53$EPARTMENTOFTHE)NTERIOR 53$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE

53'EOLOGICAL3URVEY &OREST3ERVICE3OUTHERN2ESEARCH3TATION

!'UIDETO

"OTTOMLAND(ARDWOOD2ESTORATION

53'3"2$ )NFORMATIONAND4ECHNOLOGY2EPORT


53$!&OREST3ERVICE

'ENERAL4ECHNICAL2EPORT323n

2EVISED-AY
4ECHNICAL2EPORT3ERIES

53'EOLOGICAL3URVEY

4HE"IOLOGICAL2ESOURCES$IVISIONPUBLISHESSCIENTIlCANDTECHNICALARTICLESANDREPORTSRESULTINGFROMTHERESEARCH

PERFORMEDBYOURSCIENTISTSANDPARTNERS 4HESEARTICLESAPPEARINPROFESSIONALJOURNALSAROUNDTHEWORLD 2EPORTSARE

PUBLISHEDINTWOREPORTSERIES"IOLOGICAL3CIENCE2EPORTSAND)NFORMATIONAND4ECHNOLOGY2EPORTS

3ERIES$ESCRIPTIONS

"IOLOGICAL3CIENCE2EPORTS )33.
8

4HISSERIESRECORDSTHESIGNIlCANTlNDINGSRESULTINGFROM

SPONSOREDANDCOSPONSOREDRESEARCHPROGRAMS4HEYMAY

INCLUDE EXTENSIVE DATA OR THEORETICAL ANALYSES 0APERS IN THIS

SERIESAREHELDTOTHESAMEPEER
REVIEWANDHIGHQUALITY

STANDARDSASTHEIRJOURNALCOUNTERPARTS

)NFORMATIONAND4ECHNOLOGY2EPORTS )33.


4HESE REPORTS ARE INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION OF BOOK


LENGTH MONOGRAPHS SYNTHESIS DOCUMENTS COMPILATIONS

OFCONFERENCEANDWORKSHOPPAPERSIMPORTANTPLANNING

ANDREFERENCEMATERIALSSUCHASSTRATEGICPLANSSTANDARD

OPERATING PROCEDURES PROTOCOLS HANDBOOKS AND MANUALS

ANDDATACOMPILATIONSSUCHASTABLESANDBIBLIOGRAPHIES

0APERSINTHISSERIESAREHELDTOTHESAMEPEER
REVIEWAND

HIGHQUALITYSTANDARDSASTHEIRJOURNALCOUNTERPARTS

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

4HE3OUTHERN2ESEARCH3TATIONREPORTSAREPUBLISHEDINFOURREPORTSERIES2ESEARCH0APERS'ENERAL4ECHNICAL

2EPORTS2ESEARCH.OTESAND2ESOURCE"ULLETINSALLARESUBJECTEDTOPEERANDEDITORIALREVIEW

3ERIES$ESCRIPTIONS

2ESEARCH0APERS

4HISSERIESRECORDSTHERESULTSANALYSESANDCONCLUSIONS

OFFORMALSTUDIESOREXPERIMENTS

'ENERAL4ECHNICAL2EPORTS

4HIS SERIES RECORDS INFORMATION OF A TECHNICAL NATURE

BUT NOT AN ORIGINAL REPORT %XAMPLES ARE PROCEEDINGS

COMPUTERPROGRAMSANDANNOTATEDBIBLIOGRAPHIES

2ESEARCH.OTES

4HIS SERIES RECORDS OBSERVATIONAL INFORMATION ON NEW

TECHNIQUES OR INSTRUMENTS ESPECIALLY OF HOW
TO
DO
IT

TYPEORINCIDENTALDISCOVERY

2ESOURCE"ULLETINS

4HISSERIESCONTAINSECONOMICINFORMATIONOFPERMANENT

VALUE ON TIMBER AND OTHER FOREST RESOURCES OR THEIR

UTILIZATION

53'3
.ATIONAL7ETLANDS2ESEARCH#ENTER

4ECHNOLOGY)NFORMATICS"RANCH

#HIEF

'AYE3&ARRIS

0RODUCTION3TAFF

%DITORS 4AMMY-#HARRON*OHNSON

#ONTROLS7ORLD3ERVICES	

2HONDA&$AVIS

"ETH!6AIRIN

,AYOUT .ATALIE'4RAHAN*OHNSON

#ONTROLS7ORLD3ERVICES	

0RINTING,IAISON #OVERDESIGN 3USAN-,AURITZEN
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Geological Survey Forest Service 

A Guide to Bottomland Hardwood 

Restoration

J.A. Allen, B.D. Keeland, J.A. Stanturf, A.F. Clewell, and H.E. Kennedy, Jr.

USGS BRD Information and Technology Report 2000-0011

USDA Forest Service

General Technical Report SRS–40

Revised May 2004
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of Agriculture

Gale A. Norton, Secretary Ann M. Veneman, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey Forest Service

Charles G. Groat, Director Dale Bosworth, Chief

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2001 

(revised May 2004)

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this 

publication is for descriptive purposes only 

and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. 

Government.

Copies of this publication are available from the National 

Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161 (1-800-553-6847 or 703-487-4650). Copies 

also are available to registered users from the Defense Technical 

Information Center, Attn.: Help Desk, 8725 Kingman Road, 

Suite 0944, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060-6218 (1-800-225-3842 

or 703-767-9050) and from the Southern Research Station, Attn: 

Publications Distribution, P.O. Box 2680, Asheville, North Carolina 28802 (828-257-4392).

Suggested citation:

Allen, J.A., Keeland, B.D., Stanturf, J.A., Clewell, A.F., 

and Kennedy, H.E., Jr., 2001 (revised 2004), A guide 

to bottomland hardwood restoration: U.S. Geological 

Survey, Biological Resources Division Information 

and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR–2000-0011, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station, General Technical Report 

SRS–40, 132 p.
Preface

The primary focus of this guide is to provide information for land managers and landowners who want to reestablish bottomland hardwood forest vegetation, particularly the trees, on lands where they formerly occurred. 

Restoration and reforestation are approached with the realization that hydrology, as the driving force of wetland 

ecosystems, must be explicitly considered in all projects. Without the proper hydrologic regime for the site conditions and tree species selected for planting, it is unlikely that a project will be a success. It is assumed that the goal 

of the audience using this guide is at least the reestablishment of bottomland hardwood forest systems and hopefully 

the restoration of all functions and values associated with these forests (e.g., storage of floodwaters, water quality 

improvement, provision of wildlife habitat, etc.).

It is unlikely that a publication will ever be produced that contains all the information needed for an untrained 

person to plan and implement a completely successful restoration project. Certainly, this guide has no such pretensions. We have tried to make the guide as comprehensive as possible but concise, realizing there is probably much 

that we have missed. In addition, there are currently information needs expressed by practitioners that have not been 

adequately addressed by researchers.

