual overstory so sunlight stimulates 

dense, woody regeneration and fruit-producing 

shrubs; residual stems serve as hunting perches, 

cavity trees, etc.

King and DeGraaf 2000

Yamasaki et al. in press

continued
7

Foraging opportunities for neotropical 

migrants and resident birds—wood 

thrush (Hylocichla mustelina), American 

redstart (S. ruticilla), blue jay (Cyanocitta 

cristata), black-capped chickadee 

(Poecile atricapillus) 

maintaining a diverse array of hardwood and 

softwood tree species provides suitable foraging 

opportunities for a wide diversity of insectivorous 

as well as seed-eating bird species; maintaining 

a range of opening sizes from tree-gap to multiple 

acres provides regeneration opportunities for shadetolerant, mid-tolerant, and shade-intolerant species

Holmes and Robinson 1981

Robinson and Holmes 1982

Robinson and Holmes 1984

Holmes and Robinson 1988

Mammals

Hard mast—particularly beech for gray 

squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), mice 

(Peromyscus sp.), black bear (Ursus 

americanus), and white-tailed deer 

(Odocoileus virginianus)

single-tree selection to retain resistant beech in 

places where beech does well

Leak and Graber 1993

Leak and Sendak 2002

Leak 2006b

Table 3.—continued

Wildlife species group and example 

species Habitat characteristics References

Table 4.—Landscape-scale wildlife habitat composition objectives: 

percent of acres by stand size-class and cover type (DeGraaf et al. 2005).

Habitat condition Percent of acres

Size class:

Regeneration 5-15

Sapling-pole 30-40

Sawtimber 40-50

Large sawtimber/old forest <10

Cover type:

Deciduous short rotation 5-15

Deciduous long rotation 20-35

Hard mast-oak 1-5

Conifers 35-50

Upland openings 3-5

Wetlands 1-3

Table 5.—Annual net growth (over 25 years) in basal area of poletimber (4.5 to 10.5 inches 

d.b.h.) and sawtimber (>10.5 inches) of a beech-red maple stand by residual basal area in 

poletimber and sawtimber (Leak and Gove 2008, Solomon 1977)

Basal area

ft2/acre

Percent basal area 

in sawtimber

Poletimber 

growth

Sawtimber 

growth Total growth

------------------------------- ft2 ------------------------------

40 30 0.82 1.42 2.24

45 0.84 1.37 2.21

60 1.13 1.18 2.31

60 30 0.22 1.59 1.81

45 0.57 1.69 2.26

60 0.46 1.52 1.98

80 30 -0.22 1.82 1.60

45 0.08 1.47 1.55

60 0.0 1.38 1.38

100 30 -0.13 1.80 1.67

45 -0.17 1.49 1.32

60 -0.24 1.44 1.20
8

However, recent information and experience (Leak 

2002) indicates that a more efficient structure could 

be somewhat sigmoid with an abundance of small 

sawtimber, producing high rates of value growth, and a 

decline in larger sawtimber due to harvesting of mature 

trees. In addition, within limits, stand growth is more 

closely related to species and vigor than to strict basal 

area control. And, overall quality, with some distribution 

in size/age classes will be more important than specific 

diameter distributions. For one example at Bartlett, 

under management since 1952 (three harvests), the stand 

had residual basal areas in 1993 of 17, 34, and 14 ft2

 in 

the poletimber (5 to 10 in), small sawtimber (11 to 17 

in), and large sawtimber (≥ 18 in) respectively, a total 

basal area of 65 ft2

 per acre (Leak, unpublished data2).

This type of sigmoid diameter distribution also could be 

typical of a regulated forest—even-aged or uneven-aged—

that had been managed over time for maximum quality 

production.

Marking in poletimber sizes should be restricted to trees 

with low value potential; removal of small trees with quality 

potential to simply meet a stocking/structure objective will 

reduce the ingrowth into the sawtimber size class. Mixedwood stands (stands with 25 to 65 percent softwoods) 

support higher basal areas than hardwoods, about 180 ft2

maximum versus 130 ft2

 in hardwoods (Fig. 2). Residual 

basal area guidelines as described above should be raised 

by a factor of up to 50 percent in stands maintained as 

mixed wood; up to 100 to 120 ft2

 for example. Compare 

the hardwood and mixed-wood stocking guides (which 

represent even-aged stands) in Figure 2.

Figure 2.—Northern hardwood (A) and 

mixed-wood (B) stocking guides.

2 Data on file with author in Durham, NH
9

At this point, it is important to point out that wildlife 

habitat quality should be maintained by leaving at least 

1 or 2 larger diameter wildlife trees per acre, where 

available. These are live trees with cavities (especially 

large cavities) for nesting or denning, evidence of black 

bear3

 feeding, raptor nests, or basket forks with potential 

as raptor nest sites (see Table 3). One 26 inch or two 

18 inch wildlife trees per acre contribute less than 4 ft2

per acre to the residual basal area of a stand; even five 

18 inch wildlife trees per acre represent less than 10 ft2

of residual basal area. Dead trees (snags) can be retained 

as foraging or sheltering habitat where available; and 

a large down log (hollow if possible) or two per acre 

where available maintains another ground cover habitat 

feature. Retention of softwood patches or individual 

trees (softwood retention) also adds to wildlife diversity, 

and it is important to maintain a range of wildlife 

habitat conditions across a property, or several adjacent 

properties, at the landscape level (Table 4).

Marking Guides

Previous guides have emphasized the reverse J-shaped 

curve and q-factors, which have proven difficult for field 

application. Currently, we believe that marking toward 

a range in residual basal area and basal area in sawtimber 

(possibly large versus small), based on a prior cruise or 

field exam, is sufficient for structural control. Generally, a 

range of 60 to 80 ft2

 of residual basal area with at least 25 

ft2 in sawtimber (up to 50 to 60) is a reasonable goal.

Marking should be directed toward trees that have 

low quality potential (defect or species) or are mature. 

However, as mentioned above, be sure to maintain at 

least 1 or 2 trees per acre with wildlife potential. From 

an economic point of view, mature trees are those that 

have reached the peak of grade improvement (including 

exterior and interior defect) as determined by local 

market conditions. Commonly, for long-lived hardwoods 

(and bigtooth aspen) and hemlock of acceptable growing 

stock, 18 to 24 in is a maximum, mature size. Spruce 

is economically mature at about 12 to 16 inches; 

balsam fir, quaking aspen, and paper birch at 12 to 14 

inches (Table 6). But all these guidelines depend on 

site conditions, markets, visuals, and on-site logging/

economic conditions—all extremely variable!

The term “acceptable growing stock” (AGS) commonly 

is used to describe trees that have log potential now, or in 

the future, and a reasonable crown. This can be expanded 

to include trees that meet other landowner objectives, 

such as wildlife trees. “Unacceptable growing stock” 

(UGS) denotes trees that do not meet the “acceptable 

definition” due to defect, noncommercial species, or 

unhealthy condition. AGS should comprise the bulk of 

the residual stocking after harvest. Stand prescriptions 

are clearer if mature trees are separated from AGS in 

evaluating potential residual stocking prior to harvest, 

though healthy, low risk mature trees are sometimes 

considered AGS in general evaluation.

Table 6.—Approximate mature, maximum size (d.b.h.) for species-site conditions 

denoting the peak of possible log grade improvement (financial maturity)

Species Site D.b.h. objectives

Inches

Sugar maple, yellow birch, 

red oak, and white ash

High

Moderate

18-24

16-18

Red maple Any 16-18

Beech Any 16-18

Paper birch Any 12-14

Red spruce Any 12-16

Hemlock Any 18-24

3 Scientific names of wildlife species are reported in Table 3.
10

Cutting Cycle

The general rule on cutting cycles is to wait until there 

is an optimum operable harvest, prior to a significant 

reduction in growth due to increased stand density. 

Landowner concerns over logging cost, administrative cost, 

disturbance to the stand, and road access also play a part. 

Based on growth rates in Table 5, stands with basal area 

approaching 100 ft2

 are beginning to experience slower 

growth and increased mortality. Based on net annual 

growth rates of 1.5 to 2.0 ft2

/acre, a stand will change from 

60 to 80 ft2

 to 100 ft2 in about 10 to 25 years. A good 

estimate for planning purposes is about 15 years. Damage 

from insects/diseases and wind storms may shorten this 

estimate due to the need to salvage damaged trees.

Regeneration

Adequate regeneration is a primary concern with 

single-tree selection, specifically in terms of tree species 

and vigor. Standard regeneration responses to harvest 

methods indicate that single-tree selection produces 

about 92 percent tolerant species (Table 7). In typical 

northern hardwoods on granitic till soils, the species 

composition of saplings (2 to 4 in d.b.h.) in twiceharvested stands included 45 percent beech, 25 percent 

hemlock, 13 percent striped maple, and 10 percent 

sugar maple (Table 8). This species mix may be less 

than desirable for commercial timber management or 

for providing a rich array of foraging opportunities 

for songbirds, but quite acceptable as mature wildlife 

habitat for beech mast production. On calcareous soils 

or enriched granitic sites, sugar maple will be more 

prevalent or even the dominant species. This may be 

desirable; however there may be concerns over species 

diversity. Even moderate browsing on good sites will 

tend to move the regeneration toward higher proportions 

of beech, striped maple, and possibly ferns. We discuss 

approaches for controlling browse damage under Special 

Options on page 30.

Growth and Yield

Net annual growth under single-tree selection in beechred maple with residual basal areas of 60 to 80 square 

feet ranges from 1.5 to 2.0 ft2

/acre (see Table 5). This 

is equivalent to about 40 to 50 ft3 or about one-half 

cord. At 60 or 80 ft2 residual with about 25 to 30 ft2 of 

sawtimber, the net growth on sawtimber alone was 0.6 to 

0.7 ft2 /acre, equivalent to 15 to 25 ft3

, or about 100 to 

125 board feet (bf) gross. Over a 15-year cutting cycle, 

the next cut should yield 7 to 8 cords/acre of which 

some portion could include 1500 to 2000 bf/acre. Lower 

initial or residual stocking would lead to a somewhat 

longer cutting cycle. Better sites would, of course, 

increase both yields (especially of sawtimber) and tree 

sizes, and reduce the cutting cycle.

Table 7.—Species composition (percent of milacres stocked by the tallest commercial species) 

by tolerance group and harvest method 10-15 years after cutting (Leak and Wilson 1958)

Tolerance groupa Clearcutting Group/patch Individual-tree selection

------------------------------------------- percent ----------------------------------------------

Tolerants 43 62 92

Intermediates 19 34 7

Intolerants 38 4 1

a Species included in each tolerance group:

Tolerants: beech, sugar maple, hemlock, and red spruce

Intermediates: yellow birch, white ash, and red maple

Intolerants: paper birch and aspen

Table 8.—Saplings (2-, 3-, and 4-inch classes) per acre 

and percentages in compartments cut twice by single-tree 

selection on granitic well-drained fine till (Leak 2006b)

Species Saplings/acre Percent

Beech 102 45

Yellow birch 8 3

Sugar maple 22 9

Red maple 1 1

Paper birch 0 0

White ash 1 1

Red spruce 8 3

Hemlock 57 25

Striped maple 30 13

Other 0 0

All 229 100
11

Quality

Over a 50-year period and after three harvest entries, 

a typical northern hardwood stand (granitic fine till) 

on the Bartlett showed moderate changes in species 

composition and moderate improvements in quality 

(Tables 9 and 10). Despite heavy marking of the beech 

component coupled with a heavy infestation from the 

beech bark disease (Nectria spp.), the percentage of beech 

volume decreased from 53 to 49 percent. Grade 1 and 2 

butt logs increased from 21 to 30 percent due to removal 

of the poorer quality beech. Sugar maple proportions 

increased from 18 to 25 percent, and hemlock from 3 to 

15 percent (Table 9). Volumes in grade 1 and 2 butt logs 

increased from 40 to 65 percent in hardwoods other than 

beech (Table 10). The proportion of Nectria-damaged 

beech (cambial infection with lowered merchantability) 

also dropped to about 30 percent (Leak 2006a, Leak 

and Sendak 2002). So, the moderate volume growth 

and yield values would be accompanied by moderate 

improvements in both species composition and quality 

under single-tree selection.

Table 9.—Changes in species composition, by volume of trees ≥ 5.0 in d.b.h. over 

a 50-year period after three single-tree selection harvests in 1952, 1975, and 1992 

(Leak and Sendak 2002)

Inventory year

Species 1952 1976 2000

-------------------------------- percent ---------------------------------

Beech 53 53 49

Sugar maple 18 27 25

Yellow birch 11 7 6

Paper birch 11 0 0

Hemlock 3 9 15

Red maple 2 2 3

White ash 1 1 1

Red spruce 1 1 1

Table 10.—Changes in butt-log grade of beech and other hardwoods, by volume of trees > 11.0 inches 

d.b.h. over a 50-year period after three selection harvests in 1952, 1975, and 1992 (Leak and Sendak 2002)

Inventory year

Species Butt-log grade 1952 1976 2000

-------------------------------- percent --------------------------------

Beech 1 and 2 21 21 30

3 52 36 47

5 16 41 18

Cull 11 2 5

Other hardwoods 1 and 2 40 67 65

3 47 25 31

5 10 8 3

Cull 3 0 1
12

Uneven-age Management: 

Group/Patch Selection

This approach to uneven-age management creates stands 

with distinct groups of several different age classes. It 

involves three alternative approaches: 1) the removal 

of trees in small clearcut patches ranging from less 

than 1⁄4-acre to about 2 acres or sometimes larger on 

extensive commercial properties; 2) removal of trees in 

groups to release an established understory (known as 

group release); and 3) the initial harvest of groups in a 

shelterwood fashion (known as shelterwood groups).

