L 

;j=* & United States 

Department 0, 

Agriculture 

Forest Service 

Southern Forest 

Experiment Station 

New Orleans, 

Louisiana 

General Technical Report 

SO-62 

July 1986 

SITEQUAL-A 

User's Guide 

Computerized Site Evaluation for 

14 Southern Hardwood Species 

Constance A. Harrington and Bettina M. Casson 
SUMMARY 

An interactive computer program, SITEQUAL, has been developed from the 

widely-used Baker and Broadfoot field guides, which evaluate site quality for 

14 southern hardwood tree species. The SITEQUAL program calculates site 

index for all species simultaneously and provides a breakdown of site index into 

the component contributions by each of the four major soil factors defined by 

Baker and Broadfoot, When the necessary soil-site information is available, 

SITEQUAL can be used to rapidly evaluate a series of site conditions for all 

species or to determine the relative sensitivity of these species to specific 

conditions including past or proposed land use practices. 
CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION . . Cautions ............................................................ 1 

PROGRAM SITEQUAL ................................................ 2 

Organization ........................................................ 2 

Questions and Answers .............................................. 2 

Options ............................................................. 5 

EXAMPLES AND USES .............................................. 5 

VERSIONS OF SITEQUAL ............................................ 6 

Similarities and Differences .......................................... 6 

Availability ......................................................... 7 

LITERATURE CITED ................................................. 7 

APPENDIX A 

Examples of Special Cases ........................................... 8 

APPENDIX I3 

Variable Names ..................................................... 9 

APPENDIX C 

Flowchart of SITEQUAL Program .................................... 10 
SITEQUAL-A User's Guide 

Computerized Site Evaluation for 14 Southern Hardwood Species 

Constance A. Harrington and Bettina M. Casson 

In the late 1970's, James B. Baker and Walter M. 

Broadfoot of the Southern Forest Experiment Station 

published field guides for evaluating site quality for 

the commercially important hardwood species in the 

Southern United States (Baker and Broadfoot 1977, 

1979). These field guides enable the user to evaluate 

the four major soil factors of physical condition, moisture availability, nutrient availability, and aeration, 

and then to calculate site index for any of the following 14 hardwood tree species: cottonwood (Populus 

deltoides 1, green ash (Frwinus pennsyluanica ), pecan 

(Carya illimnsis ), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), 

sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), yellow poplar 

(Liriodendron tulipifera ), hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), sugarberry (C. Eaevigata), cherrybark oak 

(Quercus fakata var. pagodifolia ), Nuttall oak (Q. 

nuttallii), Shumard oak (Q, shumardii), water oak (Q. 

nigra), willow oak (Q. phellos), and swamp chestnut 

oak (Q. michawcii). The field guides require the user 

to answer a series of questions which quantifj. the soil 

and site conditions of the area being evaluated. Information is required on: soil depth, texture, s-tructure, 

and compaction; presence of a pan; past use and 

present vegetative cover; topographic position including depth to water table, swampiness, length of flooding, and microrelief; soil age and geologic source of 

the parent material; pH, organic matter; and soil 

color. The questions are presented in a modified 

multiple-choice format with each species evaluated in 

separate site evaluation tables. 

This report describes the use of an interactive computer program, SITEQUAL, which was developed 

from the Baker-Broadfoot field guides. SITEQUAL 

predicts site index for all 14 hardwood species at the 

same time. The program requires the same usersupplied information as the published site evaluation 

tables and there are no differences in the site index1 

predicted for any species between the program and 

the Baker-Broadfoot field guides. SITEQUAL does 

differ fmm the Baker-Broadfoot field guides in the 

order and format in which questions are asked; these 

differences in organization allow all species to be evaluated simultaneously and reduce the overlap between 

questions. Several versions of the program are available for different types and models of computers. 