This guide will provide the reader with a reasonably comprehensive introduction to the wide range of activities 

and techniques which, taken together, make up the process of bottomland hardwood restoration as it is now understood. Hopefully, this guide will also provide valuable information to experienced, professional ecosystem ecologists, especially those who have worked mainly with other types of wetland systems.

Whenever possible, the novice restorationist should seek opportunities to work with experienced professionals 

during every phase of their projects, from initial planning, through implementation, to monitoring and reporting. Opportunities to visit ongoing or completed restoration projects should also be sought.

First and foremost, though, understanding the ecology of bottomland hardwood systems is vitally important. 

Without a fundamental understanding of factors such as the seasonal patterns of flooding and groundwater dynamics, 

species-site relationships, seed dispersal mechanisms, plant establishment requirements, and plant-animal interactions, a restoration project is unlikely to be fully successful. In many ways, ongoing efforts to reestablish bottomland 

forest systems is a continuing experiment. As new information is gained, it should be cycled back into the decisionmaking process and subsequent forest reestablishment efforts.

iii
Contents

Page

Preface .................................... iii

Abstract..................................... 1

Chapter 1. Introduction ............ 2

Definition of Bottomland Hardwoods................................................................................................................. 2

Geographic Scope................ 2

What is Restoration?............ 2

The Need for Restoration .... 4

Restoration and Mitigation .. 5

Restoration, Ecosystems, and Landscape............................................................................................................ 5

The Environmental Impacts of Restoration......................................................................................................... 6

Sustainability of Restoration Projects ................................................................................................................. 6

Selected References............. 7

Chapter 2. General Planning Considerations........................................................................................................... 9

Project Goals, Objectives, and Success Criteria.................................................................................................. 9

Project Site Design .............. 9

Regeneration Method ........ 10

Obtaining Planting Stock... 11

Personnel Requirements.... 11

Equipment.......................... 11

Timing of Project Operations............................................................................................................................ 11

Selected References........... 12

Chapter 3. Evaluation of the Site ........................................................................................................................... 13

Abiotic Site Factors........... 13

Climate ...................... 13

Hydrology.................. 14

Soils........................... 15

Biotic Site Factors ............. 16

Plant Competition and Exotic Species ...................................................................................................... 16

Animals ..................... 17

Insects and Disease.... 17

Human Influences.............. 17

Selected References........... 17

Chapter 4. Species Selection.. 19

Reference Sites.................. 19

Selected References........... 34

Chapter 5. Site Preparation .... 35

Site Preparation on Old-Field Sites................................................................................................................... 35

Restoring Hydrology . 35

Restoring Soil............ 36

Control of Plant Competition .................................................................................................................... 36

Site Preparation on Heavily Disturbed Sites ..................................................................................................... 38

Surface Contouring.... 38

Restoring Soil Characteristics................................................................................................................... 39

Establishment of Ground Cover................................................................................................................ 39

Selected References........... 40

Chapter 6. Seed Collection, Handling, and Storage............................................................................................... 41

Seed Collection.................. 41

Seed Handling ................... 41

Seed Storage ...................... 42

Selected References........... 43

iv
Chapter 7. Direct Seeding...... 45

Seasonal Timing ................ 45

Depth of Sowing and Spacing ........................................................................................................................... 46

Hand Sowing ..................... 47

Machine Sowing................ 48

Aerial Seeding ................... 52

Selected References........... 53

Chapter 8. Planting Seedlings 54

Choice of Seedling Type.... 54

Bare-Root Seedlings.. 54

Containerized Seedlings............................................................................................................................ 55

Handling Seedlings............ 57

Timing of Planting............. 58

Spacing .............................. 58

Planting with Hand Tools.. 58

Planting with Machines..... 60

Selected References........... 61

Chapter 9. Other Options for Revegetation............................................................................................................ 62

Cuttings.............................. 62

Transplants......................... 62

Topsoiling .......................... 63

Natural Regeneration......... 64

Selected References........... 65

Chapter 10. Establishing Native Undergrowth Vegetation .................................................................................... 67

Ecological Importance of Understory Plants..................................................................................................... 67

Biodiversity ............... 67

Ecological Functions. 67

Natural Regeneration of Undergrowth .............................................................................................................. 68

Number of Species Necessary for Restoration.................................................................................................. 68

Establishing Undergrowth Plantings................................................................................................................. 69

Transplanting............. 69

Topsoiling.................. 69

Selected References........... 69

Chapter 11. Postplanting Control of Undesirable Vegetation................................................................................ 70

Manual Vegetation Control 70

Mechanical Vegetation Control ......................................................................................................................... 70

Vegetation Control with Herbicides .................................................................................................................. 72

Selected References........... 72

Chapter 12. Protection of the Restoration Site....................................................................................................... 75

Protection from Animals ... 75

Protection from Fire .......... 76

Protection from Human Impacts ....................................................................................................................... 76

Selected References........... 77

Chapter 13. Monitoring.......... 78

Vegetation Monitoring....... 78

Hydrologic Monitoring...... 79

Water Quality Monitoring . 82

Soils Monitoring................ 83

Wildlife Monitoring........... 83

Selected References........... 85

Chapter 14. Rehabilitation and Management of Existing Forests ......................................................................... 86

Determining Present Site and Stand Conditions ............................................................................................... 86

Site Reconnaissance and Inventory ........................................................................................................... 87

Assessment of Site Potential ..................................................................................................................... 87

v
Site Inventory ............ 89

Identifying Cause of Site Degradation ...................................................................................................... 89

Clarifying Objectives......... 89

Choosing the Silvicultural System .................................................................................................................... 90

Management Versus Regeneration ............................................................................................................ 90

Is Oak an Objective?.. 90

Managing the Existing Stand .................................................................................................................... 92

Regeneration.............. 94

Bringing Back the Bush..... 99

Selected References........... 99

Acknowledgments................. 100

Glossary ................................ 100

Appendix A. Society of American Foresters Cover Type Descriptions .............................................................. 103

Appendix B. Common and Scientific Names of Plant and Tree Species ............................................................ 114

Appendix C. Partial List of Seed and Seedling Suppliers ................................................................................... 118

Appendix D. Species-Site Relationships in the Midsouth................................................................................... 123

Appendix E. Species-Site Relationships in the Southern Atlantic Coastal Plain ................................................ 129

Figures

Number Page

1.1 Distribution of bottomland hardwood forests in the lower Midwest and 

southeastern United States........................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Engineering drawings depicting surface contours, structural specifications, and locations 

of various forest types to be planted can be helpful .................................................................................. 10

3.1 Hydrographs of typical bottomland hardwood sites.................................................................................. 14

3.2 Topographic positions and associated forest cover types within a river floodplain .................................. 15

3.3 Soil penetrometer being used to assess soil compaction........................................................................... 16

5.1 Old field being disked to alleviate soil compaction before planting ......................................................... 37

5.2 Subsoiling for severe cases of soil compaction......................................................................................... 37