Marking Guides

Group/patch selection is best applied in stands that 

are patchy, containing groups of trees that are mature, 

overmature, or defective (Fig. 3). In stands of this type, 

group/patch selection is more efficient than single-tree 

selection that harvests individual trees and maintains 

a closed canopy. A second advantage of group/patch 

selection is that it can be used to regenerate a range of 

species, not only tolerants. The method should not be 

applied by locating groups/patches at uniform spacing. 

The marker should look for areas containing at least 50 

percent of the basal area in mature/overmature/defective 

trees and locate group/patch borders to efficiently harvest 

most of this material.

The first approach mentioned above, removal of trees in 

patches, is the more common approach and much of the 

following discussion deals with that method. However, 

there are excellent opportunities to apply the second 

approach, group release, during marking operations to 

release patches of desired seedling/sapling species such 

as softwoods, sugar maple, and oaks. (See the section 

on Regenerating Oak on page 20). The third approach, 

shelterwood groups, may be used to retain unusually 

valuable wildlife trees or to retain a small proportion of 

immature AGS in group harvests. However, overuse of this 

approach tends to defeat one main purpose of using groups: 

increasing the proportion of less tolerant regeneration.

During repeated harvest entries into a stand, group/

patches may be placed right next to older groups without 

maintaining any border trees. This may enhance wildlife 

habitat for those species seeking larger openings than are 

usually provided by group/patch selection.

Marking between groups can be accomplished in one 

of two ways. First, improvement cutting, single-tree 

selection, or commercial thinning (including the crop-tree 

approach) can be applied throughout the stand between 

the groups. Remember that the next entry will be another 

series of group/patch harvests, so the development of 

additional patches of mature timber is advantageous. 

Figure 3.—Recent, larger group/

patch harvest where the existing 

understory was completely removed/

destroyed, appropriate for stands with 

an undesirable understory. Photo by 

R. Holleran, Chester, VT, used with 

permission.
13

The other option is limiting treatment to some level of 

marking along the access trails. This approach is useful if 

there are concerns over excess development of a tolerant 

understory, excess damage to the residual trees, or a 

desire to maintain/increase the coarse woody material 

recruitment in the stand.

Experience shows that there is a natural tendency to 

mark trees one by one, rather than to consider whole 

areas as harvest or reserve groups. It takes a wider view 

to effectively administer group selection. Layout and 

sizing of groups should consider the whole range of 

factors: existent variation in overstory, understory, soils, 

and special habitats; location of groups of mature timber 

and/or UGS; species goals for overstory and understory; 

structural goals for timber regulation and wildlife habitat; 

access and equipment considerations; and insect and 

disease problems. This involves knowledge of the stand 

and not just the acre within sight of a forester. Marking 

groups larger than an acre is easier by simply delineating 

the perimeter if a tally of the harvest volume is not 

needed.

Regeneration

Numerous studies on the Bartlett (Leak 2003,2005) 

have shown the effectiveness of group/patch selection 

on reducing the tolerant component of the regeneration 

(increasing species diversity). Basal area tallies of 50 

to 60-year-old groups, averaging about 1⁄2 acre in size 

(Table 11), showed that moderately-well drained sites 

(somewhat enriched) produced about 31 percent sugar 

maple, 34 percent yellow and paper birch, 11 percent ash 

and 16 percent beech. On calcareous sites, we believe the 

sugar maple proportions would be even higher, especially 

if the maple understory was well advanced. Also, there 

is some evidence that the mixed species composition, 

with an early successional component, following group 

selection will encourage an understory of sugar maple 

and ash, possibly because of the nutrient-rich foliage. On 

the very well-drained sites (known as beech ridges), the 

beech composition was 26 percent, birch 41 percent, and 

sugar maple 11 percent. Comparing these percentages 

with Tables 7 and 8 shows the impact of groups on 

regeneration as compared to single-tree selection.

The size of the group produces variable effects. The larger 

the group, e.g., 2/3 acre or larger, the more intolerants—

aspen, pin cherry, paper birch, Rubus spp.—might be 

expected. However, the results are somewhat variable. 

Even very small openings, down to 1/10 acre, produce 

some increase in less tolerant regeneration. However, 

these small openings rapidly close in from the side, 

suppressing the regeneration, and are difficult to locate 

over time; though small groups may be useful on 

small private ownerships. In areas with an established 

beech understory, larger groups (1 to 2 acres) with 

scarification through snow-free harvesting will be effective 

in improving species composition. Scarification can 

normally be accomplished through the logging operation, 

especially with whole-tree harvesting.

Group selection does support a small to moderate level of

early successional bird species as well as forest birds; for 

this reason, the larger the group/patch, the better (Table 

3). Cavity trees may be left standing within groups but 

doing so may compromise regenerating more intolerant/

midtolerant species. Some provision for cavity users over 

time should be considered in the surrounding stand matrix.

Where group selection does not produce adequate lesstolerant regeneration, the problem may be excessive 

browsing from deer or moose that removes all but the 

tolerant stems of beech or striped maple. Excessive 

browsing may also lead to an abundance of ferns and 

invasive plants (see Special Topics on page 30).

Table 11.—Percent basal area by species in 50- to 60-year old groups/patches averaging about 

1⁄2-acre in size by drainage class; trees ≥3.5 inches d.b.h. 

Drainage 

class

Beech Yellow 

birch

Sugar 

maple

Red 

maple

Paper 

birch

White 

ash

Hemlock Other

--------------------------------------------------- percent -------------------------------------------------------

Well 26 15 11 14 26 2 5 1

Moderate 16 15 31 5 19 11 2 1
14

Regulation

Group/patch selection, using openings of 1⁄4 acre or larger, 

is generally regulated by area control. For example, if the 

approximate rotation is 100 years, group/patch removals 

should approximate 1 percent of the stand area per year. 

(With very small openings, marking is controlled by basal 

area as suggested for single-tree selection). For a 15-year 

entry period or cutting cycle, about 15 percent of the 

stand area would be harvested with groups. For initial 

conversion of even-age or unmanaged stands, or with 

longer cutting cycles, larger percentages may be harvested 

to jump-start the new age classes. Since the regeneration in 

groups develops more slowly than in clearcuts, a rotation 

of 120 to 140 years may be more reasonable. With smaller 

groups especially, as overstory crowns close, the effective 

group acreage is reduced. For the system to be most 

effective, groups should be laid out in patches of mature 

and defective timber as stated previously; the size can 

vary to fit stand conditions.

On large industrial properties, the advantages of group 

selection can be achieved by larger-scale application of 

these concepts: target multi-acre patches of mature/

defective trees, and reserve immature patches. This is 

well-suited to mechanized harvesting systems. Patch 

locations or boundaries can be supplied to contractors on 

a portable global positioning system (GPS) unit.

Growth, Yield, and Quality

There are no definitive studies comparing the effects of 

groups, or even-age systems, on growth and quality with 

single-tree selection. However, the effects on species 

composition are very well documented. Experience 

indicates that dominant and codominant trees growing 

in competition with one another under even-age 

conditions develop good quality stems.

Uneven-age Management: 

Improvement Cutting

Stand improvement is a part of any silvicultural partial 

removal. However, improvement cutting as a separate 

operation is a general term used to describe initial 

harvest operations in stands with an excess of defective 

or damaged timber. This condition may have resulted 

from ice or wind storms, poor quality pasture regrowth, 

insect or disease damage, or poor harvest practices in the 

past. It is implemented by removing a high percentage 

of the poor quality material with the objective of leaving 

sufficient growing stock to meet roughly C-level stocking. 

With AGS below that level, regeneration cutting may 

be warranted following the suggestions under even-age 

management or rehabilitation sections. Improvement 

cutting operations may be marginally commercial, and 

require good markets for low-grade material. In the next 

harvest entry following an improvement cut, follow the 

guidelines in the Inventory/Prescriptions section (page 

26) to determine an appropriate silvicultural regime.

Even-age Management

Even-aged northern hardwood stands can be regenerated 

using the clearcut method or the shelterwood method 

of regeneration. Each of these methods has variations of 

the basic model that can be applied depending on many 

factors (site quality, species goals, visual, wildlife habitat, 

etc.). With the clearcutting method there is reliance on 

seed and some seedlings being in place when the harvest 

is made, or seed arriving from adjacent stands to establish 

new vegetation on the site. With the shelterwood 

method, the stand is partially harvested in some form to 

maximize seed production on the most preferred species 

and provide some shade on the site. Preparing a seed bed 

with scarification and control of undesired vegetation 

to maximize regeneration success may be a component 

of both options. The seed tree method, leaving a few 

trees per acre as a seed source is occasionally used and 

can also be called clearcut with reserves. With even-age 

management in hardwoods, the role of stump sprouts, 

stool shoots on small stumps, and root suckers can play 

a significant role in the regeneration. Aspen, beech, red 

maple, and others significantly regenerate by these means.

Following the regeneration stage, there are options on 

precommercial thinning or release as well as commercial 

thinning(s) discussed below. Rotation ages and yields 

under even-age management also are discussed below.

Clearcutting

As the name implies, clearcutting is the removal of mature 

or defective stands over areas large enough to be recognized 
15

as a separate stand – 5 to 10 acres or larger. Clearcutting 

is best applied to stands where the proportion of mature 

and defective timber is at least 50 to 60 percent. If the 

understory or advance regeneration is acceptable (discussed 

under the section on regeneration), the harvest should 

be considered an overstory removal that preserves the 

advance growth to the extent possible by well-designed 

access and possibly a winter harvest. Previously thinned 

stands commonly have a well-developed understory. If 

the understory is unacceptable, the harvest should remove 

the smaller suppressed stems down to at least 2 inches 

diameter or smaller and provide for maximum ground 

disturbance; whole-tree harvesting is useful for this 

purpose. Clearcuts generally remove all merchantable trees, 

plus submerchantable trees down to about 2 inches d.b.h.

Often, reserve patches are retained, such as 1/4 acre for 

every 10 acres of clearcut, that provide for cavity trees, 

other wildlife trees, seed sources (e.g., yellow birch), seeps, 

softwood inclusions, and structural diversity. Variable 

retention, which is a modification of the clearcutting 

system, retains about 10 to 30 percent of the area. These 

are usually no-cut patches of immature growing stock, 

riparian buffers, or special habitats, creating irregular 

stands over time. This variant will provide elements of 

habitat diversity beneficial to a range of species.

Two to ten-acre clearcuts are sometimes called patch 

clearcuts and follow the same guidelines previously 

mentioned for true clearcuts or overstory removals. This 

becomes a semantic discussion depending on what size 

constitutes a stand.

Table 12 provides examples of clearcut/patch-cut/

shelterwood regeneration. The shelterwood with 40 ft2

residual basal area was a portion of a true clearcut that 

was feathered into the uncut border, thus, it was the same 

site and same harvest period as the true clearcut. Note 

the very high percentage of beech and striped maple. 

Clearcuts with any component of reserve trees will begin 

to resemble a shelterwood. The true clearcut may have 

a high percentage of pin cherry, which drops out of the 

canopy as the stand ages but can improve the quality 

of desired species by natural branch shedding (Fig. 4). 

Note that the larger patch cuts (~5 acres) have typical 

early successional regeneration with high proportions of 

birch and pin cherry; the smaller patch cuts (~3 acres) 

have much less pin cherry and more beech in a dominant 

position (Table 12). A typical, excellent species mix of a 

25-year-old stand that developed following a complete 

clearcut on a (good) moderately well-drained site is also 

included in Table 12. The regeneration will contain a 

mix of tolerants that were usually present prior to harvest 

Table 12.—Percent composition (10 to12 years after harvest) of regeneration (based on the dominant 

stem per milacre of any species) in a clearcut, patch cuts (3 to 5 acres), and in a shelterwood with 40 

ft2 residual basal area retained (a portion of the clearcut harvest). Also percent composition of basal 

area (BA) in a 25-year-old stand (moderately well-drained) (Leak, unpublished data; Marquis 1969).

Species Clearcut 

(fine till)

Two 3-acre 

patch cuts 

(sandy tills)

Two 5-acre 

patch cuts 

(sandy tills)

Shelterwood 

w/40 ft2 residuals 

(fine till)

25-year-old 

clearcut

------------------------------ percent of milacres ------------------------------- Percent BA

Beech 4 15-41 0-3 48 11

Yellow birch 9 5-24 13-45 7 10

Sugar maple 3 0 0 2 11

Red maple 1 0-5 0-3 0 5

Paper birch 23 23-25 3-24 5 24

White ash 7 0 0 2 3

Aspen 0 0-40 0-30 0 9

Red spruce 0 0 0 0 1

Hemlock 0 0-6 0 0 1

Striped maple 4 0-6 0 31 2

Pin cherry 46 0-10 24-51 2 23

Other 3 0 0-4 3 --
16

and less tolerant species that developed anew. A more 

thorough clearcut with scarification usually is obtained 

with a whole-tree harvest rather than a standard clearcut; 

lower percentages of tolerant species are generally 

obtained with snow-off harvests.

The heavy harvests and skid trail activity associated 

with clearcutting require particular attention to best 

management practices to avoid excessive erosion and 

compaction, as well as stream buffers to minimize 

impacts on streamwater.

Clearcutting is the ideal system for encouraging earlysuccessional bird species, as well as providing postfledging habitat for forest songbirds (Chandler et al. 