The major advantages of using the SITEQUAL program are completeness and speed. In the past, users of 

the Baker-Broadfoot field guides would commonly 

evaluate only 3 or 4 hardwood species for a site rather 

than all of the 14 possible species. This partial evaluation ran the risk of overlooking species that might be 

more productive than the species evaluated. In addition, the speed at which different sets of site 

conditions can be evaluated makes the SITEQUAL 

program more efficient to use than the field guides, 

especially when a user has the necessary soil-site data 

already "in hand'' for several areas. 

Cautions 

The SITEQUAL program only evaluates the site 

conditions used as input data, and all 14 hardwood 

species will be evaluated for a site, regardless of 

whether or not all species naturally occur on a particular soil. In addition, the broad geographic area of 

applicability for the program is the same as that 

specified in the field guides, i.e., "the southern hard- 

'In the Baker-Broadfoot field guides the phrase "site quality rateing" was used to refer to potential or calculated site index. In this 

report, the more commonly used phrase, site index, is used in place 

of site quality rating. 

Constance A. Hamngton is research foresfer and Bettina M. Casson is computer programmer, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Southern Forest 

Experiment Station, USDA Forest Service, in cooperation with the Department of Forest Resources and Arkansas Agricultural Experiment 

Station, University of Arkansas at Monticello. 

1 
wood region except in those mountainous areas where 

aspect is important" (Baker and Broadfoot 1979, p 2). 

Neither the program nor the field guides should be 

used without modification outside this region unless 

local testing indicates their applicability. 

It is highly recommended that potential users of 

SITEQUAL read the Baker-Broadfoot field guides before using the program. The field guides illustrate 

how the site index values are calculated and contain 

useful background information on assessing soil and 

site properties. 

PROGRAM SITEQUAL 

Organization 

Site index (SI) is calculated by summing the values 

obtained in each of four major soil factors: (1) Physical 

condition; (2) Moisture availability during the growing season; (3) Nutrient availability; and (4) Aeration. 

SITEQUAL calculates a factor value by summing the 

values assigned to the individual soil-site properties. 

The percentage of the maximum allowable value is 

also determined for each factor and species 

combination. Several individual soil-site conditions 

were considered by Baker and Broadfoot to indicate 

the site was unsuitable for a species. Those site conditions, given in table 1, result in the species being 

assigned an unsuitable rating in the output with a 

footnote indicating the reason for the rating (see examples in Appendix A). The computed SI value is also 

compared to the minimum acceptable value established by Baker and Broadfoot for each species 

(table 1). A footnote in the output table indicates if the 

The SITEQUAL program consists of 12 major pro- calculated value is below the minimum acceptable 

gram segments with each segment containing the cal- value. 

culations for 1 or 2 species. Hackberry and sugarbeny 

are evaluated in one segment, water oak and 

willow oak are evaluated together in another program 

segment, and the other 10 species are evaluated individually. The first program segment is for cottonwood; 

in addition to calculating site index for cottonwood, 

this segment also contains all of the questions, and 

accepts the answers for all of the other species. The 

answers given in the first program segment are 

checked to see if they are within acceptable ranges for 

that question. If an answer is not acceptable the question is repeated. If answers given in the first program 

segment are acceptable, they are automatically 

passed to the next 11 program segments for calculation of the site index values for the other species. The 

program logic is flowcharted in Appendix C. 

Questions and Answers 

The SITEQUAL program requires information on 

various soil and site characteristics (table 2). Most 

answers can be selected from a multiple choice format. The user needs to press only one number key and 

then the <RETURN> or <ENTER> key. A site identification in the form of a number or name is required; 

any combination of letters, numbers, spaces, or special characters can be used, up to a maximum of 17 

characters or spaces. Values for pH can be input as 

either whole numbers (e.g. 5) or with decimal fractions (e.g. 4.5). All other questions require a single 

digit response. Out of range answers result in the 

question being asked again. 