5.3 Phosphate mine site showing the degree of habitat alteration................................................................... 38

6.1 Fresh acorns being collected in an appropriate container in the field ....................................................... 42

6.2 Processing acorns using the float test to determine viability..................................................................... 42

6.3 Sacks of acorns in a large cold storage unit .............................................................................................. 43

7.1 Restoration site where oaks have been successfully established by direct seeding .................................. 47

7.2 This hand tool, developed by the U.S. Forest Service, can make hand sowing of 

acorns much easier .... 48

 7.3 Two types of modified agricultural planters used for direct seeding......................................................... 49

7.4 The Truax large seed planter ..................................................................................................................... 50

7.5 Machine developed by U.S. Forest Service for sowing acorns in nursery seedbeds................................. 51

7.6 Crop duster used for sowing acorns .......................................................................................................... 52

8.1 Selection of larger sized containers for growing seedlings....................................................................... 54

8.2 Good quality bare-root oak seedlings........................................................................................................ 55

8.3 Root-bound seedling grown in a 1-gallon container ................................................................................. 55

8.4 Carolina ash seedlings grown in plastic sacks........................................................................................... 56

8.5 Dahoon tubelings removed from their pots and ready for planting........................................................... 56

8.6 A bulb planter is a commonly used hand tool for planting seedlings ....................................................... 57

8.7 A good field method to protect the roots of seedlings is to carry them in a planting bag......................... 57

8.8 Bare-root seedlings can be planted using a sharpshooter shovel, dibble bar, or bulb planter.................. 58

8.9 Planting technique for use with hand tools ............................................................................................... 59

8.10 It is critical that tree seedlings be planted properly................................................................................... 59

vi
8.11 Mechanical seedling planter...................................................................................................................... 60

9.1 Bundle of cottonwood cuttings.................................................................................................................. 62

9.2 One-year-old green ash seedling grown from a horizontally planted cutting ........................................... 62

9.3 Tree spade used for planting large saplings or small trees........................................................................ 63

9.4 Scrapers are useful for short-distance transport of topsoil........................................................................ 64

9.5 Bulldozer spreading topsoil at Hall’s Branch restoration site ................................................................... 65

11.1 Manual vine control can be accomplished using brushhooks or machetes............................................... 70

11.2 Mechanical cultivation of a restoration site............................................................................................... 71

11.3 Guidance on the timing of herbicide applications in commercial forestry ............................................... 73

11.4 Herbicide application with a backpack sprayer......................................................................................... 73

12.1 Herbivory protection by (a) wire predator guard and (b) plastic tree shelter............................................ 75

12.2 An informative sign such as this can provide useful information to individuals

using or visiting the site............................................................................................................................. 76

13.1 Diagonal layout of sample transects across a direct-seeded field ............................................................. 80

13.2 Location of forest reclamation strip quadrats at the Agrico Swamp West restoration site ....................... 80

13.3 Tree survival trends at Morrow Swamp (Agrico Swamp West) restoration site ....................................... 81

13.4 Staff gages, piezometers, and monitoring wells can be used to determine the pattern 

of flooding (hydrologic regime) of a restoration site................................................................................. 81

13.5 Placement of piezometers and staff gages on a reclaimed phosphate site in Florida................................ 82

13.6 Example of an automated, single purpose water level recorder, the WL-80............................................. 83

14.1 Bottomland hardwood stand degraded by years of mismanagement ........................................................ 86

14.2 A generalized guide for regenerating southern hardwoods....................................................................... 92

14.3 Example of damage caused by poor logging practices ............................................................................. 93

14.4 Mature cane brakes provide habitat for numerous wildlife species.......................................................... 94

14.5 Snags left in a clearcut on Scott Paper land near Mobile, Alabama.......................................................... 95

14.6 Natural forest site that has been clearcut, sheared, root-raked, and disked............................................... 96

14.7 Five to 10-year-old regenerating clearcut.................................................................................................. 97

14.8 Shelterwood cut......... 98

14.9 Aerial photo of several group selection cuts ............................................................................................. 99

Tables

1.1 Bottomland hardwood forest cover types.................................................................................................... 2

2.1 General definitions of mitigation success used in MiST........................................................................... 10

2.2 Seven “grievous errors” that have been made on restoration projects in the absence 

of adequate training and supervision......................................................................................................... 11

2.3 Partial list of equipment occasionally used in restoration projects and examples of 

how they are used ...... 12

3.1 Abiotic site data that should be obtained if possible ................................................................................. 13

4.1 Characteristics of selected tree and shrub species suitable for reforestation of bottomland hardwood 

forests in the southeastern United States................................................................................................... 20

7.1 Pros and cons of direct seeding and planting seedlings ............................................................................ 46

7.2 Number of seeds or seedlings required per hectare at various spacings ................................................... 47

11.1 Commonly used herbicides....................................................................................................................... 72

11.2 Weed species susceptible to Oust.............................................................................................................. 72

13.1 Measures of vegetation abundance and plant performance that can be used for monitoring.................... 79

13.2 Wildlife species that use early successional stages of bottomland hardwood 

forested wetlands....... 84

14.1 Species groups and expected regeneration under different silvicultural systems for 

important southern bottomland hardwood associations............................................................................ 88

14.2 Selected species of bottomland hardwood trees and their associated valves as wildlife food .................. 91

14.3 Decision key for choosing a regeneration procedure for bottomland oaks............................................... 92

vii
A Guide to Bottomland Hardwood Restoration

by 

James A. Allen1

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Institute of Pacific Island Forestry

Honolulu, HI

Bobby D. Keeland

U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division

National Wetlands Research Center

Lafayette, LA

John A. Stanturf2

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Center for Bottomland Hardwoods Research

Stoneville, MS 

Andre F. Clewell

A.F. Clewell, Inc.

Quincy, FL

and

Harvey E. Kennedy, Jr.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Center for Bottomland Hardwoods Research

Stoneville, MS

Abstract: During the last century, a large amount of the original bottomland hardwood forest area in the United 

States has been lost, with losses greatest in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley and East Texas. With a holistic approach in mind, this manual describes methods to restore bottomland hardwoods in the lower Midwest, 

including the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley and the southeastern United States. Bottomland hardwoods in 

this guide include not only the hardwood species that predominate in most forested floodplains of the area but 

also the softwood species such as baldcypress that often co-occur. General restoration planning considerations 

are discussed as well as more specific elements of bottomland hardwood restoration such as species selection, 

site preparation, directseeding, planting of seedlings, and alternative options for revegetation. We recognize that 

most projects will probably fall more within the realm of reforestation or afforestation rather than a restoration, 

as some site preparation and the planting of seeds or trees may be the only actions taken. Practical information 

needed to restore an area is provided in the guide, and it is left up to the restorationist to decide how complete 

the restoration will be. Postplanting and monitoring considerations are also addressed. Restoration and management of existing forests are included because of the extensive areas of degraded natural forests in need of 

rehabilitation. 