2012, King et al. 2011). And even-age management with 

clearcutting produces considerable vertebrate wildlife 

diversity; guidelines suggest that 5 to 15 percent of an 

ownership should be in the 0 to 10 year age class (see 

Table 4). In areas with heavy deer browsing, clearcuts 

(about 15 acres or more) help reduce the damage since 

deer venture less into the center of these larger openings 

until seedlings are out of reach. However, due partly to 

heavy browsing around the edges of clearcuts, invasive 

species and/or ferns may become established.

Figure 4.—Following patch/clearcut 

harvests, the vegetation after less than 

10 years of age (A) will be a mixture of 

noncommercial/commercial vegetation, 

ideal for early successional wildlife; 

(B) at 15 to 20 years, the vegetation is 

mostly commercial tree species with 

pin cherry and only a small proportion 

of beech. Photos by M. Yamasaki, U.S. 

Forest Service.

A

B
17

Aspen-birch stands, especially useful for grouse/

woodcock management, are best reproduced by 

clearcutting where there is an aspen component 

(10 percent is more than sufficient) to provide root 

suckering capacity. Sandy, granitic tills are suitable 

sites, but these species can be managed on a wide 

range of sites including sites conducive to softwood 

regeneration. Aspen stands can also be managed as 

“coppice with reserves”, which is really a two-age 

system. Selected overstory trees are retained in a 

final aspen harvest. Since aspen is particularly shade 

intolerant, reserve trees should be widely spaced for 

good aspen development. As with all prescriptions, 

there will be species or habitat elements both favored 

or unwanted; taking a larger landscape context often 

helps decide what course of treatment to pursue. 

For example, new openings can create habitat 

opportunities for early-successional songbirds but are 

less habitable for salamanders and frogs for some time 

after harvest (Hocking et al. 2013, Veysey et al. 2009).

Shelterwoods: 

Northern Hardwoods

Regeneration with the shelterwood method involves 

removing part of the stand, leaving a low to moderate 

density of canopy trees to provide seed and partial 

shade to aid in seedling establishment. Shelterwoods 

can be standard, low-density, or low-density deferred. 

Any of these may be “irregular” where the residual 

overstory density is intentionally non-uniform.

A standard shelterwood in northern hardwoods 

would consist of a seed cut leaving 60 to 80 ft2

 of basal 

area (sometimes as low as 40 to 60 ft2

) per acre in 

fairly mature trees in the main canopy, coupled with 

a removal cut 5 to 15 years later (Fig. 5). This type of 

harvest would regenerate a high percentage of tolerant 

species. However, on good sites, those with some 

calcareous influence or enriched sites, the regeneration 

should contain a substantial proportion of sugar maple 

and white ash. On less productive sites, the proportions 

of beech and striped maple would be high, especially with 

considerable browsing pressure. The removal cut requires 

careful choices on layout and equipment to avoid excessive 

damage to the regeneration; snow cover is an asset.

As previously mentioned, in managed stands that 

have been previously thinned, or shelterwood cut, a 

tolerant understory may have developed already. If this 

is desirable, then the overstory can be removed in one 

or more cuts—a so-called overstory removal (Fig. 6). 

There is a tendency to delay the overstory removal, or 

to remove portions in several entries. Problems with 

Figure 5.—Standard shelterwood with about 60 ft2 residual basal area 

in dominant overstory stems. Tolerant regeneration will be common, and 

early overstory removal will help maintain less-tolerant regeneration. 

Photo by U.S. Forest Service.

Figure 6.—A stand ready for an overstory removal, leaving an understory 

of seedlings and saplings. Same stand as Figure 5, about 15 years later. 

Photo by M. Yamasaki, U.S. Forest Service.
18

this include suppressing the desired regeneration 

and damaging it with subsequent operations. 

If an undesirable understory has accumulated, 

snow-off cutting, scarification, whole-tree harvest, 

or herbicide treatment may be needed to shift 

regeneration species composition. Regeneration 

species composition is often visually evident, or 

it can be evaluated with milacre plots—making 

sure that primary attention is given to seedlings/

saplings in a dominant position (Leak 2007a). See 

the section on prescriptions for suggestions on 

adequacy of the regeneration on page 26.

Low-density shelterwoods leave a residual of 

perhaps 20 to 40 ft2 of basal area in mature 

trees from the main crown canopy, including 

individuals (e.g., yellow birch) desired for a 

seed source. This approach provides sufficient 

sunlight and ground disturbance to allow for 

the regeneration of a proportion of intolerant 

and intermediately tolerant species (e.g., yellow 

birch), especially if the operation is snow-off and 

also late fall after the seed crop is ripe. A standard 

low-density shelterwood would be followed by a 

removal cut in 5 to 20 years. Again, precautions are 

needed to avoid excess damage, such as operating 

with snow cover, although the lower amounts 

of residual timber help in this regard. Lowdensity shelterwoods leaving less than 20 ft2

 are 

approaching a seed-tree harvest where the residual 

trees primarily serve as a seed source instead of as 

source of light shade. Low density shelterwoods 

often defer removals for more than 20 years—a 

deferred shelterwood (Fig. 7) as described below.

The shelterwood system is usually described as 

being uniform in residual stocking. In practice, 

residual stocking is often quite variable. This is 

often purposely done, as desired reserve trees are 

irregularly located, advance regeneration may be 

present in patches, or to create additional diversity 

in stand structure or the regeneration component. 

We will use the term “irregular shelterwood” 

to define the situation where the overstory is 

intentionally variable in residual stocking (as seen 

in portions of Figure 8).

Figure 7.—A deferred, low-density shelterwood (20 to 40 ft2 residual 

basal area) where the remaining trees will be mature in 20 or more 

years. This provides for a higher proportion of intolerant and mid-tolerant 

regeneration than a standard shelterwood. Photo by R. Holleran, 

Chester, VT, used with permission.

Figure 8.—Example of rehabilitation harvest where stand conditions 

required small areas of complete removal, irregular shelterwoods, and 

uncut reserves. Photo by M. Yamasaki, U.S. Forest Service.

Shelterwoods and the above variants provide cover for 

maximum numbers of breeding bird species since there 

is both overhead cover and a brushy understory; these 

conditions favor upper canopy breeding birds and foraging 

raptors as well as understory dwellers. Numbers of early 

successional birds (not necessarily numbers of species) are 

less in shelterwoods than in clearcuts (Table 3).
19

Deferred Shelterwood: 

Shelterwood with Reserves

Often, a mature hardwood stand contains a significant 

component of acceptable growing stock that has not 

reached maturity or maximized their grade potential. 

This is commonly tolerant hardwoods in intermediate 

crown position, 10- to 14-inch diameter, or cohorts of 

sapling or pole stock derived from previous harvesting. 

A standard shelterwood, in most cases, sacrifices many 

of these trees in either the establishment or final cut. 

Also, some landowners do not want to see the final 

overstory removed in one cut. Deferred shelterwood is 

when the overstory is retained for more than 20 percent 

of the rotation for additional growth. In the extreme, 

it becomes a two-age system where overstory trees are 

retained for 40 to 60 years while the understory has 

grown to half of its rotation age. Final removal of the 

overstory creates a new age class, and the understory 

becomes the overstory. In some cases, periodic removal 

of portions of the overstory will eventually transition the 

stand into uneven-age condition, especially if there is a 

patchy arrangement.

Deferred shelterwoods will usually have an irregular 

arrangement of stocking, as the desirable immature 

component will be found in groups or erratically located. 

It is important to reduce the stocking to well below 

the C-level (20 to 40 ft2

/acre) to allow for growth in 

the overstory, while not shading out the regeneration. 

Reserve trees should be selected for high quality 

potential, wildlife features, desirable seed source, or to 

meet other landowner objectives.

Smaller diameter crop trees, especially of mid-tolerant 

species, are prone to epicormic sprouting. Leaving groups 

of these trees can reduce this risk, or select trees with 

larger crowns. Sugar maple is long-lived and less prone to 

sprouting, and is often selected as a reserve species. These 

deferred shelterwood systems provide a tool for irregular 

stands that do not fit well into the normal silvicultural 

prescriptions. Stands that are mature or low quality, but 

have an immature acceptable component are particularly 

well suited, including previously high-graded stands. 

Stands that might otherwise be clearcut have another 

option to maintain some growing stock. Deferring the 

removal of the shelterwood overstory can make evenage management more attractive to small woodlot 

owners. It provides a more continuous forest cover than 

regular shelterwood, though not as much as uneven-age 

management. It has better regeneration success in areas of 

high deer browse pressure, if densities are low enough. It 

maintains complex stand structure, which provides both 

overstory and understory wildlife habitats for a longer 

period of time.

Table 13 provides an example of the moderately 

successful regeneration (after 10 years) under a low 

density, deferred shelterwood (40 ft2

/acre, granitic 

soils). Note that beech dominates about 50 percent of 

the regeneration. Residual saplings had to be removed 

by hand since the residual trees and the time of harvest 

(winter) resulted in less than optimum ground/

understory disturbance. The regeneration would have 

been better with a snow-off, whole-tree harvest and a 

lower residual basal area of about 20 ft2

 basal area/acre, 

thus providing a higher level of ground disturbance. 

Better site conditions, supporting more advanced sugar 

maple regeneration, would have greatly improved the 

regeneration.

Table 13.—Percentage of milacres dominated by 

commercial and any species regeneration 10 years after 

a winter harvest of a low-density shelterwood on granitic, 

moderately well-drained soils with 40 ft2 residual basal 

area/acre. Over time, the commercial species should 

dominate as the noncommercial species subside (Leak, 

unpublished data). Snow-free harvest and lower residual 

basal area would have improved the species mix.

Species Commercial Any species

------------ percent of milacres ------------

Beech 54 42

Yellow birch 22 17

Sugar maple 5 4

Red maple 10 4

Paper birch 2 2

White ash 5 2

Aspen 0 0

Red spruce 1 1

Hemlock 0 0

Striped maple -- 20

Pin cherry -- 5

Other 1 3
20

Regenerating Oak

The regeneration of oak in northern New England is 

especially difficult. Oak tends to be more abundant on 

sandy tills, outwash, and shallow bedrock soils, especially 

on south- to west-facing sites (Leak and Yamasaki 

2013). Many of the better oak stands occur on old fields 

where the species regenerated under old-field pine, and 

then was released when the pine was harvested. This 

phenomenon relates to wildlife interactions where blue 

jays and squirrels bury acorns, sometimes at considerable 

distance from the parent tree (Alexander 1980, DarleyHill and Johnson 1981, Vander Wall 2001). If the 

stand is more than 50 percent oak, use the appropriate 

oak guide. However, since oak is usually a scattered 

component of northern hardwood stands, the methods 

in this guide should be applicable. The best opportunities 

to regenerate oak are on fairly dry, warm sandy till soils. 

If there is oak regeneration present (perhaps 1 to 2 feet 

tall or more), it should be released by overstory removal, 

using groups/patches if the regeneration is patchy. 

If oak regeneration is absent, begin the regeneration 

process by a light shelterwood removal from below 

(perhaps a shelterwood group), leaving perhaps 80 

to 100 ft2

 basal area with well-spaced oak seed trees. 

Harvested oak will sprout readily, contributing to the 

regeneration process. This first removal should be done 

in the fall of a good mast year with sufficient ground 

disturbance to bury the acorns; acorns on the surface 

will be almost completely lost to predation by insects, 

birds, and mammals. Acorn crops are sporadic but can 

be detected a year in advance with northern red oak. 

When the regeneration is approximately 1 to 2 feet tall, 

proceed with an overstory removal (perhaps a group 

release). Oak is heavily browsed by deer, so early release 

is advisable. Some stands with a promising overstory oak 

component have dense understories of beech saplings 

and other undesirable species. One approach to deal with 

this problem is a series of intensive cultural treatments, 

perhaps including fire and chemicals, to minimize 

the understory competition. Other approaches, not 

thoroughly tested, include a whole-tree harvest of the 

understory in the fall of a good acorn crop, coupled with 

a light overstory harvest. Another possible approach 

is group selection adjacent to an oak seed source since 

observation indicates the oak regeneration may develop 

under an early-successional overstory, but not under a 

beech canopy.

Intermediate Treatments

Precommercial Thinning

Precommercial thinning is the treatment of young 

stands to increase diameter growth and vigor of the best 

trees and species by felling or killing competing trees. 

Four precommercial thinning (release) treatments were 

examined in a 25-year-old stand on the Bartlett (Marquis 

1969) where an average of 385 crop trees per acre across 

the treatments were selected.The thinning treatments 

were:

1. Heavy crop-tree: removal of all trees touching 

the crown of selected crop trees.

2. Light crop-tree: removal of the most severe 

competitor around each crop tree.

3. Species removal: removal of all aspen, pin cherry, 

striped maple, and some red maple sprouts.

4. Control: untreated.

Residual basal areas across treatments were 56, 72, 66, 

and 100 ft2 per acre, respectively, in trees > 0.5 inches 

d.b.h. While the number of crop trees seems high by 

current standards (Perkey et al. 1994), the residual basal 

areas following thinning are reasonable. The crop-tree 

approach was used to guide the thinning, not to target 

trees that would reach final maturity.

Results after 5 years showed a response on the crop trees 

of more than 50 percent growth in d.b.h. (Table 14). 

Over the next 30 years, the crop trees generally showed 

an increase of about 2 inches more than the controls; 

however white ash and yellow birch showed much less 

response. An economic analysis showed real rates of 

return for the light crop-tree treatment of 3.5 percent 

(31 years after treatment) or 2.3 percent (44 years after 

treatment); much less for the heavy treatment. If a 

harvest had been done at about age 45, and if fewer crop 

trees (50 to 100 per acre) had been targeted, the rates 

would have been better. Other research shows variable 

results, including great success, with precommercial 

thinning. Operationally, 50 to 100 crop trees released 
21

on three to four sides is normal. Other precommercial 

treatments are better described as weedings, in which 

selected species, such as beech, poplar, or red maple, are 

removed to favor trees with more value potential.