Table 1.-Summary of minimum site index values and unsuitable soil-site conditions which result 

in comment footnotes in the program output 

Condition resulting in unsuitable ratings Minimum SI" and footnoted by program considered Tree species acceptable for Water table Water- Flooding 

management < 1 foot logging continuous 

Cottonwood 

Green Ash 

Hackbev, Sugarberry 

Cherrybark Oak 

Nuttall Oak 

Shumard Oak 

Swamp Chestnut Oak 

Water Oak, Willow Oak 

Pecan 

Sweetgum 

Sycamore 

Yellow Poplar 

-- 

-- Feet --- 

IS1 is site index at age 30 for cottcmwood, age 50 for other species. 
Table 2.-Listing of SITEQUIQL qwstbw and possible answers. Questlow pmceded by a * are only tyhd if the user9s response to a previous 

gustion triggers the program to ask for additbnal infirmation. 

This program predicts site index for 14 southern hardwood species. It requires the user to answer questions on soil properties and site 

charaeteristies for each area that is evaluated. The questions are answered by pwasing the appropriate key or keys (most answer8 we a 1-digit 

number) followed by preming the "E=~WW) key. 

Do you wish to run this program? 

(1) Yes 

(2) No 

Input Site number or name 

Input presence of artificial or inherent pan from the following list: 

(I) Without pan 

(2) Plowpan 

(3) Inherent pan 

*Input depth of soil that can be readily occupied by roots from the following list: 

(1) Deep soil; >4 feet 

(2) Medium soil; 2-4 feet 

(3) Shallow soil; <2 feet 

Does the soil contain any stratified horizons within the effective rooting zone? 

(I) Yes, major horizons are stratified 

(2) No, major horizons are not stratified 

Input the structure in rooting zone from the following list: 

(1) Granular 

(2) Massive (if silty, loamy, or mucky) 

(3) Massive (if clayey) 

(4) Single grained (if sandy) 

(5) Prismatic 

(6) Platy 

(7) Blocky 

*Input the soil texture in rooting zone from the following list: 

(1) Fine-textured; clayey 

(2) Medium-textured; silty or loamy 

(3) Coarse-textured; sandy 

Classify compaction in the surface foot from the following list: 

(1) No compaction; loose, porous, fkiable; (bulk density C1.4 glcc) 

(2) Moderately compacted; firm, moderately tighG (bulk density 1.4-1.7 gIcc) 

(3) Strongly compacted; tight; (bulk density >1.7 g/w) 

Input present cover from the following list: 

(1) Forest cover (includes sites recently clearcut) 

(2) Open with grass cover 

(3) Open and bare 

*How many years has this site been cultivated or pastured? 

(1) 0 (i.e. never cleared for cultivation or pasture) 

(2) 1-4 years 

(3) 5-9 years 

(4) 10-19 years 

(5) 20 years or more 

*Did past farming cultural practices include annual fertilization? 

(1) Yes 

(2) No 

Input average depth to water table during the growing season hm the following list: 

(1) <I foot 

(2) 1-2 feet 

(3) 2-6 f~t 

(4) 7-10 f~t 

(5) >10 feet 
Table 2.-Listing ofSITE(;;IU;AL questions and possible amwers. Questiom preceded by a * are only asked if the mer's respome to a previous 

questlbn triggers the pmgmm to ask for ruLditional infb~ion,-Codmd - - 

Input the topographic position from the following list: 

(1) Fldplain or stream bottom 

(2) Stream terraces or lower slopes 

(3) Upland 

Input the microsite hm the following list: 

f 1) Concave; depression, pocket, trough 

(2) Level; flat 

(3) Convex; ridge, mound 

Input flooding times from the following list: 

(I) Winter through spring 

(2) Winter only 

(3) None 

(4) Continuous 

Input the geologic source from the following list: 

(1) Mississippi River, Loess, Blackland 

(2) Mixed Coastal Plain and other 

(3) Coastal Plain 

Input the organic matter in A-horizon fiom the following list: 

(1) Organic matter >2% 

(2) Organic matter r 1% or Organic matter 52% 

(3) Organic matter <1% 

Input depth of topsoil (A-horizon) fkom the following list: 