Key words: bottomland hardwood forest, forested wetlands, Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley, restoration, 

silviculture 

1

Present address: Paul Smith’s College, Paul Smiths, NY

2

Present address: USDA, Disturbance and the Management of Southern Pine Ecosystems, 320 Green Street, Athens, GA
2 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Chapter 1: Introduction

Definition of Bottomland Hardwoods

The term “bottomland hardwoods” is generally used 

to describe both the dominant forest tree species and 

the major forest types that occur on floodplains in the 

lower Midwest and the southeastern United States. Occasionally, the term is also applied to floodplain forests 

in other regions. Bottomland hardwoods in much of the 

scientific literature, and in this guide, include not only 

the hardwood species that predominate in most forested floodplains but also the softwood species such as 

baldcypress. The Society of American Foresters’ forest 

cover type classification system (Eyre, 1980) identifies 

16 forest cover types found in the southern and central 

United States (see Appendix A for descriptions) that are 

considered bottomland hardwoods (table 1.1). 

In this guide, bottomland hardwoods are treated as 

wetlands. Under the wetlands classification system 

used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin 

and others, 1979), bottomland hardwoods are in the 

palustrine system, forested wetland class, and primarily 

either in the broad-leaved deciduous or needle-leaved 

deciduous subclasses. It is recognized, however, that not 

all bottomland hardwoods may be classified as jurisdictional wetlands under the jurisdiction of section 404 of 

the Clean Water Act (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

1987), as there are several methodologies for identifying 

wetlands. Regardless of whether or not a particular project involves jurisdictional wetlands, the basic principles 

described in this text will remain the same.

Table 1.1. Bottomland hardwood forest cover types.1

Type SAF Number1

River birch-Sycamore 61

Silver maple-American elm 62

Cottonwood 63

Pin oak-Sweetgum 65

Willow oak-Water oak-Laurel (diamondleaf) oak 88

Live oak 89

Swamp chestnut oak-Cherrybark oak 91

Sweetgum-Willow oak 92

Sugarberry-American elm-Green ash 93

Sycamore-Sweetgum-American elm 94

Black willow 95

Overcup oak-Water hickory 96

Baldcypress 101

Baldcypress-Tupelo 102

Water tupelo-Swamp tupelo 103

Sweetbay-Swamp tupelo-Redbay 104

1

 Numbers refer to the classification system used by the Society of American Foresters (SAF). 

See Eyre (1980) and Appendix A for cover type descriptions.

The common and scientific names, along with information on habitat, flood and shade tolerance, seed 

ripening and storage requirements, and reproductive 

characteristics of many tree species common to southern 

bottomland hardwood forests are given in Chapter 4. 

Table 13.2 contains the common and scientific names of 

some wildlife species common in bottomland hardwood 

forests. In addition, Appendix B lists the common and 

scientific names of all species mentioned in the text.

Geographic Scope

This guide is designed primarily to provide information for restoration efforts in the lower Midwest, 

including the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley (LMAV; 

extending from the southern tip of Illinois to the Gulf 

of Mexico and including portions of Illinois, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, and 

Louisiana) and the southeastern United States (fig. 1.1). 

The area with perhaps the greatest forested wetland 

losses and potential for restoration is the delta portion of 

Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. To a lesser degree, 

the methods described here will be applicable to forested 

wetlands throughout the United States.

What is Restoration?

Throughout this guide, “restoration” refers to the 

ultimate goal of bottomland hardwood reestablishment 

projects. It is therefore necessary to discuss the concept 

of restoration and contrast it with other commonly used 

terms, such as “reforestation,” “reclamation,” “creation,” 

and “enhancement.”

Ecological restoration is defined as the return of an 

ecosystem to a close approximation of its condition 

prior to disturbance (National Research Council, 1992). 

This definition, supported by the Society for Ecological 

Restoration, stresses that restoration is intentional and 

that it emulates the structure, function, diversity, and dynamics of a previously existing natural ecosystem. The 

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) defines 

a restored wetland as “a rehabilitated degraded wetland 

where the soils, hydrology, vegetative community, and 

biological habitat are returned to the original condition 

to the extent practicable” (NRCS, 1998). The NRCS’s 

definition recognizes that it may not always be possible 

to completely restore a site to some previous condition, 

but that it is still desirable to restore it to the greatest 

extent possible.

These definitions of restoration serve to highlight 

some of the difficult issues facing restorationists. Although the definitions are seemingly straightforward, 

questions about what constitutes predisturbance or 

original forest conditions are ambiguous and need to be 

considered because they are often open to debate within 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 3

Figure 1.1. Distribution of bottomland hardwood forests along rivers and streams in the lower Midwest and southeastern United States. 

The dark band shows the extensive area covered by this forest type along the lower Mississippi River (modified from Putnam and others, 

1960).

the scientific community. During the height of Pleistocene glacial activity, the forests of the southeastern 

United States included many boreal forest species such 

as spruce and fir (Delcourt and Delcourt, 1987). While 

it may be obvious that we should not try to restore to 

the Pleistocene community type, it is often not so obvious that forests have been naturally changing for eons 

and will continue to do so. Factors that have shaped the 

structure, function, diversity, and dynamics of bottomland hardwood forests over the last 500 years (less 

than the lifespan of some individual trees in the region) 

include natural disturbances (e.g., hurricanes, droughts, 

lightning-caused fires), Native Americans’ agricultural 

practices and use of fire, and the agricultural, silvicultural, drainage, and flood control practices of European 

settlers. Restorationists need to be aware that, in a sense, 

they are trying to hit a moving target. Trying to restore to 

a previously existing natural ecosystem is less important 

than matching the tree species to be planted with the 

topographic, soil, and hydrologic conditions that will 

exist on the site after the project is completed. We must, 

therefore, use best judgement and any available data to 

determine the composition and structure of the forests 

we want to restore.

True ecological restoration may not be possible in 

many cases because of factors beyond the restorationist’s 

control. For example, Schneider and others (1989) have 

shown that practically every major stream and hundreds 

of smaller ones throughout the southeastern United 

States have been affected by major construction projects. 

Such projects often affect the timing, magnitude, and duration of flooding as well as groundwater dynamics (i.e., 

a site’s hydrology). Ideally, restorationists would be able 

to restore the hydrologic regime of their restoration sites, 

but it is rarely possible to reverse the impacts of major 

construction projects that affect hundreds or thousands 

of square kilometers of land. Because hydrology drives 

wetland ecosystems and determines the type of wetland 

that will develop, it must be restored if possible. If complete hydrologic restoration cannot be accomplished, 

then the trees to be planted must be selected based on 

the expected hydrologic regime. If only the hydrology is 

restored (a partial restoration), the vegetation and soils 
4 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

will develop naturally over a period of many years (and 

eventually become a full restoration).