At this point, however, it is difficult to make a strong 

recommendation for large-scale precommercial thinning 

unless there are overriding circumstances such as an 

overtopping overstory of less desirable species resulting 

from a less-than-complete clearcut, sprout growth of 

red maple or other less favored species, or a minimal 

stocking of highly valuable species in a matrix of 

poorer quality stems. Cost-share money or landowner 

investment should be reserved for these situations. 

However, some landowners may wish to personally 

engage in limited precommercial crop-tree work in 

selected areas. Once a stand reaches pole size, there are 

often markets for fuelwood or pulp that make these 

improvement cuts at least break-even propositions.

Commercial Thinning

The definition of commercial thinning is expanding 

since there are growing markets for small stems as 

biomass or specialty products. However, we use the 

term herein as a commercially viable thinning for 

conventional products, usually in a stand containing 

8- to 10-inch trees at the very least, usually 45 years 

old or more. Precommercial thinning is usually not 

warranted at this stage.

Northern hardwoods are unique in that they often 

contain a component of short-lived, intolerant 

species (aspen, paper birch) in mixture with longerlived species of appreciable value (white ash, red 

maple, black cherry) plus extremely long-lived 

species such as sugar maple, yellow birch, and red 

oak (Fig. 9). The intolerants become mature at age ~50 

to 70 years, the middle category at 80 to 100, while the 

long-lived species mature at 100 to 140 years or more. 

Thinning of the short-lived species, coupled with stand 

improvement within the long-lived species, creates 

the opportunity for repeated high-volume commercial 

thinnings. However, one important precaution: maintain 

a component of the most vigorous early successional tree 

species as a regeneration source for the next stand. This 

component should be well-spaced as individuals or small 

groups of trees.

Thinnings can be described as from above, from below, 

free, or crop-tree. Thinning from above removes trees 

from the upper crown classes and is best applied to 

younger stands, removing short-lived trees such as 

aspen, birch, or ash. Thinning from below removes 

mostly suppressed and intermediate crown classes. This 

Figure 9.—A commercial thinning in middle-aged northern hardwoods 

to about 70 to 80 ft2 of acceptable growing stock (AGS), mostly sugar 

maple. Photo by R. Holleran, Chester, VT, used with permission.

Table 14.—Annual response (over 5 years) of a 25-year-old precommercially thinned northern 

hardwood stand (Marquis 1969)

Thinning level

Residual basal area 

(≥ 0.5 in d.b.h.)

Entire stand: basal 

area growth

Crop trees: 

basal area growth

Crop trees: 

d.b.h. growth

-------------------------------------- ft2/acre -------------------------------------- inches

Heavy 56 4.0 3.2 0.18

Light 72 3.3 2.7 0.15

Species 66 4.9 2.7 0.15

Control 100 2.2 2.1 0.11
22

salvages expected mortality, but does not seem to have 

much effect on crop tree growth unless intermediate 

trees compete with desired codominants. Thinning 

from below is recommended for late thinnings in nearly 

mature stands, especially in preparation for a shelterwood 

cut. This is sometimes called the “shelterwood 

preparatory cut”. Many thinnings are, in fact, free 

thinning—removing trees from all crown classes, based 

on a wider range of factors. Perhaps the most useful is 

thinning from above—removing short-lived species and 

crop-trees—which concentrates the growth on to the 

potentially best trees.

A thinning in a 75-year old northern hardwood stand 

(Leak 2007b) (the precommercially thinned stand 

referred to previously (Marquis 1969), on an excellent 

site on the Bartlett produced about 19 cords/acre. The 

thinning removed mostly paper birch and aspen and 

reduced the basal area down to an average of 70 ft2

/

acre, ranging from about 50 to 90 ft2

/acre, equivalent 

to the C-line at the low end of the range, or well above, 

on the northern hardwood stocking guide (Fig. 2). 

Diameter growth responses to the thinning were good 

for yellow birch and white ash (Table 15), and very 

slight for other species possibly due to the effects from a 

previous precommercial thinning. Although the northern 

hardwood stocking chart provides a reasonable range 

in stocking levels, stand growth rates were more closely 

related to the vigor and crown class of individual stems 

and species than they were to stocking level. A second 

study (Leak and Gove 2008) in partially harvested 

northern hardwoods on a moderate site showed similar 

(only moderate) diameter growth responses (Table 16). 

However, a 1936 thinning study on the Bartlett (Jensen 

1940) showed that the larger trees grew at up to 0.15 

inches annually in d.b.h. growth compared to about 

1/10 inch in the unthinned control. This stand had not 

been previously managed, possibly the reason for the 

somewhat better diameter growth response.

Growth responses in young stands (Table 14) may 

be superior to those in older stands. The older-stand 

thinnings, however, are very worthwhile in salvaging 

potential mortality, and especially concentrating growth 

over time on high value species with high quality 

potential.

To produce maximum volume yields, commercial 

thinning in northern hardwoods is useful and almost 

essential in stands with a component of short-lived 

species. In addition, commercial thinning extends the 

period of increasing mean annual increment up to the 

end of a normal rotation (next section). But thinning 

does have its problems. Careful harvesting operations 

are more expensive and thinning products are generally 

lower value, so thinning may not be profitable. It is 

important to keep in mind the goal of increasing the 

growth and health of the crop trees and not to harvest 

the premium trees to try to make it more economical, 

unless they are short-lived species. If the desired thinning 

is deemed to be unprofitable, it may be best to wait for 

improved markets and additional growth. Risk of felling 

Table 15.—Annual (over 7 years) d.b.h. growth rates by species for thinned (to 70 ft2 residual 

BA average) and unthinned northern hardwoods at 75 years of age (Leak 2007b)

Treatment Beech Yellow birch Sugar maple Red maple White ash

--------------------------------------------- inches ------------------------------------------------

Thinned 0.17 0.13 0.20 0.19 0.17

Unthinned 0.16 0.06 0.17 0.19 0.13

Table 16.—Annual d.b.h. growth of sawtimber (25-year period) in young sawtimber/

poletimber stands thinned to 60 and 100 ft2 basal area (Leak and Gove 2008)

Residual basal 

area ft2/acre Beech Yellow birch Paper birch Red maple Hemlock

---------------------------------------------- inches ----------------------------------------------

 60 0.14 0.05 0.10 0.12 0.20

100 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.19
23

and skidding damage is high with repeated thinning, 

so the contractor needs to be compensated for the 

careful work required. Laying out straight access trails 

in initial thinning is important, regardless of crop trees, 

as these may be used in future entries if well located 

(e.g., avoiding steep slopes and seeps). This practice will 

reduce skidding damage, especially with repeated entries. 

In very uniform stands, this can almost be treated as a 

row-thinning. Finally, even mild thinning will provide 

enough light for tolerant regeneration or invasive species 

to accumulate. While they do not interfere with the 

growth of the main canopy, they may make regeneration 

more difficult at the end of the rotation.

Where the stand is primarily long-lived species (in 

contrast to stands with a short-lived component), a 

commercial thinning still is viable, removing lowerquality stems that have reached their maximum grade 

potential. A conscious effort also can be made to release 

the best crop trees on three or four sides (perhaps 50 

per acre) – a so-called crop-tree thinning. It is best to 

flag selected, well-spaced premium crop trees to guide 

the marking, and reduce the risk of damage during 

harvesting. Residual stand density can be guided by the 

stocking guides described below; however, it is more 

important to mark the stand well, retaining trees with 

quality potential and good crowns.

The stocking chart for northern hardwoods (Fig. 2A) 

provides general guidance on both growth and quality; 

this chart is generally applicable to most hardwood 

stand mixtures. Stands below the B-line will appear 

understocked and will begin to develop a dense 

understory. Some species, such as yellow birch, will 

develop epicormic sprouts. The C-line represents our 

best estimate of minimal residual density. If the trees are 

vigorous, 10 years of growth should bring the stand to 

the B-line. Stands that contain acceptable growing stock 

below the C-line may not be worth maintaining over a 

full rotation. The so-called quality line suggests that fairly 

high densities should be maintained in young stands to 

ensure natural shedding of live branches. The mixedwood stocking chart (Fig. 2B) for stands containing 25 

to 65 percent softwoods range from about 50 to 60 ft2 

above the northern hardwood chart; higher stocking can 

be allowed with higher percentages of softwood. A white 

pine stocking chart is in the Appendix, Figure A-2.

Stocking charts provide very general guidance on 

appropriate stocking levels. Growth of hardwoods 

may be high at levels well below the B-line; growth of 

softwoods may be maximized at well above the guide 

recommendations. It is more important to mark stands 

for vigor, quality, species composition, and regeneration 

potential.

Growth, Yield, and Rotation

Managed and unmanaged yield tables for even-age 

northern hardwoods were developed through simulation 

procedures (Solomon and Leak 1986) and checked 

by available volume information (Table 17). For the 

unmanaged (unthinned) stands at site index 60, the 

maximum mean annual volume peaks at about 50 to 70 

years of age (mean d.b.h. is 6 to 8 inches) at around 30 

ft3

 (Table 18). For the managed stands, mean annual 

increment peaks at about 95 years of age at around 50 

ft3

. Note that this figure is about the same as the growth 

estimates for uneven-age management (Table 5 and 

related discussion), which is consistent with expectations. 

Mean annual board-foot growth (gross volume) for 

managed stands levels at about 150 board feet/year at 

ages 107 to 119 years, which is a reasonable, minimum 

rotation age for quality sawtimber products. Rotations 

up to 120 to 140 years are quite within reason for longlived species. Shorter-lived species and species with lower 

quality potential (paper birch, red maple, beech) might 

be managed on shorter rotations such as 80 to 100 years. 

And keep in mind that early-successional stands of aspenbirch require rotations of about 40 to 60 years.

Site conditions, as reflected by soils or substrate, have 

a pronounced effect on maximum tree diameters at a 

given age (Table 19), but much less effect on biomass 

productivity (Table 20). Note that the enriched site 

is the only category with greater annual increase in 

biomass, and we would expect that richer soils developed 

from calcareous till would also produce higher biomass 

productivity. As discussed previously (e.g., Tables 1 and 

2), soil/site conditions have a pronounced influence on 

species composition.
24

Table 17.—Simulated yields per acre for unthinned and thinned northern hardwoods at site index 60. The cumulative 

thinned volumes include a summation of volumes up to a given age/mean diameter. The standing volume is the afterthinning volume. The board foot (bf) volumes are total gross volumes based on tree dimensions, trees larger than 11 

in d.b.h. to an 8-inch top (Solomon and Leak 1986). 

Unthinned Thinned 

Mean d.b.h. 

(overstory in 

inches)

Age

Standing 

cubic foot 

volume 

Standing 

board foot 

volume Age 

Cumulative 

cubic foot 

volumes

Cumulative 

board foot 

volumes

Standing 

cubic foot 

volume 

Standing 

board foot 

volume 

(years) (ft3) (bf) (years) (ft3) (bf) (ft3) (bf)

 4.0 30 -- -- -- --

 6.0 49 1547 48 269 -- 1418 --

 8.0 67 1924 3560 61 1243 895 1189 2211

10.0 87 2311 6640 72 1243 895 1912 5471

12.0 114 2700 9783 83 1854 2680 2039 7375

14.0 157 3102 13048 95 2602 5633 2011 8449

16.0 -- -- -- 107 2602 5633 2449 10289

18.0 -- -- -- 119 3394 8960 2085 8760

Table 18.—Mean annual increment (MAI) calculations developed from Table 17 (Solomon 

and Leak 1986)

Unthinned Thinned

Overstory 

mean d.b.h. Age MAI MAI Age MAI MAI 

(inches) (years) (ft3) (bf) (years) (ft3) (bf)

 4.0 30 -- -- -- --

 6.0 49 32 -- 48 35

 8.0 67 29 53 61 40 51

10.0 87 27 76 72 44 88

12.0 114 24 86 83 47 121

14.0 157 20 83 95 49 148

16.0 -- -- -- 107 47 149

18.0 -- -- -- 119 46 149

Table 19.—Mean d.b.h. of the largest tree per plot at stand age 100, granitic till, White Mountains of 

New Hampshire (Leak 1982)

Soil class Beech

Yellow 

birch

Sugar 

maple

Red 

maple

Paper 

birch

White 

ash

Red 

spruce Hemlock

--------------------------------------------------- inches ----------------------------------------------------

Enriched -- 17.3 19.6 -- -- 21.1 -- --

Sandy till 15.2 14.2 12.5 13.4 15.4 16.8 -- 13.3

Sandy sediments 14.8 -- 17.0 13.6 -- -- --

Silty sediment 12.0 12.6 -- 16.9 -- -- -- 22.2

Dry hardpan 12.5 12.0 9.6 14.6 13.8 -- -- --

Wet hardpan 9.8 11.2 9.4 16.8 14.3 16.0 14.8 18.6

Poorly drained -- -- -- -- -- -- 13.6 --
25

Aspen-birch, useful for woodcock/grouse management, 

generally is grown on rotations of 40 to 60 years, often in 

small blocks of about 5 acres in size that vary in age class 

(Table 3) (Gilbart 2012; Wildlife Management Institute 

2012a, 2012b). These stands do well on less productive 

sites such as sandy, granitic till, or hardpan.