(1) >6 inches or no profile development 

(2) 3-6 inches 

(3) <3 inches 

Input soil age from the following list: 

(1 1 Young; no profile development (Entisols) 

(2) Medium; moderate profile development (Inceptisols) 

(3) Old; well-developed profile, leached (Alfisols, Ultisols) 

Input pH in rooting zone. EX. 5.5 

Input swampiness from the following list: 

(1) Wet in winter only 

(2) Wet January-July 

(3) Waterlogged all year 

Input mottling from the following list: 

(1) None to 18 inch depth 

(2) None to 8 inch depth 

(3) Mottled to surface or gray mineral soil 

Input soil color in rooting zone from the following list: 

(1) Black, brown, red 

(2) Yellow, brownish-gray 

(3) Gray 

Do you want a listing of your input values. 

(1) Yes, please provide a listing 

(2) No, input listing is not necessary 

Do you want to do another set of site evaluations? 

(1) Yes 

(2) No 
Options 

The program provides the user with three choices or 

options. men SITEQUAL begins, it presents an introductory paragraph and asks the user whether he or 

she wishes to run the program (table 2). If the user 

presses 1 (meaning Yes, followed by pressing 

<RETURN>), the program continues by asking the 

user to "Input site number or name"'. If the user 

presses 2 (meaning No, followed by pressing 

<RETURN>), the program goes to the END statement and stops. Thus, the first option provides the 

user a chance to exit the program gracefilly (i.e. without "crashing"). 

The other two choices offered the user occur at the 

end of the program-user dialog. The user is first 

asked, "Do you want a listing of your input values?" If' 

the question is answered (by pressing 1 

and then <RETURN>), a list of the input values for 

each soil-site property will be printed above the basic 

summary table (see table 3). The input values listed 

correspond to the categories selected by the user. For 

example the "1" printed to the right of "Presence of 

pan" in table 3 corresponds to the category "(1) Without pan" in the listing of the SITEQUAL qwstions 

(table 2). If the question on input values is answered 

negatively, only the basic suIlzmary table is provided. 

r answering this question, the output will begin printing (see discussion under 

"Versions of SITEQUAL'Vor systems without a 

printer). Following the printing of the output, the program will ask, ""Do you want to do another set of site 

evaluations?'" If the answer is Yes (i.e., 1 was pressed), 

the program will loop back to the beginning and 

restart. If No is selected (i.e., 2 is pressed), the program goes to the END statement and stops. 

ElUMPUS AND USES 

The output available from a run of SITEQUAL is 

illustrated in table 3. It is composed of a title, site 

identification, optional listing of input values, and 

summary table. For all 14 hardwood species the program calculates the number of points assigned in each 

of the four soil factors and the total site index. In 

addition, the calculated value for each factor is diTable 3.-Example of output obtained using SITEQUAL progmrn and selecting the option to print 

the input values. SI is site index in feet at 30 years for cottonwood and 50 years for the 

other species 

SITEQUALSite Evaluation for 14 southern hardwoods. 

Site ID Example 1 

Input values for each soil site property. 

Presense of pan 

Stratification 

Soil structure 

Compaction 

Water table depth 

Microsite 

Geologic source 

Topsoil depth 

PH 

Mottling 

Soil depth 1 

Soil texture 

Present cover 

Topographic position 

Flooding times 

Organic matter 

Soil age 

Swampinesa 

Soil color 

Number of points and % of total possible by factor' 

Species Physical Moisture Nutrient Aeration Total 

condition avail. avail. SI -- 

Cottonwood 

Green Ash 

Hackberry, Sugarberry 

Cherrybark Oak 

Nuttall Oak 

Shumard Oak 

Swamp Chestnut Oak 

Water Oak, Willow Oak 

Pecan 

Sweetgum 

Sycamore 

Yellow Poplar 
vided by the maximum number possible and the resulting percentage is printed. This calculation enables the user to readily identify which of the four 

major soil factors is at the least optimum level. In the 

example giwn in &;rbk 3, two sf the soil factam evaluated for Nuttall oak have similar values-Moisture 