The lack of ability to conduct a full restoration does 

not eliminate the importance of restoring those functions 

and values that we understand or restoring an area as 

close as possible to its previous condition. Restorationists, then, may frequently have to settle for more modest 

goals than complete ecological restoration, such as 

partial restoration or one of the terms described below: 

reclamation, reforestation, creation, or enhancement. 

Regardless of the level of restoration, the restorationist 

should maintain a holistic approach to each project and, 

to the greatest extent possible, establish an ecological 

community that is not only as close as possible to the 

original forest but is also well matched to the environmental conditions that will exist on the completed site.

Reclamation is defined by Jordan and others (1988, 

p. 55) as “any deliberate attempt to return a damaged 

ecosystem to some kind of productive use or socially 

acceptable condition short of restoration.” Reforestation 

is defined by the Society of American Foresters (SAF) as 

the reestablishment of a tree crop on forest land (FordRobertson, 1971). With reforestation there is not necessarily any attempt to restore the same species of trees or 

the same functions that occurred naturally on the site. 

Establishment is defined as the process of developing a 

crop to the stage where it can be considered safe from 

normal adverse influences such as weeds, browsing, or 

drought (Ford-Robertson, 1971). Without hydrologic 

restoration, most projects probably fall within the realm 

of reforestation or reclamation. On any project, the restorationist is faced with the decision to spend a limited 

budget to completely restore a small amount of land or 

to reforest a much larger area.

Wetland creation has two meanings. First, it is “the 

conversion of a persistent non-wetland area into a 

wetland through some activity of man” (Lewis, 1990, 

p. 418). This activity generally includes lowering the 

surface of an upland sufficiently for the seasonal or permanent exposure of the water table. Conversely, wetland 

creation can be accomplished by filling a deepwater 

habitat with dredged materials to a sufficiently shallow 

depth to support wetland plants. The second kind of 

wetland creation occurs when an entire ecosystem is first 

destroyed and then re-created on the same site. Creation 

in this manner takes place, for example, when a wetland 

is destroyed during the course of surface mining. Following mining, the original ecosystem is re-created on 

physically reclaimed land, which requires the ecological 

engineering of new soils and hydrological conditions, 

as well as the establishment of a biotic community. The 

term “constructed wetland” is often used interchangeably with “created wetland” and is apparently coming 

into preferred usage by many practicing restorationists.

Enhancement is defined as “the increase in one or 

more values of all or a portion of an existing wetland by 

man’s activities, often with the accompanying decline in 

other wetland values” (Lewis, 1990, p. 418). Examples 

of forested wetland enhancement include selective removal of some tree species to favor growth of those species that provide greater values to desired wildlife and 

diking tracts of bottomland forest so that flooding can 

be controlled (i.e., construction of green-tree reservoirs). 

In many cases an enhancement for one species or suite 

of species proves detrimental to many other species. 

In contrast to enhancement, the process of ecological 

restoration is holistic and does not favor individual species or particular ecological functions and values to the 

detriment of other species or functions.

The Need for Restoration

During the last century, a large amount of the original 

bottomland hardwood forest area in the United States 

has been lost. Losses have been greatest in the LMAV 

and East Texas. Of an estimated 9.7 million ha (24 million acres) of bottomland hardwood forest present in the 

LMAV at the time of European colonization, only 2.1 

million ha (5.2 million acres; 22%) remained by 1978 

(MacDonald and others, 1979). Approximately 63% of 

the original bottomland hardwood forest area in East 

Texas has been lost (Frye, 1987). Proportionally, the 

most extreme losses of bottomland hardwood forest have 

occurred in the northern part of the LMAV; in southern 

Illinois, about 98% of the original bottomland hardwood 

forest area has been lost (Tiner, 1984).

The primary cause of bottomland hardwood loss has 

been conversion of the land to agricultural production. 

Approximately 87% of wetland losses in the United 

States as a whole has been attributed to agriculture 

(Tiner, 1984), and the losses of forested wetlands in the 

LMAV have corresponded very closely to the expansion of agricultural land (MacDonald and others, 1979). 

Additional losses of bottomland hardwood forests have 

been caused by construction and operation of flood control structures and reservoirs, drainage and conversion to 

pine forests, surface mining, petroleum extraction, and 

urban development.

While many of these alternative uses of bottomland 

hardwood forest sites are important economically, the 

functions and values of intact bottomland hardwood forests (storage of floodwaters, water quality improvement, 

provision of wildlife habitat, etc.) are becoming increasingly appreciated. These functions and values have been 

described both in technical terms (Wharton and others, 

1982; Taylor and others, 1990; Wilkinson and others, 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 5

1987) and in terms readily understood by nontechnically 

oriented readers (Harris and others, 1984).

Growing public concern over the loss of bottomland 

hardwood forests and wetlands in general has resulted 

in unprecedented opportunities for protection of this 

valuable resource. Clearly, preservation of the existing bottomland hardwood resource—through fee title 

acquisition, easements, or other means—should be the 

preferred protection strategy. Given the magnitude of the 

losses that have already occurred, however, restoration 

of former bottomland hardwood habitats has become a 

key element in an overall strategy of protection. Over 

the past 10 years, at least 62,500 ha (154,000 acres) 

were reforested within the LMAV. Most of this area was 

planted by the Natural Resources Conservation Service 

(through the Wetland Reserve Program) or the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, although other state and federal 

agencies have also been involved in planting bottomland 

hardwood forests (King and Keeland, 1999). The rate 

of reforestation has been increasing to the point that the 

amount of LMAV land scheduled for reforestation by all 

agencies over the next 5 years totals 74,200 ha (183,300 

acres). Although the amount of land being restored is 

commendable, the continuing losses are staggering. 

From the mid-1970’s to the mid-1980’s (the most current 

data available) a total of 364,200 ha (900,000 acres) 

of forested wetlands were lost in the LMAV region of 

Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Obviously, we are 

a long way from our national goal of no net loss.

Restoration and Mitigation

The term “mitigation” in this guide refers to the 

process of rectifying or compensating for the impact on 

a wetland of a specific development project. In the strict 

sense, mitigation is a much broader concept than restoration, including avoidance (no impacts to wetlands) and 

minimization (project modification to reduce the amount 

of wetlands to be affected) (40 CFR 1508.20 [1998]). 

Mitigation is usually required as part of the process of 

obtaining a permit for a development project, such as a 

“404” permit (Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) for 

dredge or fill operations in a wetland. Thus, mitigation 

refers to activities taking place in a regulatory environment. Restoration in this situation can help achieve no 

net loss of wetlands, but it is not likely to make a significant contribution to making up for past losses.

Because so much of the bottomland hardwood resource has already been lost, the greatest contributions 

are likely to be made by restoration projects that are 

not done as mitigation. Voluntary projects to restore 

agricultural fields, old unreclaimed surface mines, and 

other such sites on public and private lands are needed 

if restoration of bottomland hardwood forests is to be 

achieved on a scale significant enough to achieve a net 

gain of wetlands.