Mixed-wood Stands

Managing mixed-wood stands (25 to 65 percent mixtures 

of hemlock/spruce/fir/pine with northern hardwoods) 

can add challenges. Some mixed-wood stands originated 

from heavy harvesting of softwood stands, especially on 

soils that are not strong softwood sites (Table 2). Some 

mixed wood occurs in areas where the site conditions 

are variable, consisting of a mixture of softwood and 

hardwood sites, e.g., where fluctuating topography 

leads to variable depths to a restrictive soil layer. Many 

mixed-wood stands result from past history: essentially 

hardwood sites on abandoned agricultural land which 

can produce a mixed condition. Old-field pine is a 

typical example.

There is a wide range of options for dealing with mixed 

wood. First is the development of long-term objectives: 

softwood, hardwood, or maintenance of the mix. Second 

is the choice of an appropriate silvicultural system which 

could include both even-age or uneven-age approaches.

To deal with mixed wood, first try to evaluate the site 

capability, hardwood vs. softwood, which will help set 

the long-term goal. Areas with a hardwood objective 

can be handled through the methods described above, 

including the section on oak regeneration. Many mixedwood sites support lower value hardwoods such as red 

maple. However, yellow birch is often readily regenerated 

and vigorous on mixed-wood sites, especially those with 

abundant moisture.

Areas to be pushed toward tolerant softwoods or 

hardwood/softwood mixtures are more problematic 

and a longer term, uneven-age approach may be useful. 

Advanced regeneration is important for softwood 

regeneration. If the stand has patches of softwood 

regeneration, these can be carefully released through 

overstory removal (i.e., group release), using equipment 

and harvesting layout to avoid damage.

In a well-stocked stand without any softwood 

regeneration, approaching the A-line on the mixedwood stocking chart (Fig. 2), light thinning from 

below is a logical choice to begin the process of 

softwood regeneration. This is essentially a shelterwood 

preparatory cut. Scarification from snow-free logging 

should be helpful. Then in the future, the established 

softwood regeneration can be released through standlevel overstory removal or group-level release. Small 

group selection openings (~1/10 acre) may also be 

useful, although the resulting regeneration may have an 

overstory of early-successional hardwood with a softwood 

understory.

When stocking is lower and the understory is mostly 

unwanted hardwood or weed species (and softwood still 

is the objective), it may be possible to use long strips 

about a half-chain wide to thoroughly eliminate the 

understory and heavy scarification to expose the lower 

soil horizons. This tends to emulate the well-known 

phenomena of softwood in old skid trails or on cut road 

banks. If possible, the operation should be timed with a 

softwood seed crop.

Thinnings in mixed-wood stands with 25 to 65 percent 

softwood should follow the mixed-wood stocking chart 

(Fig. 2), keeping in mind that the condition of the 

growing stock (vigor and quality potential) are more 

important than strict adherence to the chart numbers.

Table 20.—Mean annual growth in biomass and basal area 

per acre in 60- to 70-year-old even-aged stands by soil/

site category for all trees ≥4.5 inches d.b.h. (Leak 1979)

Soil/site

Biomass

(lbs)

Basal area/acre

(ft2)

Enriched 2,916 2.67

Fine till 2,162 1.77

Sandy till 2,198 2.31

Dry hardpan 2,263 2.31

Shallow/loose rock 2,129 2.54
26

Inventory and Prescriptions 

For Uneven- and Even-age 

Management

Inventory and Prescriptions

To develop accurate stand prescriptions for unevenage or even-age management, the following minimal 

procedures should be adequate. The guide below leads 

to a suggested range of optimum treatments, which can 

be adjusted to meet particular landowner objectives or 

operational concerns. In obviously two-aged stands, 

you might apply the following procedure to the 

overstory only and regard the understory (saplings/

poles) as the regeneration layer. To help with developing 

prescriptions, all the silvicultural methods discussed in 

this guide are summarized in Table 21.

The following approaches take into account the 

patchiness of the stand, a feature ignored in previous 

guides. Prescription development is the pinnacle of 

forestry practice. It involves consideration of the full 

range of circumstances and objectives, and there is no 

substitute for experience. Observe the effects of previous 

harvests on the site and nearby areas. What worked? 

What did not? The key will walk you through to a range 

of sub-options, so this is not intended as a “recipe”, but 

a silvicultural guide. Use your professional judgment and 

don’t be afraid to innovate.

1. Sample at least 10 and as many as 30 plots per stand, 

unless the stands are very large or very small. These are 

simple point samples with a limited amount of data 

to use with this key. Experience will dictate adequate 

sampling for using these prescriptions. These samples can 

be part of a more detailed inventory or simply a lowcost walk-through set of observations. In the key below, 

notice that the descriptive NOTE provides a quick walkthrough assessment of treatment needs.

2. The steps below apply to stands with commercial 

possibilities, not understocked or recently-harvested 

stands. If the stand is clearly saplings or noncommercial 

poletimber, go directly to the sections in this guide on 

precommercial thinning.

3. At each point, there are two steps:

A: Determine whether the surrounding area 

(1⁄4 to 1 acre) should be group/patch harvested 

(GROUPCUT). GROUPCUT is recommended 

if 50 percent or more of the basal area is in 

mature/overmature/defective trees (MOD). 

Determine whether the regeneration is none 

(minimal)/desirable/undesirable. Desirable would 

imply 40 to 50 percent of milacres are dominated 

by desirable species. This step might meet the 

need for a walk-through survey.

B: Take a prism survey of:

i. Total basal area, possibly split by 

poletimber/sawtimber.

ii. Basal area of mature/overmature/defective 

trees (MOD). The remaining basal area will 

be immature AGS (again possibly split by 

poletimber/sawtimber).

4. For the stand, summarize percentage of points classed 

as GROUPCUT, and percentage basal area in MOD. 

Follow the key below; if the inventory numbers are close 

to the class limits, check the next closest prescription.

5. If %GROUPCUT is >50 percent of the plots: 

(NOTE: high overall MOD stand)

A. Regeneration mostly desirable:

Recommendation—overstory removal in one 

or several entries, or a low-density, irregular 

shelterwood harvest, possibly a deferred lowdensity. An irregular shelterwood would have 

a variable/non-uniform overstory density. See 

Prescription Details (page 28) for other options.

B. Regeneration mostly undesirable or absent: 

Recommendation—clearcut in one or several 

entries, or consider the shelterwood options 

mentioned above (irregular low-density, or 

deferred low-density).
27

Table 21.—Summary of silvicultural methods and their application

Silvicultural method Application Regeneration Residual basal areas ft2/acre

Uneven-age:

Single-tree and 

very small groups 

(<1/10 acre)

sawtimber stand; spatially well-distributed sizes/ages; 

rich sites; light visual disturbance; mature-forest wildlife; 

management of beech mast stands (moderate sites).

over 90 percent tolerant 

species

60 to 80 total; 25 to 60 

sawtimber

Group/patch 

selection (1⁄4-2 

acres in size)

Sawtimber stand; patchy distribution; any site; moderate 

visual disturbance acceptable; mature and limited earlysuccessional wildlife—larger is better. 

about 2/3 tolerants in small 

groups; 1/3 in patches 

60 to 80 between groups/

patches

Even-age:

Clearcutting sawtimber stand; over 50 percent mature or UGS; any 

site including poor-moderate; heavy visual disturbance 

acceptable; maximum early-successional wildlife. 

about 2/3 intermediates and 

intolerants, especially with 

whole-tree harvesting 

0 to 10

Overstory removal sawtimber stand; overstory over 50 percent mature or 

UGS; desirable understory (seedlings, saplings, poles); 

complete removal or any of the shelterwood options 

below; must minimize understory damage (perhaps 

winter operation); heavy visual disturbance.

Intermediates/tolerants 

that are released 

0 to 10

Standard 

shelterwood

well-distributed sawtimber stand; rich site; harvest from 

below leaving roughly C to B-line overstory; moderate 

visual disturbance acceptable; light/moderate wildlife 

response. 

on rich sites, mostly sugar 

maple with component of 

white ash; beech a problem 

on poorer sites

50 to 80 in mature overstory 

trees

Low-density 

shelterwood

sawtimber stand; over 50 percent mature plus UGS; 

any site; harvest from below leaving 20 to 40 ft2/acre; 

often undesirable understory; overstory removal in 5 to 

10 years; good wildlife response with moderate early 

successionals. 

Half tolerants, half 

intermediates 

20 to 40 in mature overstory 

trees

Deferred 

shelterwood

mature/UGS sawtimber; component of quality small 

poles/sawtimber residual (20 to 40 ft2/acre) for removal 

in 20 years plus; any site; heavy visual disturbance; 

wildlife response similar to low-density shelterwood. 

half tolerants, half 

intermediates. Some 

suppression of 

regeneration under the 

reserves

20 to 40 in overstory AGS 

trees

Irregular 

shelterwood

low-density or low-density deferred shelterwoods where 

the residual overstory is irregular, not uniformly spaced.

20 to 40 irregular spacing

Intermediate Treatments:

Precommercial 

thinning

sapling/poletimber stands; questionable economics; 

best applied where AGS is marginal and needs release 

using crop-tree approach. 

none planned use stocking chart 

Commercial 

thinning

poletimber/small sawtimber stands; component of 

early-maturing species (paper birch, aspen) and UGS; 

follow stocking charts. 

none planned but may 

initiate tolerant understory 

response

use stocking chart 

Stand improvement even/uneven/two-aged stands with high component 

of UGS; an initial conditioning cut prior to even- or 

uneven-age management. 

none planned, but may 

initiate tolerant understory 

response

use stocking chart as a 

rough guide

Alternative Silvicultural Systems:

Rehabilitation heterogeneous mixture of stand conditions without 

recognizable uniform stands. Handled, acre by acre, 

as appropriate with methods listed above. Long-term 

goal is to increase AGS proportion, and acceptable 

regeneration with irregular stocking. 

mixed residual stocking will vary 

with microstand condition

Ecological forestry a landscape-level approach involving a range of 

silvicultural practices with emphasis on maintaining 

diversity in species and structure.

broad range variable depending on 

silvicultural treatment

Natural disturbance 

silviculture

emulates on-site natural regimes such as windthrow 

patterns and natural succession. 

generally tolerant often 100 plus
28

6. If %GROUPCUT is 10 to 50 percent of the plots: 

(NOTE: very patchy, inconsistent)

A. Regeneration mostly desirable: 

Recommendation—group/patch release, retain 

regeneration.

B. Regeneration undesirable or absent:

Recommendation—group/patch selection, 

destroy/replace advance regeneration.

7. If %GROUPCUT is <10 percent of the plots. 

(NOTE: not patchy, but may have high MOD)

A. Average MOD basal area over 30 percent of 

total: 

Recommendation—standard shelterwood 

(especially on a good site) or single-tree 

selection (good site). Consider commercial 

thinning options: from above, crop-tree, and 

free. (NOTE: not patchy, but high MOD)

B. Average MOD basal area 10 to 30 percent of 

total: 

Recommendation—light single-tree selection 

(good site) with a few small groups, or 

commercial thinning are the best options, 

especially as MOD basal area approaches 30 

percent.

C. Average MOD basal area less than 10 percent 

of total: 

Recommendation—defer cutting unless 

overstocked (roughly half way between A and 

B lines on the stocking charts [Fig. 2]). If 

overstocked, consider commercial thinning, 

especially the crop-tree approach.

Examples

Example 1. The forester takes 30 plots. Ten plots 

(30 percent) occur in patches (about 1⁄4 to 1-acre in 

size) where more than 50 percent of the basal area is 

estimated as mature, overmature, or defective (MOD). 

Regeneration is undesirable, mostly beech saplings. The 

recommendation (6B) is group/patch selection removing/

destroying as much understory as possible.

Example 2. In a sample of 30 plots only two (7 percent) 

occur in patches (about 1⁄4 to 1-acre in size) where 

more than 50 percent of the basal area is MOD. But 

average stand basal area is about 25 percent MOD. The 

recommendation (7B) is light single-tree selection with 

some groups/patches or commercial thinning. If the 

regeneration is undesirable, there will be opportunities 

for more drastic regeneration harvests as the stand 

matures.

Prescription Details

Note: the guide above may lead to a nearly borderline 

choice. If so, check and evaluate both options.

5A. This stand has a high proportion of mature, 

overmature, and defective in numerous patches 

with desirable regeneration such as sugar maple 

and ash. Overstory removal is appropriate in 

one or more entries using harvesting guidelines/

equipment to protect the regeneration. An irregular 

(variable density), low-density shelterwood 

is another option, or a low-density deferred 

shelterwood retaining a basal area of 20 to 40 ft2

/

acre in thrifty, small sawtimber or large poles.

5B. Same as 5A with undesirable or missing 

regeneration. Clearcutting with sufficient ground 

disturbance is the best choice, coupled with 

reserve patches containing seed sources and habitat 

features. An irregular low-density shelterwood, or 

deferred low-density shelterwood, with sufficient 

ground disturbance, is another option.

6A. This stand has numerous patches of MOD 

(10 to 50 percent) and is suitable for group/

patch selection with group release. With desirable 

advance regeneration, the harvest layout/

equipment/season should protect the regeneration 

as much as feasible. For regular returns at 10 

to 20-year intervals, the area in groups/patches 

should be a no more than 10 to 20 percent of the 
29

stand, targeting the most defective/overmature 

patches. Consider commercial thinning or stand 

improvement between groups, or marking MOD 

trees along the skid trails.

6B. Same as 6A except with undesirable 

regeneration. Harvesting should be conducted to 

provide sufficient ground/understory disturbance 

in the group/patches. Again, consider marking 

between groups or along skid trails.