Availability (31) and Nutrient Availability (28). In 

the model developed by Baker and Broadfoot, however, moisture availability during the growing season 

was considered to be more important than nutrient 

availability in detemining site quality for Nuttall 

oak; thus, the prcentage of total points possible differs between the two soil factors (74 percent versus 

93 percent). The soil factor achieving the lowest percentage-moisture availability in the above example-was considered by Baker and Broadfoot as the 

factor that was most limiting to tree growth on that 

basic soil charackristics as in table 3, but in the second case the sik had been cropped for 30 years rather 

than having been under tree cover. For this scenario 

it was assumed that 30 years of cropping had caused 

development of a plow pan and moderate compaction 

in the surface foot of soil but that little topsoil had 

been lost due to erosion. Predicted site index was 

lower for all species (after cropping!, but the magnitude of the reduction varied by species. Cottonwood 

was the species most sensitive to the site changes 

associated with cropping, losing a total of 36 feet of 

potential site index (125 minus 89). Pecan was the 

least sensitive, losing 23 feet of site index. 

WRSIONS OF SITEQUAL 

site. Similarities and Differences 

Another possible use of the SITEQUAL program is 

to evaluate the relative sensitivity of these hardwood SITEQUAL was written in the BASIC computer 

tree species to past land use practices (e.g., agricul- language; unfortunately since a standardized version 

tural cropping) or proposed future practices (e.g., con- of BASIC does not exist, several versions of the prostruction of a drainage system). For example, the val- gram needed to be created so the program could be run 

ues in table 4 weredetermined by using the same on different types and models of computers (table 5). 

Table 4.-Example of SITEQUAL output. Soil and site conditions in this example are the same as 

in table 3 except for emmple 2 it was assumed the site had been cultivated for 30 years. 

As a result of cultivation, a plow pan and moderate compaction developed and organic 

matter content was decreased. 

SITEQUAL-Site Evaluation for 14 southern hardwoods. 

Site ID Example 2 

Input values for each soil site property. 

Presense of pan 

Stratification 

Soil structure 

Compaction 

Past use 

Water table depth 

Mimsite 

Geologic source 

Topmil depth 

pH 

Mottling 

2 

1 

1 Soil texture 2 

2 Present cover 3 

5 Fertilization 2 

4 Topographic position I 

2 Flooding times 1 

1 Organic matter 3 

1 Soil age 1 

7 Swampiness 1 

1 Soil color 1 

Number of points and % of total possible by factor 

Species Physical Moisture Nutrient Aeration Total 

condition avail. avail. SI 

Cottonwood 

Green Ash 

Hackberry, Sugarberry 

Cherrybark Oak 

Nuttall Oak 

Shumard Oak 

Swamp Chestnut Oak 

Water Oak, Willow Oak 

Pecan 

Sweetgum 

Sycamore 

Yellow Poplar 
Table 5.-Summary ofSITE&URL vershns 

Language Tested on 

of version these machines Special coments 

- 

WP BASIC Hewlett Packard $3845 

AppleSoft" Apple IIe, IIe 

BASIC 

MicroSoft" IBM-PC, North Star 

BASIC Advantage, 

Cromemco, Panasonic 

Partner, Compaq 

rI G Ddsher One 

%%era doing re~atd, 

sets of site evaluations, 

user can press <COPIT> 

key for values that do not 

change beLween dtes. 

Both 40-and 80-colversions are available. 

North Star ~ersion reloads 

program for subsequent 

runs, other MicroSoBT" 

versions go to question 

asking for site ID. 

Program creates output 

file; user must send output file to printer. 

All versions of the program give identical answers. 