Restoration, Ecosystems, and 

Landscape

This guide contains information that is specific to 

restoration of forested wetlands of the Southeast and 

lower Midwest. The best approach to restoration is to 

maintain the overall integrity of ecosystems, including 

the entire global ecosystem. In practice, however, most 

restoration projects are conducted in isolation, on a 

site-specific basis. It is probable that some opportunities 

to increase the value of an individual restoration project 

are simply overlooked because not all restorationists 

are used to thinking of their projects within an ecosystem or landscape context. Therefore, it is worthwhile to 

consider individual restoration projects within a larger, 

long-term context.

Where sufficient flexibility exists, restoration sites 

should be selected to maximize their usefulness within a 

larger geographic area. One obvious example is to locate 

the site where it will have the most beneficial impact on 

water quality (or other desired function) within a watershed. Prime locations are along the edges of existing 

streams or rivers, especially where the site will act as a 

buffer between farm fields and other nonpoint sources of 

pollution and the waterway. Also, by placing a forested 

wetland near the lower end of a small watershed, it may 

act as a filter for runoff and floodwaters from the entire 

area upstream. By shading the water and increasing 

inputs of plant debris and invertebrates, restoration sites 

along waterways will also improve habitat values for 

fish. In some cases, it might be beneficial to choose a 

restoration site that can act as a screen between an existing site, such as a marsh used by waterfowl, and a road, 

housing development, or agricultural area.

Opportunities to maximize wildlife habitat values 

should also be sought. For instance, choosing sites that 

will increase the size of an existing but isolated tract 

may improve habitat for forest interior species and reduce nest predation and parasitism. Many of the species 

in most need of protection require the interior habitat 

provided by large tracts. On the other hand, sites that 

will provide a travel corridor between existing tracts of 

forest might be more valuable than isolated sites in some 

cases. Corridors, however, may actually have negative or 

minimal impacts on some wildlife, and any reader contemplating creating a corridor is urged to look at some 

of the recent literature on this subject (Simberloff and 

others, 1992; Hobbs, 1992; Rosenberg and others, 1997; 

Tiebout and Anderson, 1997). 
6 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Those involved in land management and restoration 

should keep abreast of developments in fields such as 

conservation, biology, and systems and landscape ecology to the greatest extent possible. By developing an 

increased appreciation of ecosystem and landscape level 

processes, land-use planners, managers, and restorationists may be able to greatly increase the environmental 

values of their projects.

The Environmental Impacts of 

Restoration

The process of restoration can have both positive 

and negative impacts on the environment. While it is 

clear that a successfully restored site is healthier and 

more desirable than a degraded site, there may well be 

some hidden environmental costs associated with the 

restoration process that can call the overall value of the 

project into question.

One of the most obvious negative impacts associated 

with restoration is when one wetland is degraded to 

restore another. Plants or topsoil are sometimes removed from intact wetlands and moved to restoration 

sites. When this causes significant damage to the intact 

wetland, then the net benefit of the project must be 

considered to be significantly reduced. Fortunately, this 

issue is being addressed by professional restorationists, 

and especially with the ever-increasing availability of 

commercially produced seed and seedlings, is becoming 

less of a problem.

The creation of green-tree reservoirs is a common forested wetland management practice that has been shown 

to degrade bottomland hardwood stands in the Southeast. 

A green-tree reservoir is typically flooded in the fall to 

provide waterfowl habitat and then drained during the 

next spring. This usually changes the timing, duration, 

extent, and frequency of flooding within these systems. 

Although flooding during the dormant season is generally not thought to harm most bottomland hardwood tree 

species, studies have shown that the repeated flooding of 

green-tree reservoirs can result in the loss of the less water tolerant species. Quite often, the hard mast producing 

species that the manager wants to maintain, such as Nuttall, cherrybark, and willow oaks, are the very species 

killed by this management technique. These more desirable species are often replaced by overcup oak, water 

hickory, swamp red maple, green ash, and baldcypress. 

In addition, most green-tree reservoirs in the LMAV are 

not dewatered on schedule each spring (Judy DeLoach, 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Functions 

Branch, Memphis, TN, oral commun.), further impacting 

the desirable hard mast species.

Another negative impact associated with some projects is the destruction of a healthy upland site to create a 

wetland. The net benefit of this type of project, which is 

often required by regulatory agencies, is highly questionable, especially because of the low degree of certainty 

that a fully functional, sustainable wetland can actually 

be created on a former upland site. While this kind of 

project could conceivably have an overall net benefit in 

some cases, the decision to destroy an upland site to create a wetland should never be taken lightly.

Hydrologic restoration is encouraged to the greatest extent possible; however, full consideration must be 

given to the landscape context in which the restoration 

will be developed. Many river processes, such as erosion, sedimentation, etc., are occurring at an accelerated 

rate. Floodplain wetlands can be overwhelmed and/or 

severely degraded if unnatural fluctuations in river flow 

and unnatural loads of sediment, nutrients, and contaminants in the river are not reduced to approximate predisturbance levels (Humburg and others, 1996; Sparks 

and others, 1998). In this case, the restored vegetation 

may be destroyed and the site filled in with sediment to 

the point where it can no longer be considered a (viable) 

wetland.

Some restoration projects involve extremely high 

expenditures for the restoration of relatively small areas. 

It seems reasonable to consider the opportunity costs 

associated with such projects. For example, is expending 

$100,000 or more to restore a small, isolated wetland in 

an industrial area worthwhile, or would it be better to put 

that money towards some other environmentally oriented 

project that might have a larger net benefit? There is no 

simple way to determine the answers to such questions, 

but they are still worth considering.

Finally, the costs associated with energy-intensive 

restoration projects should be considered. Use of heavy 

earthmoving equipment, irrigation, and other operations 

associated with restoration projects all require energy, 

primarily from fossil fuels. Even use of nursery-produced planting stock (versus direct seeding or natural regeneration) may involve a moderately high expenditure 

of energy. Because production and consumption of fossil 

fuels and most other forms of energy involve negative 

impacts to the environment, energy efficiency should 

be considered when planning a restoration project. 

Although it should certainly not be used as an excuse 

for skimping on necessary operations such as good site 

preparation, energy inputs to restoration projects should 

be reduced where possible.

Sustainability of Restoration Projects

Restored wetlands are no different than other ecological systems in that they are both naturally dynamic 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 7

and subject to future human-induced perturbations. 

Examples of natural changes that might be expected to 

occur include succession and damage caused by storms, 

animals, insects, or disease. Examples of human-induced 

perturbations include changes in hydrology as encroaching development increases runoff into the wetland 

and long-term changes in global climate effects on local 

weather patterns.

In cases where there is a desire to limit or control 

natural change (e.g., to maintain a restoration site in a 

stage dominated by early to midsuccessional species), 

long-term management of the site needs to be planned. 

The silvicultural techniques discussed in Chapter 14 

will be the primary tools for most forms of long-term 

management.