7A. This stand has few patches of MOD (less 

than 10 percent), but a high proportion of 

scattered MOD (over 30 percent). Consider a 

standard shelterwood on good sites. Single-tree 

selection (good sites) with a few groups/patches is 

another option. Over time, additional patches of 

MOD can develop through windthrow, insects or 

disease. Commercial thinning is a good option: 

use thinning from above if the MOD is shortlived (e.g., paper birch or aspen); if not, use a 

combination of crop-tree and free thinning to 

improve stand growth and quality.

7B. This stand has few patches of MOD (less than 

10 percent), and a moderate proportion of MOD 

basal area (10 to 30 percent). Good options 

are light single-tree selection (good sites) with 

some group/patches. As mentioned under 7A, 

new patches of MOD often will develop before 

the next entry. Commercial thinning is another 

option using a combination of thinning from 

above (short-lived species) and crop-tree release.

7C. This stand has few patches of MOD timber 

(less than 10 percent), and a low proportion of 

MOD basal area (less than 10 percent). Defer 

harvesting. Or if the basal area/acre is more 

than half way between the A and B lines on the 

stocking charts (Fig. 2), consider a commercial 

thinning, although the operation may be 

marginal. Crop-tree release is a likely approach. 

Locate at least 50 crop trees/acre and release on at 

least two sides.

Alternative Silvicultural 

Systems

There are several alternative approaches to traditional 

silvicultural practice or specific methods that do not fit 

neatly into even- or uneven-age management. Foresters 

may wish to examine these systems which are described 

below with literature citations.

Rehabilitation Silviculture

This approach is applied to large areas with 

heterogeneous stand conditions (microstands) too small 

to be recognized as separate stands. These may be areas 

that experienced previous high-grading, storm damage, 

or insect/disease problems, and where harvesting may 

be commercially marginal. The overall strategy is to 

remove mature or unacceptable growing stock, release 

acceptable growing stock or regeneration, and create/

release regeneration where AGS is absent, generally using 

the methods previously described in this guide. The 

difference is that each acre, or group of acres, presents 

a different challenge. Over time, these areas can be 

transitioned to individual even-aged or uneven-aged 

stands, as appropriate (Fig. 8) (see Kenefic et al., no date; 

Nyland 2011).

A microstand could consist of (1) mature or UGS 

overstory; (2) immature AGS overstory; (3 and 4) 

partial overstory with either acceptable or unacceptable 

understory; or (5 and 6) regeneration patches with either 

acceptable or noncommercial regrowth. A separate 

field-determined prescription is applied as a collaborative 

effort between the forester and logging contractor. Each 

microstand is treated with the goal of improving species 

composition, quality potential, and productivity in 

either overstory or understory strata as available. As a 

result, each ‘microtype’ is being treated in accordance 

with normal silvicultural techniques, and this solves the 

problem of mapping tiny stands from heterogeneous 

types. This differs from deferred shelterwood, in that 

more than two age classes normally make up the residual 

stand. It departs from uneven-age management in that 

no attempt is made at balancing age class distribution, or 

meeting area regulation or residual stocking goals.
30

This approach is generally used to prepare low-value 

stands for improved productivity. As such, it may 

have little income, or costs exceeding income. Markets 

for fiber or chips are essential unless this is done with 

herbicides or by girdling or felling cull trees. Identifying 

and reserving quality immature AGS (trees of acceptable 

species, with reasonable vigor and quality for continued 

growth) will be part of appropriate treatments for each 

‘microtype’. This will vary with ownership goals, site 

quality, markets, and other factors.

Rehabilitation silviculture strives to balance economic 

and ecological considerations, and employs a diversity 

of silvicultural practices, both even- and uneven-age. 

This may include intensive management techniques such 

as planting and early spacing operations, or herbicide 

treatment of competing vegetation. It maintains 

structural diversity, with variable patches of overstory 

retention, and a large component of seedling/sapling 

regeneration. As such, it is an excellent technique 

for dealing with high levels of deer or moose browse, 

and also provides benefits to wildlife requiring earlysuccessional forest with a multistoried canopy element.

Ecological Forestry

This landscape approach follows natural processes as 

much as possible and generally encompasses a range of 

silvicultural methods. It involves long-term planning, 

and while implemented at the stand level, it is concerned 

with maintaining a balanced landscape. It is sciencebased and follows place-based, site-specific experience. 

Social concerns are as important as economic ones 

(Seymour and Hunter 1999). Early references (Twight 

and Minckler 1972) equate this approach to stand-level 

natural disturbance silviculture.

Natural Disturbance Silviculture

Natural disturbance silviculture consists of modeling 

silvicultural practices to closely follow natural disturbance 

regimes. In northern hardwoods, the silvicultural 

practices will be light – resembling individual-tree 

and group-selection approaches, using long, biological 

rotations. In softwood and mixed-wood stands, which 

generally experience heavier natural disturbances, the 

silvicultural methods may incorporate heavier harvests. 

The emphasis is on maintaining biodiversity in species 

and structural complexity (Palik et al. 2002).

Special options

There are a number of special problems or opportunities 

that could be of concern. Various landowner groups 

will consider and weigh each of these differently. Each 

of these is more or less independent of silvicultural 

systems, and as such is treated in this separate heading. 

Some of these are connected to particular treatments or 

systems. Foresters should be aware of these concerns and 

be ready to provide advice or references to specialists in 

the field. General considerations are expressed for each 

of these concerns or opportunities with references where 

available. Advice and references on most of these subjects 

are in Bennett (2010).

Reserve Areas, Special Habitat 

Features, and Associated Buffers

No-cut decisions for special areas are a separate issue 

from the silvicultural approaches discussed above. It is 

a decision to remove portions of stands or properties 

from the standard silvicultural options to meet specific 

conservation goals. Small reserve areas can be included as 

part of the silvicultural system utilized. For larger areas, 

they should be essentially treated as separate stands or 

handled by careful application of natural-disturbance 

principles.

Wildlife Concerns

Forest management can have beneficial or negative 

effects on wildlife, as each species has requirements and 

preferences; and habitat management for some species 

may conflict with habitat management concerns for 

other species. A thorough understanding of target species 

requirements, along with the home range and local 

conditions is needed, as well as the surrounding habitat 

conditions. In general, diverse forest habitats (species, 

age classes, structure and silvicultural practices), in 

combination with openings and agriculture, will provide 

for the greatest number of species (see Tables 3 and 4). 

Specific considerations will include retaining nest or den 

trees, hard and soft mast sources, wetlands, and vernal 

pools (DeGraaf et al. 2006).
31

Rare/Endangered Species

Rare and endangered plants or animals are a special 

consideration for the logging process. Most states have 

a Natural Heritage database of known locations or rare 

communities that should be protected and a specific 

review process. These are often unusual habitats such 

as ledge outcrops, wetlands, ridgetops, or other areas 

with unique growth features that can be identified and 

avoided, or managed to enhance the habitat.

Deer/Moose Browsing

Ungulate damage to regeneration can be a severe 

problem in each silvicultural system. One strategy is to 

provide an abundance of regeneration to supply deer or 

moose and still have enough for successful regeneration, 

attempting to meet both wildlife and silvicultural 

needs. There are examples of both failure and success 

with this strategy. Failures are more common with 

smaller regeneration units in high or moderate deer/

moose populations, and preferred browse species such 

as maples, ash, and hemlock. Herd regulation is outside 

the scope of this guide. Possible strategies include larger 

harvest areas, unlopped residual tops, brush barriers, or 

fencing. Fencing may not be cost effective, but has been 

used operationally in high-value Appalachian forests 

(Knopp 2007).

Invasive Plants

The presence of invasive plant species is a widespread 

problem in the Northeast and elsewhere. Usually 

found on rich soils, pasture regrowth forests, and near 

suburban landscapes, seeds are often moved by birds 

and mammals to interior forests. They are particularly 

problematic in shade-based regeneration systems, such 

as high density shelterwoods or small group/individual 

tree selection, although there is some evidence that 

invasives are less vigorous under dense shade from 

hemlock or beech (personal communication, T. Lee, 

University of New Hampshire). Prevention and early 

awareness are the best strategies, as the first invaders are 

easiest to control. Chemical control is often warranted 

for advanced populations, using a licensed, experienced 

applicator.

Invasive Insects and Disease

Exotic introduced pests have plagued northern hardwood 

forests for more than a century, and will continue to 

do so. Great efforts are currently underway to control 

the spread of Asian long-horned beetle (Anoplophora 

glabripennis), emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis), 

and hemlock wooly adelgid (Adelges tsugae). New pests 

are undoubtedly on their way. Silvicultural strategies to 

reduce the impacts of these will require understanding 

pest dynamics, along with silvics and silviculture to 

manipulate stand structure and species composition 

toward less susceptible conditions.

Chemical Application

For control of certain undesirable species such as 

understory beech, ferns, invasive plants or pests, chemical 

applications may be the best strategy. Some ownerships 

or certain certifications may preclude use of nonorganic chemicals. This discussion is beyond the scope 

of this guide. Licensed applicators are required for most 

pesticides. Check state and federal requirements (Nelson 

and Wagner 2011, Nyland et al. 2006).

Insects/Diseases

Native insects and diseases are a natural part of the forest 

ecosystem, and most are in some sort of balance. Periodic 

outbreaks can sometimes be predicted. The forester can 

prepare for these by maintaining species and structural 

diversity, and harvesting high-risk trees during active 

operations. After an outbreak, salvage of mortality or 

dieback may be appropriate. This may alter the best laid 

forest plans.

Best Management Practices

Every state has its laws and rules regarding water 

quality and Best Management Practices (BMPs). Field 

foresters and logging professionals should be intimately 

acquainted with them in each state they work. Most of 

these boil down to common sense, keep the mud out 

of the flowing water. Logging in and around wetlands, 

vernal pools, and in buffer strips along water courses, 

steep slopes, and even seeps all have risk of impacting 

clean water, and are treated differently in each state. 
32

Stream crossings are probably the greatest risk. Most state 

forestry departments have service foresters available to 

provide technical assistance in applying BMPs.

Quality Beech

Some stands contain a nucleus of clean-barked beech 

that are genetically resistant to the beech bark disease. 

These groves should be maintained and encouraged 

to regenerate through vegetative means (Houston 

2001). Research on the Bartlett shows that proportions 

of resistant beech can be greatly increased over time 

by removal of the susceptible beech and reservation/

regeneration of the resistant individuals (Leak 2006a).

Carbon Management

Due to climatic uncertainty, some landowners may 

wish to engage in carbon management. There is some 

uncertainty about the best approach, but some guidelines 

are available (Nunery and Keeton 2011). Emerging 

markets for ‘Carbon Credits’ to offset carbon sources 

may influence future management decisions. It is the 

opinion of the authors that “good forest management is 

good carbon management” (Birdsey et al. 2006).

Cultural Features

The protection of historical cultural resources should be 

considered during access and harvesting, such as cellar 

holes/foundations, old roads, stone walls, boundary 

markers, etc. Various landowners will place different 

emphasis on these. Many formerly agricultural lands 

contain many of these features, and some disturbance 

may be unavoidable.

Planting

Occasionally, planting may be undertaken to add a 

less common or exotic species to a stand. Commonly, 

these might include oaks, butternut (Juglans cinerea), 

black walnut (J. nigra), chestnut (Castanea dentata), or 

softwoods. Especially for hardwoods, protection from 

deer, moose, and hare is usually required using fencing or 

tree protectors.

Literature Cited

Alexander, L. 1980. The influence of gray squirrels and 

red oaks in establishing eastern white pine. Durham, 

NH: University of New Hampshire. 90 p. M.S. thesis.

Bennett, K.P., ed. 2010. Good forestry in the Granite 

State: recommended voluntary forest management 

practices for New Hampshire. 2nd edition. Durham, 

NH: University of New Hampshire Cooperative 

Extension. 224 p.

Birdsey, R.; Pregitzer, K.; Lucier, A. 2006. Forest 

carbon management in the United States. Journal of 

Environmental Quality. 35: 1461-1469.

Calhoun, A.J.K.; deMaynadier, P. 2004. Forestry 

habitat management guidelines for vernal 

pool wildlife. MCA Tech. Pap. 6. Bronx, NY: 

Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife 

Conservation Society. 32 p.

Chandler, C.C.; King, D.I.; Chandler, R.B. 2012. Do 

mature forest birds prefer early-successional habitat 

during the post-fledging period? Forest Ecology and 

Management. 264: 1-9.

Costello, C.A.; Yamasaki, M.; Pekins, P.J.; Leak, 

W.B.; Neefus, C.D. 2000. Songbird response to 

group selection harvests and clearcuts in a New 

Hampshire northern hardwood forest. Forest 

Ecology and Management. 127: 41-54.

Cunningham, F.E.; Filip, S.M.; Ferree, M.J. 1947. 

Relation of tree-stump diameter to diameter 

breast height. Station Note 1. Upper Darby, PA: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 3 p.

Darley-Hill, S.; Johnson, W.C. 1981. Acorn dispersal 

by the blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata). Oecologia. 50: 

231-232.

DeGraaf, R.M. 1991. Breeding bird assemblages 

in managed northern hardwood forests in New 
33

England. In: Rodiek, J.E.; Bolen, E.G., eds. Wildlife 

and habitats in managed landscapes. Washington, 

DC: Island Press: 154-171.

DeGraaf, R.M.; Hestbeck, J.B.; Yamasaki, M. 1998. 

Associations between breeding bird abundance 

and stand structure in the White Mountains, New 

Hampshire and Maine, USA. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 103: 217-233.