We have only run the program on the computer models listed in the table; however, virtually any machine 

that runs MicroSoftTM BASIC should run the MicroSoft '" BASIC interpreted version of SITEQUAL without changes. Although the language version of the 

program may be the same for many machines, the 

user must make sure he or she uses the right type of 

diskette, data cartridge, or tape and that it has been 

correctly formatted for his or her system. 

The AppleSoftT" BASIC and BASIC-11 versions of 

the program differ from the other two major versions 

in that they do not utilize any IFITHENELSE statements, and variable names are limited to two characters (Appendix B). Other machines with similar requirements for their type of BASIC may be able to run 

one of these program versions with little or no modification. 

All versions of SITEQUAL except the BASIC-11 

version automatically route the program output to the 

printer port. If a "printer version" of the program is 

run on a machine which is not connected to a printer, 

the output phase of the program will result in an error 

message or will cause the machine to "freeze". If the 

user wishes to run the program but does not have 

access to a printer, all LPRINT statements in the program (for the printer) must be changed to PRINT 

statements (for the screen). 

With the Hewlett Packard Interpreter all soil-site 

variable values and all question values are retained 

in memory. Thus, when evaluating more than one 

site, the values from the first evaluation can be input 

for the second evaluation by pressing <CONT>. This 

allows the user to change the value of any variable 

that is different, but eliminates the need to re-input 

values that are the same as were used in the evaluation of the previous side. On most other syskms each 

time a site is evaluated the program is loaded back in 

memory, a process which erases any soil-site variable 

values or question values that were used previously. 

The user must supply a new value for each question 

every time a new site is evaluated, 

The AppleSoftTM version of SITEQUAL is available 

in both 40 column and 80 column subversions. The 

versions are almost identical except for fomatting. 

However, if the 80 column version is run on a machine 

that does not contain an 80 column card, the program 

will be scrambled. After initially turning on the 80 

column card, it is not necessary to repeat the process, 

as the program does it automatically after each site 

evaluation table is printed. 

Availability 

A program listing, program documentation, or 

copies of the SITEQUAL program may be obtained by 

contacting the authors at the Southern Forest Experiment Station, Box 3516, Mcmnticello, AR 71655, 501- 

367-3464. Requests by mail should include a name, 

address, and phone number as well as a blank 

diskette, data cartidge, or tape which is compatible 

with the version being requested. If a MicroSoftTM 

BASIC version is desired, please indicate whether a 

compiled or an interpreted program is needed. An interpreted program can be changed by the user; however, in order to actually run an interpreted program, 

the user must have a BASIC interpreter software program that is compatable with the user's system. Compiled programs can be run without additional software but cannot be altered. 

LITERATURE CITED 

Baker, J.B., Broadfoot, W.M. A practical field method 

of site evaluation for eight important southern 

hardwoods. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-14. New Orleans, 

LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station; 1977. 

31 p. 

Baker, J.B., Broadfoot, W.M. A practical field method 

of site evaluation for commercially important 

southern hardwoodset Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-26. New 

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

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station; 1979. 51 p. 
APPENDIX A 

Examples of Special Cases 

The following two examples illustrate the footnotes 

that appear when the site quality rating is below the 

minimum acceptable value established for a species 

(example 3) or when a specific soil-site property 

makes the site unsuitable for a species (example 4). 

Site ID Example 3 

Number of points and % of total possible by factor 

Species Physical Moisture Nutrient Aeration Total 

condition avail. avail. SI 

Cottonwood 

Green Ash 

Hackberry, Sugarberry 

Cherrybark Oak 

Nuttall Oak 

Shumard Oak 

Swamp Chestnut Oak 

Water Oak, Willow Oak 

Pecan 

Sweetgum 

Sycamore 

Yellow Pop!ar 

@Total SI is below minimum site index considered reasonable for planting or managing this 

species unless soil conditions can be improved. 