The concept of “freeboard” has been suggested as 

one way of increasing the sustainability of a restoration 

site in the face of human-induced changes in hydrology (Willard and Hiller, 1990). This concept is that the 

restoration site should be designed so that there is room 

for the desired plant community to shift to higher or 

lower elevations in response to gradual shifts in the site’s 

hydrology. Wetlands with steep transitions to uplands 

or steep dropoffs to deep water do not have as much 

freeboard as sites with long, gentle slopes and therefore 

should be avoided where possible.

The one certainty about a restoration project is that, 

as time passes, it will be subjected to both natural and 

man-made agents of change. Restorationists, therefore, 

need to consider multiple decades when designing projects and not just project time specified in permits or the 

lifetime of the first generation of trees.

Selected References

Allen, J.A., and Kennedy, H.A., Jr., 1989, A guide to 

bottomland hardwood restoration: Slidell, La., U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 

National Wetlands Research Center and Stoneville, 

Miss., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, 28 p.

Allen, J.A., 1997, Reforestation of bottomland hardwoods and the issue of woody species diversity: 

Restoration Ecology, v. 5, p. 125-134.

Breedlove, B.W., and Dennis, W.M., 1983, Wetlands 

reclamation: a drainage basin approach, in Robertson, 

D.J., ed., Reclamation and the Phosphate Industry: 

Proceedings of the Symposium Held at Clearwater Beach, Fla., January 26-28, 1983: Bartow, Fla., 

Florida Institute of Phosphate Research, p. 90-99.

Council on Environmental Quality, 1998, Mitigation: U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Pt. 

1508.20.

Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, 

E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and deepwater 

habitats: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological 

Services Program FWS/OBS-79/31, 103 p.

Delcourt, P.A., and Delcourt, H.R., 1987, Long-term 

forest dynamics of the temperate zone, A case study 

of late-Quaternary forests in eastern North America: 

New York, Springer-Verlag, 439 p.

Eyre, F.H., ed., 1980, Forest cover types of the United 

States and Canada: Washington, D.C., Society of 

American Foresters, 148 p.

Ford-Robertson, F.C., ed., 1971, Terminology of forest 

science: technology practice and products, The Multilingual Forestry Terminology Series No. 1: Washington, D.C., Society of American Foresters, 349 p.

Forman, R.T.T., 1986, Landscape ecology: New York, 

John Wiley and Sons, 619 p.

Forman, R.T.T., 1995, Land mosaics: the ecology of 

landscapes and regions: Cambridge University Press, 

632 p.

Frye, R.G., 1987, Bottomland hardwoods: current supply, status, habitat quality and future impacts from 

reservoirs, in McMahan, C.A., and Frye, R.G., eds., 

Bottomland Hardwoods in Texas: Proceedings of an 

Interagency Workshop on Status and Ecology, May 6-

7, 1986, Nacogdoches: Austin, Tex., Texas Parks and 

Wildlife Department, p. 24-28.

Hamel, P.B., and Buckner, E.R., 1999, So how far could 

a squirrel travel in the treetops? A prehistory of the 

southern forest, in Wadsworth, K.G., ed., Transactions 

of the 63rd North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 1998, Orlando, Fla., p. 309-315.

Harris, L.D., 1984, The fragmented forest: island biogeography theory and the preservation of biotic diversity: Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 211 p.

Harris, L.D., Sullivan, R., and Badger, R.L., 1984, Bottomland hardwoods: valuable, vanishing, vulnerable: 

Gainesville, Fla., Cooperative Extension Service, 

University of Florida, 17 p.

Hobbs, R.J., 1992, The role of corridors in conservation: solution or bandwagon?: Trends in Ecology and 

Evolution, v. 7, p. 389-392.

Humburg, D.D., Graber, D.A., Havera, S.P., Fredrickson, 

L.H., and Helmers, D.L., 1996, What did we learn 

from the great flood of 1993?, in Ratti, J.T., ed., Proceedings of the 7th International Waterfowl Symposium, 1995, Memphis, Tenn., p. 139-148.

Jordan, W.R., III, Gilpin, M.E., and Aber, J.D., 1987, 

Restoration ecology: a synthetic approach to ecological research: New York, Cambridge University 

Press, 342 p.

Jordan, W.R., III, Peters, R.L., II, and Allen, E.B., 1988, 

Ecological restoration as a strategy for conserving 

biological diversity: Environmental Management, v. 

12, no. 1, p. 55-72.
8 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

King, S.L., and Keeland, B.D., 1999, Survey of reforestation of southern forested wetlands: Restoration 

Ecology, v. 7, no. 4, p. 348-359.

Lewis, R.R., III, 1990, Wetlands restoration/creation/

enhancement terminology: suggestions for standardization, in Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, M.E., eds., Wetland creation and restoration: the status of the science: 

Washington, D.C., Island Press, 591 p.

MacDonald, P.O., Frayer, W.E., and Clauser, J.K., 1979, 

Documentation, chronology, and future projections of 

bottomland hardwood habitat losses in the lower Mississippi alluvial plain: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 427 p.

National Research Council, 1992, Restoration of aquatic 

ecosystems: science, technology, and public policy: 

Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 552 p.

National Resources Conservation Service, 1998, Conservation Practices Standard, Wetland Restoration, Code 

657: http://www.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/nhcp_2.html, accessed Nov. 1, 1999.

Naveh, Z., and Lieberman, A.S., 1994, Landscape ecology, theory and application: New York, Springer-Verlag, 360 p.

Putnam, J.A., Furnival, G.M., and McKnight, J.S., 1960, 

Management and inventory of southern hardwoods: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook No. 181, 102 p.

Rosenberg, D.K., Noon, B.R., and Meslow, E.C., 1997, 

Biological corridors: form, function, and efficacy: 

Bioscience, v. 47, no. 10, p. 677-687.

Schneider, R.L., Martin, N.E., and Sharitz, R.R., 1989, 

Impact of dam operations on hydrology and associated floodplain forests of southeastern rivers, in

Sharitz, R.R., and Gibbons, J.W., eds., Freshwater 

wetlands and wildlife, CONF-8603101, U.S. Department of Energy Symposium Series No. 61: Oak 

Ridge, Tenn., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of 

Science and Technology Information, p. 1113-1122.

Simberloff, D., and Cox, J., 1987, Consequences and 

costs of conservation corridors: Conservation Biology, 

v. 1, p. 63-71.

Simberloff, D., Farr, J.A., Cox, J., and Mehlman, D.W., 

1992, Movement corridors: conservation bargains 

or poor investments?: Conservation Biology, v. 6, p. 

493-504.

Sparks, R.E., Nelson, J.C., and Yin, Yao, 1998, Naturalization of the flood regime in regulated rivers: Bioscience, v. 48, p. 706-720.