DeGraaf, R.M.; Shigo, A.L. 1985. Managing cavity 

trees for wildlife in the Northeast. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. NE-101. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station. 21 p.

DeGraaf, R.M.; Yamasaki, M. 2002. Effects of edge 

contrast on redback salamander distribution in 

even-aged northern hardwoods. Forest Science. 48: 

351-364.

DeGraaf, R.M.; Yamasaki, M. 2003. Options for 

managing early-successional forest and shrubland 

bird habitats in the northeastern United States.

Forest Ecology and Management. 185: 179-191.

DeGraaf, R.M.; Yamasaki, M.; Leak, W.B.; Lester, A.M. 

2005. Landowner’s guide to wildlife habitat: forest 

management for the New England region. Lebanon, 

NH: University Press of New England. 128 p.

DeGraaf, R.M.; Yamasaki, M.; Leak, W.B.; Lester, A.M. 

2006. Technical guide to forest wildlife habitat 

management in New England. Burlington, VT: 

University of Vermont Press. 305 p.

Freidenfelds, N.A.; Purrenhage, J.L.; Babbitt, K.J. 

2011. The effects of clearcuts and forest buffer 

size on post-breeding emigration of adult wood 

frogs (Lithobates sylvaticus). Forest Ecology and 

Management. 261: 2115-2122.

Gevorkiantz, S.R. 1951. Distribution of volume in 

Lake States trees. Tech. Notes 347. St. Paul, MN: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Lake States Forest 

Experiment Station. 1 p.

Gevorkiantz, S.R.; Olsen, L.P. 1955. Composite volume 

tables for timber and their application in the Lake 

States. Tech. Bull. 1104. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. 51 p.

Gilbart, M. 2012. Under cover: wildlife of shrublands 

and young forest. Cabot, VT: Wildlife Management 

Institute. 87 p. Available at http://www.youngforest.

org/sites/default/files/Under_Cover-010412_FINAL.

pdf (Accessed September 26, 2013).

Hermann, H.L.; Babbitt, K.J.; Baber, M.J.; Congalton, 

R.G. 2005. Effects of landscape characteristics 

on amphibian distribution in a forest-dominated 

landscape. Biological Conservation. 123: 139-149.

Hocking, D.J.; Babbitt, K.J.; Yamasaki, M. 2013. 

Comparison of silvicultural and natural 

disturbance effects on terrestrial salamanders in 

northern hardwood forests. Biological Conservation. 

167: 194-202.

Holmes, R.T.; Robinson, S.K. 1981. Tree species 

preferences of foraging insectivorous birds in a 

northern hardwoods forest. Oecologia. 48: 31-35.

Holmes, R.T.; Robinson, S.K. 1988. Spatial patterns, 

foraging tactics, and diets of ground-foraging birds 

in a northern hardwoods forest. Wilson Bulletin. 

100: 377-394.

Houston, D.R. 2001. Effect of harvesting regime 

on beech root sprouts and seedlings in a northcentral Maine forest long affected by beech bark 

disease. Res. Pap. NE-717. Newtown Square, PA: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northeastern Research Station. 20 p.

Jensen, V.S. 1940. Results of thinning and its 

effect on residual yellow birch and associated 

hardwoods species. Tech. Note 35. New Haven, 

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

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 4 p.

Kenefic, L.; Wilson, J.; Brissette, J.; Nyland, R.; 

Lilieholm, R. (n.d.). Silvicultural rehabilitation of 
34

cutover mixedwood stands. Available at http://www.

umoncton.ca/umce-foresterie/files/umce-foresterie/

wf/wf/pdf/EKENEFIC.pdf (Accessed September 26, 

2013).

King, D.I.; Chandler, R.B.; Schlossberg, S.; Chandler, 

C.C. 2009. Habitat use and nest success of scrubshrub birds in wildlife and silvicultural openings 

in western Massachusetts, USA. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 257: 421-426.

King, D.I.; DeGraaf, R.M. 2000. Bird species diversity 

and nesting success in mature, clearcut and 

shelterwood forest in northern New Hampshire, 

USA. Forest Ecology and Management. 129:227-235.

King, D.I.; Yamasaki, M.; DeGraaf, R.M.; Costello, 

C.A. 2011. Three decades of avian research on the 

Bartlett Experimental Forest, New Hampshire, 

USA. In: Long-term avian research. Forest Ecology 

and Management (special issue). 262: 3-11.

Knopp, G. 2007. Reducing deer browse damage.

Forestry Tech. Note 44 (OR 72). 15 p. St. Paul, MN: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resources 

Conservation Service. Available at http://efotg.sc.egov.

usda.gov/references/public/NE/Nebraska_Forestry_

Tech_Note_72(Reducing_Deer_Browse_Damage).

pdf (Accessed September 26, 2013).

Lancaster, K.F.; Leak, W.B. 1978. A silvicultural 

guide for white pine in the Northeast. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. NE-41, Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station. 13 p.

Leak, W.B. 1979. Effects of habitat on stand 

productivity in the White Mountains of New 

Hampshire. Res. Pap. NE-452. Broomall, PA: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 8 p.

Leak, W.B. 1982. Habitat mapping and interpretation 

in New England. Res. Pap. NE-496. Broomall, 

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

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 28 p.

Leak, W.B. 2002. Origin of sigmoid diameter 

distributions. Res. Pap. NE-718. Newtown Square, 

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

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 10 p.

Leak, W.B. 2003. Regeneration of patch harvests in 

even-aged northern hardwoods in New England.

Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 20: 188-189.

Leak, W.B. 2005. Effects of small patch cutting on 

sugar maple regeneration in New Hampshire 

northern hardwoods. Northern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 22: 68-70.

Leak, W.B. 2006a. Fifty-year impacts of the beech bark 

disease in the Bartlett Experimental Forest, New 

Hampshire. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 

23: 141-143.

Leak, W.B. 2006b. Sixty years of change in the sapling 

understories of northern hardwood selection stands 

in New Hampshire. Northern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 23: 301-303.

Leak, W.B. 2007a. Accuracy of regeneration surveys 

in New England northern hardwoods. Northern 

Journal of Applied Forestry. 24: 227-229.

Leak, W.B. 2007b. Thinning northern hardwoods 

in New England by dominant-tree removal-early 

results. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 24: 

312-313.

Leak, W.B.; Gove, J.H. 2008. Growth of northern 

hardwoods in New England: a 25-year update.

Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 25: 103-105.

Leak, W.B.; Graber, R.E. 1993. Six-year beechnut 

production in New Hampshire. Res. Pap. NE677. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 6 p.

Leak, W.B.; Lamson, N.I. 1999. Revised white pine 

stocking guide for managed stands. NA-TP-01-99. 

[Radnor, PA:] U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry. 2 p.
35

Leak, W.B.; Sendak, P.E. 2002. Changes in species, 

grade, and structure over 48 years in a managed 

New England northern hardwood stand. Northern 

Journal of Applied Forestry. 19: 25-27.

Leak, W.B.; Solomon, D.S.; DeBald, P.S. 1987. 

Silvicultural guide for northern hardwood types 

in the Northeast (revised). Res. Pap. NE-603. 

Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 36 

p.

Leak, W.B.; Wilson, R.W. 1958. Regeneration after 

cutting of old-growth northern hardwoods in 

New Hampshire. Station Pap. 103. Upper Darby, 

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

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 8 p.

Leak, W.B.; Yamasaki, M. 2013. Regeneration of 

upper-elevation red oak in the White Mountains of 

New Hampshire. Research Note NRS-161. Newtown 

Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northern Research Station. 5 p.

Marquis, D.A. 1969.Thinning in young northern 

hardwoods: 5-year results. Res. Pap. NE-139. Upper 

Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 22p.

McKenny, H.C.; Keeton, W.S.; Donovan, T.M. 2006. 

Effects of structural complexity enhancement on 

eastern red-backed salamander (Plethodon cinereus) 

populations in northern hardwood forests. Forest 

Ecology and Management. 230: 186-196.

Nelson, A.S.; Wagner, R.G. 2011. Improving the 

composition of beech-dominated northern 

hardwood understories in northern Maine.

Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 28: 186-193.

Nunery, J.S.; Keeton, W.S. 2010. Forest carbon storage 

in the northeastern United States: net effects of 

harvesting frequency, post-harvest retention, and 

wood products. Forest Ecology and Management. 

259: 1363-1375.

Nyland, R.D. 1996, 2002 (reissued 2007). Silviculture 

concepts and applications. 2nd edition. Long Grove, 

IL: Waveland Press. 682 p.

Nyland, R.D. 2011. Characteristics of cutover stands, 

a challenge for rehabilitation [Presentation]. In: 

New England Society of American Foresters 91st

winter meeting; 2011 March 30-April 1; Fairlee, 

VT.[Publisher unknown].

Nyland, R.D.; Bashant, A.L.; Bohn, K.K.; Verostek, J.M. 

2006. Interference to hardwood regeneration in 

Northeastern North America: controlling effects of 

American beech, striped maple, and hobblebush.

Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 23: 122-132.

Palik, B.J.; Mitchell, R.J.; Hiers, J.K. 2002. Modeling 

silviculture after natural disturbance to sustain 

biodiversity in the longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) 

ecosystem: balancing complexity and implementation.

Forest Ecology and Management. 155: 347-356.

Perkey, A.W.; Wilkins, B.L.; Smith, H.C. 1994. Crop 

tree management in eastern hardwoods. NATP-19-93. Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Area State 

and Private Forestry, Forest Resources Management. 

58 p. + appendices.

Robinson, S.K.; Holmes, R.T. 1982. Foraging behavior 

of forest birds: the relationships among search 

tactics, diet, and habitat structure. Ecology. 63: 

1918-1931.

Robinson, S.K.; Holmes, R.T. 1984. Effects of plant 

species and foliage structure on the foraging 

behavior of forest birds. The Auk. 101: 672-684.

Ruffed Grouse Society. 2013. Grouse facts. Coraopolis, 

PA: Ruffed Grouse Society. Available at http://

www.ruffedgrousesociety.org/grouse-facts (Accessed 

September 26, 2013).

Schlossberg, S.; King, D.I. 2007. Ecology and 

management of scrub-shrub birds in New England: 

a comprehensive review. Washington, DC: U.S. 
36

Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, Resource Inventory and 

Assessment Division. 120 p. Available at ftp://ftp-fc.

sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/nri/ceap/schlossbergkingreport.

pdf (Accessed September 26, 2013).

Schlossberg, S.; King, D.I. 2009. Postlogging succession 

and habitat usage of shrubland birds. Journal of 

Wildlife Management. 73: 226-231.

Seymour, R.S.; Hunter, M.L., Jr. 1999. Principles 

of ecological forestry. In: Hunter, M.L., Jr., ed. 

Managing biodiversity in forest ecosystems. New York, 

NY: Cambridge University Press: 22-61.

Solomon, D.S. 1977. The influence of stand density 

and structure on growth of northern hardwoods 

in New England. Res. Pap. NE-362. Upper Darby, 

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

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 13 p.

Solomon, D.S.; Leak, W.B. 1986. Simulated yields for 

managed northern hardwood stands. Res. Pap. NE578. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment 

Station. 24 p.

Smith, D.M.; Larson, B.C.; Kelty, M.J.; Ashton, P.M.S. 

1997. The practice of silviculture. 9th ed. New York, 

NY: John Wiley and Sons. 560 p.

Tubbs, C.H.; DeGraaf, R.M.; Yamasaki, M.; Healy, 

W.M. 1987. Guide to wildlife tree management 

in New England northern hardwoods. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. NE-118. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station. 30 p.

Twight, P.A.; Minckler, L.S. 1972. Ecological forestry 

for the northern hardwood forest. Washington, DC: 

National Parks and Conservation Association. 12 p.

U.S. Forest Service. 2008. Timber management field 

book. NA-MR-02-08. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Area, State and Private Forestry. [not paged].

Vander Wall, S.B. 2001. The evolutionary ecology of 

nut dispersal. The Botanical Review. 67: 74-117.

Veysey, J.S.; Babbitt, K.J.; Cooper, A. 2009. An 

experimental assessment of buffer width: 

Implications for salamander migrator behavior.

Biological Conservation. 142: 2227-2239.

Wenger, K.F., ed. 1984. Forestry handbook. 2nd 

edition. Society of American Foresters Publ. No. 84-

01. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 1335 p.

Wildlife Management Institute. 2012a. The woodcock 

management plan. [Place of publication unknown]: 

Wildlife Management Institute. Available at http://

www.timberdoodle.org/northernForestInitiative 

(Accessed September 26, 2013).

Wildlife Management Institute. 2012b. The young 

forest project—growing wildlife habitat 

together. [Place of publication unknown]: Wildlife 

Management Institute. Available at http://www.

youngforest.org/content/think-5-5-5 (Accessed 

September 26, 2013).

Yamasaki, M. 2013. Uneven-aged management and 

wildlife habitats—what do we know? In: Bennett, 

K.P., tech. coord. Implementing uneven-aged 

management in New England. Is it practical? 2006 

workshop proceedings. Durham, NH: University 

of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension Natural 

Resource Network: 10-13.

Yamasaki, M.; Costello, C.A.; Leak, W.B. In press. 

Clearcutting, patch cutting, and low-density 

shelterwoods in northern hardwoods, New 

Hampshire: effects on breeding birds and 

regeneration. Research Paper. Newtown Square, 

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

Northern Research Station.