Site ID Example 4 

Number of points and % of total possible by factor 

Species Physical Moisture Nutrient 

condition avail. avail. Total SI Aeration 

Cottonwood 

Green Ash 

Hackberry, Sugarberry 

Cherrybark Oak 

Nuttall Oak 

Shumard Oak 

Swamp Chestnut Oak 

Water Oak, Willow Oak 

Pecan 

Sweetgum 

Sycamore 

Yellow Poplar 

90 

83 

80 

Unsuitable 

Unsuitable 

Unsuitable 

Unsuitable 

Unsuitable 

93 

101 

100 

87 

*Site is classified unsuitable for this species because pH is above 7.5. 
Soil-site and factor variable names by program version 

Soil-site variables Factor variables 

MicroSoR All other Conditiom being MicroSoR All other 

version versions quantified version versions -- - 

Factor 1. Physical condition 

HRDP H1 m~an 

SOLD 53 Soil Depth 

STRC S5 Soil Structure 

TEXRT T1 Texture (Rooting Zone) 

CMP C1 Compaction 

PAST1 PI Present Cover 

PAST2 P2 Cultivation 

Factor 2. Moisture availability during the growing season 

WAT W1 Water Table Depth 

HRDP H1 Hardpan 

TOP0 T2 Topographic Position 

MICR Ml Microsite 

STRC S5 Soil Structure 

STR 54 Stratification 

TEXRT T1 Texture (Rooting zone) 

FLD F7 Flooding 

PAST1 P1 Present Cover 

PAST2 P2 Cultivation 

Factor 3. Nutrient availability 

GEOS G1 

PAST1 P1 

PAST2 P2 

FQ F6 

ORGM 01 

TSOL T3 

SOLA S1 

PH P3 

Geologic Source 

Present Cover 

Cultivation 

Fertilization 

Organic Matter 

Topsoil 

Soil Age 

PH 

Factor 4. Aeration 

STRC S5 Soil Structure 

SWP S6 Swampiness 

MOTT M2 Mottling 

SOLC S2 Soil Color 

SPV 

SPV 

SZV 

TRV 

CBV 

PSlV 

PSlV 

m 

APV 

TPV 

MSV 

SRV 

SRV 

TXV 

FLV 

PS2V 

PS2V 

GSV 

PS3V 

PS3V 

PS3V 

OMV 

TSV 

SAV 

PHV 
START 

0 

I INTRODUCTION 

I 

SITE NA4E 

L.J1;Ell --

OF PAN 

EVALUATE 

FOR SPV 

STRATIFIED 

HORIZONS 

1 

SOIL READILY 

OCCUPIED BY 

ROOTS I 

EVALUATE 

FOR SZV 

ROOTING ZONE 

NO 

EVALUATE 

FOR CBV 

w 
EVALUATE 

FOR PSlV I 

CULTIVATED 

SET FQ=2 

I 

J1 

EVALUATE 

FOR PSlV 

* i 

EVALUATE FOR 

WTV & APV 

I 

WATER TABLE 

POSITION 

I 

EVALUAT

FOR TX

FOR SAV 

FOR PHV 

FOR SZ2V 

SWAMPINESS 

- 

EVALUATE 

FOR SWV 

CALCULATE 

r_L

PERI, "PER2 

HEADINGS 

SITE VALUE

F 

CALCULAT

NEXT II 

PROGRAM 

SEGMENTS 

ANOTHER 

G 

STOP 
METRIC EQUIVAmmS 

1 foot = 3.28 meters 

1 inch = 2.54 centimeters 

The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service. 
Harrington, Constance A*, and Casson, Bettina M. SITEQUAL-A user's guide. Computerized site evaluation for 14 

southern hardwood species. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-62. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station; 1986, 13 p. 

SITEQUAL, an interactive computer program, evaluates site 

quality for 14 southern hardwood tree species. This report 

rapidly evaluates site conditions for all species or determines 

the relative sensitivity of these species to specific conditions, 

including past or proposed land use practices. 

Additional keywords: Soil-site prediction, site index, site 

quality, computer programsfprogramming.