Yamasaki, M.; Leak, W.B. 2006. Snag longevity in 

managed northern hardwoods. Northern Journal of 

Applied Forestry. 23: 215-217.
37

APPENDIX

Familiar tables and charts useful in field applications

Table A-1.—Plot radius factors (PRF): Multiply the PRF and tree d.b.h. to determine the 

maximum horizontal distance from prism-plot center to tree center (U.S. Forest Service 2008).

Table A-2.—Basal area by d.b.h. class, and number of stems/acre for each tree counted by 

several basal area factors (U.S. Forest Service 2008).

Table A-3.—Volume in board feet (International 1⁄4-inch rule) by d.b.h. and number of 

16-foot logs to an 8.0-inch top diameter inside bark (d.i.b.) (Gevorkiantz and Olsen 1955, 

Wenger 1984).

Table A-4.Percent of board-foot volume (International 1⁄4-inch rule) in 8-foot bolts by tree log 

height. Bolts are numbered from bottom (#1) to top (#10) (Gevorkiantz 1951, Wenger 1984).

Table A-5.—Cubic-foot volume inside bark to a variable top diameter (> 4 in. d.i.b.) by d.b.h. 

and number of 8-foot bolts (U.S. Forest Service 2008).

Table A-6.—Saw log scale deduction for sweep in percent of gross scale for 16-foot logs and 

8-foot logs (U.S. Forest Service 2008). Note C = cull.

Table A-7.—Relation of stump d.i.b. to d.b.h.: stump height 0.5 ft (stumps 5 to 10 inches 

diameter) and 1.0 ft (stumps > 11 inches diameter) (Cunningham et al. 1947, Wenger 1984).

Table A-8.—Weights for various species (U.S. Forest Service 2008).

Figure A-1.—Site index curves for species occurring in northern hardwoods: American beech, 

yellow birch, red maple, white ash, black cherry, red spruce, sugar maple, and white pine (U.S. 

Forest Service 2008).

Figure A-2.—Revised white pine stocking guide for managed stands (Leak and Lamson 1999).

Figure A-3.—Textural classification of soils (U.S. Forest Service 2008, Wenger 1984).
38

Table A-1.—Plot radius factors (PRF): Multiply the PRF and 

tree d.b.h. to determine the maximum horizontal distance from 

prism-plot center to tree center (U.S. Forest Service 2008)

Basal area factor Plot radius factor

 5 3.8891

10 2.750 

20 1.9445

40 1.3750

80 0.972

Table A-2.—Basal area by d.b.h. class, and number of stems/acre for each tree counted by several 

basal area factors (U.S. Forest Service 2008)

D.b.h.

Inches

Basal area

ft2

Basal area factor

5 10 20 40 80

----------------------------------------- stems/acre ------------------------------------------

 2 0.022 229.4 458.7 917.4 1834.9 3669.7

 3 0.049 101.9 203.7 407.4 814.9 1629.7

 4 0.087 57.3 114.6 229.2 458.4 916.7

 5 0.136 36.7 73.3 146.7 293.4 586.7

 6 0.196 25.5 50.9 101.9 203.7 407.4

 7 0.267 18.7 37.4 74.8 149.7 299.3

 8 0.349 14.3 28.6 57.3 114.6 229.2

 9 0.442 11.3 22.6 45.3 90.5 181.1

10 0.545 9.2 18.3 36.7 73.3 146.7

11 0.660 7.6 15.2 30.3 60.6 121.2

12 0.785 6.4 12.7 25.5 50.9 101.9

13 0.922 5.4 10.8 21.7 43.4 86.8

14 1.069 4.7 9.4 18.7 37.4 74.8

16 1.396 3.6 7.2 14.3 28.6 57.3

18 1.767 2.8 5.7 11.3 22.6 45.3

20 2.181 2.3 4.6 9.2 18.3 36.7

22 2.640 1.9 3.8 7.6 15.2 30.3

24 3.142 1.6 3.2 6.4 12.7 25.5

26 3.690 1.4 2.7 5.4 10.8 21.7

28 4.280 1.2 2.3 4.7 9.4 18.7

30 4.910 1.0 2.0 4.1 8.1 16.3

32 5.590 0.9 1.8 3.6 7.2 14.3

34 6.300 0.8 1.6 3.2 6.3 12.7

36 7.070 0.7 1.4 2.8 5.7 11.3
39

Table A-3.—Volume in board feet (International 1⁄4-inch rule) by d.b.h. and number of 16-foot logs to 

an 8.0-inch top diameter inside bark (d.i.b.) (Gevorkiantz and Olsen 1955, Wenger 1984)

D.b.h.

Inches

Number of 16-foot logs

1/2 1 1 1/2 2 2 1/2 3 3 1/2 4

---------------------------------------------------- board feet -----------------------------------------------------------

12 30 57 80 100

13 36 68 96 118 134

14 42 79 110 140 163 184

15 50 92 128 160 188 214 232

16 59 105 147 180 213 247 274 295

17 66 118 166 208 245 281 314 340

18 74 135 188 235 278 320 360 400

19 83 152 212 265 314 360 405 450

20 92 170 236 295 350 400 450 500

21 102 189 262 328 390 450 505 550

22 112 209 290 362 430 495 555 610

23 122 228 316 396 470 540 610 680

24 133 252 346 430 510 595 670 740

25 145 275 376 470 555 645 730 810

26 158 300 410 510 605 700 790 880

27 172 325 440 550 650 760 850 950

28 187 348 480 595 700 810 920 1020

29 203 378 515 640 760 870 990 1100

30 220 410 550 685 810 930 1060 1180

31 237 440 595 740 870 1000 1140 1260

32 254 470 635 790 930 1070 1210 1350

33 270 500 680 840 990 1140 1290 1440

34 291 530 725 900 1060 1210 1380 1530

35 311 565 770 950 1120 1290 1460 1630

36 333 600 820 1010 1190 1370 1550 1725
40

Table A-5.—Cubic-foot volume inside bark to a variable top diameter (> 4 in d.i.b.) by d.b.h. 

and number of 8-foot bolts (U.S. Forest Service 2008)

D.b.h.

Inches

No. of 8-ft bolts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

------------------------------------------------------------ ft3 -------------------------------------------------------------

6 1.3 2.2 3.2 -- -- -- -- --

8 2.4 3.9 5.4 6.9 8.4 -- -- --

10 3.9 6.5 8.8 10.5 12.6 14.9 -- --

12 5.5 9.6 13.0 15.6 17.8 20.5 23.7 --

14 7.5 13.2 18.0 21.6 24.6 27.9 31.6 37.1

16 9.6 17.4 23.7 29.0 33.2 37.1 41.9 46.6

18 12.2 22.3 30.2 37.1 43.4 47.4 51.3 57.7

20 15.3 27.9 37.9 46.6 53.7 60.0 64.0 70.3

22 19.0 34.8 47.4 57.7 66.4 73.5 79.0 84.5

24 22.8 41.1 56.9 69.5 79.0 88.5 95.6 101.1

26 26.9 49.0 66.4 82.2 94.0 105.1 113.8 119.3

28 30.7 56.9 76.6 94.8 109.0 122.4 131.9 139.0

30 34.0 63.2 86.9 108.2 125.6 134.3 152.5 161.2

Table A-4.—Percent of board-foot volume (International 1⁄4-inch rule) in 8-foot bolts by tree 

log height. Bolts are numbered from bottom (#1) to top (#10) (Gevorkiantz 1951, Wenger 1984)

Bolt no.

Tree log height (16-ft logs)

1 1 1/2 2 2 1/2 3 4 5

1 56 41 33 27 24 20 18

2 44 32 26 23 20 17 15

3 27 22 19 18 16 13

4 19 17 15 13 12

5 14 13 12 11

6 10 9 9

7 8 8

8 5 6

9 5

10 3
41

Table A-6.—Saw log scale deduction for sweep in percent of gross scale for 16-foot logs and 

8-foot logs (U.S. Forest Service 2008). Note C = cull.

Scaling 

diameter

Inches

Absolute sweep (in) for 16-foot logs

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

--------------------------------------------------------- percent ----------------------------------------------------------

8 12 25 38 50 C C C C

9 11 22 33 44 56 C C C

10 10 20 30 40 50 60 C C

11 9 18 27 36 45 54 64 C

12 8 17 25 33 42 50 58 C

13 8 15 23 31 38 46 54 62

14 7 14 21 29 36 43 50 57

15 7 13 20 27 33 40 47 53

16 6 12 19 25 31 38 44 50

17 6 12 18 24 29 35 41 47

18 6 11 17 22 28 33 39 44

19 5 11 16 21 26 32 37 42

20 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

22 5 9 14 18 23 27 32 36

Scaling 

diameter

Inches

Absolute sweep (in) for 8-foot logs

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

-------------------------------------------------- percent --------------------------------------------------

8 12 25 38 50 C C C

9 11 22 33 44 56 C C

10 10 20 30 40 50 60 C

11 9 18 27 36 45 54 64

12 8 17 25 33 42 50 58

13 8 15 23 31 38 46 54

14 7 14 21 29 36 43 50

15 7 13 20 27 33 40 47

16 6 12 19 25 31 38 44

17 6 12 18 24 29 35 41

18 6 11 17 22 28 33 39

19 5 11 16 21 26 32 37

20 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

22 5 9 14 18 23 27 32
42

Table A-7.—Relation of stump d.i.b. to d.b.h.: stump height 0.5 ft (stumps 5 to 10 in 

diameter) and 1.0 ft (stumps > 11 in diameter) (Cunningham et al. 1947; Wenger 1984)

Stump 

d.i.b.

Inches Beech

Red/sugar 

maple

Yellow/black 

birch Aspen Red oak White ash White pine

---------------------------------------------- d.b.h. (inches) ----------------------------------------------

 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4

 6 5 5 5 6 5 5 5

 7 6 6 5 7 6 6 6

 8 6 7 6 8 6 7 7

 9 7 8 7 9 7 8 8

10 8 8 8 10 8 9 9

11 10 10 9 11 10 10 10

12 11 11 10 12 10 11 11

13 11 12 11 13 11 12 12

14 12 13 12 14 12 13 12

15 13 14 13 15 13 14 13

16 14 14 13 16 14 15 14

17 15 15 14 -- 14 16 15

18 15 16 15 15 17 16

19 16 17 16 16 17 17

20 17 18 17 17 18 18

21 18 19 17 18 19 --

22 19 20 18 18 20

23 19 20 19 19 21

24 20 21 20 20 22

25 21 22 21 21 22

26 21 23 -- 21 23

21 22 24 22 24

28 23 -- 23 --

29 24 -- 24
43

Species Green weight 

per cord

Green weight per 

mbf of lumber

Green weight 

per ft3

Air dry weight 

per ft3

--------------------------------------- pounds ----------------------------------------

Ash, white 4300 4000 48 41

Aspen 3900 3600 42 27

Basswood 3800 3500 41 26

Beech 4900 4500 55 44

Birch, yellow 5100 4800 58 43

Birch, white 4500 4200 50 39

Cherry, black 4000 3800 46 35

Elm 5000 4600 56 37

Hemlock 4500 4200 49 28

Hickory 5700 5300 64 51

Locust, black 5200 4800 58 49

Maple, hard 5300 4600 56 44

Maple, soft 4300 3900 50 38

Oak, red 5700 5200 63 44

Oak, white 5600 5200 62 48

Pine, red 3800 3500 42 33

Pine, white 3200 3000 36 25

Spruce 3000 2800 34 28

Table A-8.—Weights for various species (U.S. Forest Service 2008)
44

Figure A-1.—Site index curves for species occurring in northern hardwoods: American beech, yellow birch, red maple, 

white ash, black cherry, red spruce, sugar maple, and white pine (U.S. Forest Service 2008).
45

Figure A-1.—continued.
46

Figure A-2.—Revised white pine 

stocking guide for managed stands 

(Leak and Lamson 1999).

Figure A-3.—Textural classification of soils 

(U.S. Forest Service 2008, Wenger 1984).

Textural Classification of Soils

Soil texture refers to the relative proportions of sand, silt, and clay 

particles that make up the soil mass. Fig. A-3 shows the percentage 

of these soil fractions in the basic textural grades. Use the arrows 

provided to facilitate reading the axes properly.

Three classifications—sandy loam, loam, and silt loam—are 

common surface soils; they also may occur as subsoils. The rest of 

the classifications are subsoils.

For example, a soil consisting of 10 percent clay, 20 percent silt, 

and 70 percent sand is sandy loam.
Printed on Recycled Paper

Leak, William B.; Yamasaki, Mariko; Holleran, Robbo. 2014. Silvicultural guide for 

northern hardwoods in the northeast. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-132. Newtown 

Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research 

Station. 46 p.

This revision of the 1987 silvicultural guide includes updated and expanded 

silvicultural information on northern hardwoods as well as additional information on 

wildlife habitat and the management of mixed-wood and northern hardwood-oak 

stands. The prescription methodology is simpler and more field-oriented. This guide 

also includes an appendix of familiar tables and charts useful to practicing field 

foresters. Northern hardwood forest types can be managed as even- or unevenaged stands using a variety of silvicultural practices. In planning these practices, 

there are many factors to consider including access, species composition, desired 

regeneration, wildlife habitat needs and environmental concerns. The aim of this 

document is to provide guidelines to assist the manager in choosing the right 

methods to meet the landowner objectives consistent with stand conditions.

KEY WORDS: northern hardwoods, silviculture/wildlife prescriptions, even-age 

management, uneven-age management, forest management, beech-birch-maple

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on 

the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial 

status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because 

all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited 

bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternate means for communication 

of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 

(202)720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of 

Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800)795-3272 

(voice) or (202)720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 
Northern Research Station

www.nrs.fs.fed.us