Taylor, J.R., Cardamone, M.A., and Mitsch, W.J., 1990, 

Bottomland hardwood forests: their functions and 

values, in Gosselink, J.G., Lee, L.C., and Muir, T.A., 

eds., Ecological processes and cumulative impacts: 

illustrated by bottomland hardwood wetland ecosystems: Chelsea, Mich., Lewis Publishers, Inc., p. 

13-86.

Tiebout, H.M., III, and Anderson, R.A., 1997, A comparison of corridors and intrinsic connectivity to promote dispersal in transient successional landscapes: 

Conservation Biology, v. 11, no. 3, p. 620-627.

Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States: 

current status and recent trends: Newton Corner, 

Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987, Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1: Vicksburg, 

Miss., Waterways Experiment Station, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, 165 p.

Wharton, C.H., Kitchens, W.M., Pendleton, E.C., and 

Sipe, T.W., 1982, Ecology of bottomland hardwood 

swamps of the Southeast: a community profile: U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program FWS/OBS-81/37, 133 p.

Wilkinson, D.L., Schneller-McDonald, K., Olson, R.W., 

and Auble, G.T., 1987, Synopsis of wetland functions and values: bottomland hardwoods with special 

emphasis on eastern Texas and Oklahoma: U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 87(12), 132 p.

Willard, D.E., and Hiller, A.K., 1990, Wetland dynamics: considerations for restored and created 

wetlands, in Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, M.E., eds., 

Wetland creation and restoration: status of the science: Washington, D.C., Island Press, p. 459-466.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 9

Chapter 2: General Planning 

Considerations

A successful restoration project starts with good 

planning. In general, the plan should define the goals for 

restoration and subsequent management of the project 

site and should identify specific procedures to meet the 

goals. The major steps in the planning process are (1) 

identify goals; (2) characterize the restoration site; (3) 

select species to be restored; (4) develop a design for the 

site; (5) determine site preparation needs; (6) determine 

best regeneration method(s); (7) determine what postregeneration operations will be carried out; (8) develop a 

timetable for obtaining planting stock, equipment, and 

personnel; (9) develop a budget and identify the source 

of funds; and (10) develop specific performance standards for evaluating project success. Some of these steps 

are discussed in this chapter while all are covered in 

more detail throughout the manual.

Project Goals, Objectives, and Success 

Criteria

Ideally, restorationists should begin their projects by 

developing a list of general goals or long-term objectives. General goals might include something like (1) 

establishment of a bottomland forest similar in species 

composition to the original forest or (2) establishment of 

a forested wetland that will provide wintering habitat for 

mallards and wood ducks.

Once general goals have been listed, more specific 

objectives can be developed. An example of a specific 

objective is a list of the species to be established and the 

number of each to be planted per hectare (acre). Another 

specific objective might be that the site should either 

flood naturally or have the capability of being flooded 

artificially during the winter months so that waterfowl 

can feed within the forest. Much time, effort, and money 

can be wasted on a project if objectives are not specified in the planning stage, yet simply developing a set of 

objectives is not sufficient. Specific performance criteria 

should also be developed to help assess whether the 

objectives are being met.

Frequently, project objectives are limited to the establishment of vegetation. Success criteria for these projects 

are often simple, such as the survival rate of all species 

planted should be at least 50% after one complete growing season, or a minimum of 980 trees per ha (400 per 

acre) of preferred species should be established on the 

site; the trees should be at least 2 m (~6 ft) tall and have 

been growing on the site for at least 24 months.

Therefore, specific goals or objectives and success 

criteria ideally should be established for all elements 

of the restoration project. In addition to vegetation, it is 

desirable to establish criteria for soils, hydrology, water 

quality, and fish and wildlife habitat. The Mitigation Site 

Type classification system (MiST; White and others, 

1990) provides both general and specific success criteria 

for bottomland hardwood restoration projects (table 2.1). 

Although these criteria are directed toward mitigation, 

they can serve as a starting point for developing more 

specific success criteria for a given project. The MiST 

is recommended reading for all restorationists involved 

with bottomland hardwood and other forested wetland 

systems. In many ways the planning process from an 

overall landscape perspective is an artistic process and 

deserves optimum time and attention to detail before 

moving forward toward implementation.

Project Site Design

The level of effort put into project site design can 

vary considerably. For small projects that do not involve 

extensive earthmoving or are not being carried out for 

mitigation, the design may simply be what a restorationist envisions. For larger, more complex projects, the process of site design may involve development and review 

of a series of engineering drawings depicting surface 

contours, structural specifications, and locations of various forest types to be planted (fig. 2.1). Regardless of 

the level of detail in the final design, the process of site 

design should only begin after project objectives have 

been determined and the site evaluation is completed.

The three-stage design process outlined in the Soil 

Conservation Service’s (now the NRCS) Engineering 

Field Handbook (Soil Conservation Service, 1992a) is 

appropriate for the design of restoration projects. Their 

first step, data collection and evaluation, is analogous to 

the site evaluation process described in Chapter 3.

The second stage is the development of a preliminary 

design, which consists of (1) developing a list of the 

general project features; (2) identifying any structures 

needed; and (3) developing a preliminary layout of the 

site (e.g., contours, location of any stream channels, and 

location/area of vegetation types to be established). The 

preliminary design may consist of a variety of alternatives and should be sufficiently detailed to allow for 

a well-informed choice of alternatives based on both 

ecological and economic grounds.

The third stage is development of the final design, 

which consists of (1) assessment of the accuracy of the 

data used in the preliminary design; (2) review of the 

accuracy of all drawings developed in the preliminary 

design; (3) selection of alternatives; (4) development of 

final drawings depicting site layout and any structures; 

and, ideally, (5) production of a report covering both the 
10 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Table 2.1. General definitions of mitigation success used in the Mitigation Site Type classification system (MiST) (see White and others, 

1990 for more information).

General definitions of mitigation success

Vegetation

Successfully mitigated project sites shall contain:

(1) An approved species composition represented by self-sustaining species populations.

(2) Adequate tree abundance in terms of overall density and spatial distribution throughout the project site.

(3) Well-established trees (e.g., trees should have been growing on site for at least 1 year).

(4) An adequate representation of undergrowth species.

Soil

A succ 

successfu 

definitions of the current U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.

Hydrology

, 

duration, and seasonality of the flooding or soil saturation and the source of the water.

Water quality

Water q 

of the frequency distribution of the reference site when graphically represented. Minimally, measured levels of parameters should not 

violate State or Federal water quality standards.

Fish and wildlife habitat

Because of the long-term nature of forested wetland restoration, the habitat for fish and wildlife will be considered restored if the 

success criteria for vegetation, soils, and hydrology are met.

Figure 2.1. Engineering drawings depicting surface contours, 

structural specifications, and locations of various forest types to be 

planted can be helpful when designing a restoration project.

final design and a plan for any relevant operation, maintenance, and monitoring.

Review and approval by a licensed civil engineer 

may be required for designs of structures and surface 

contours. Local NRCS officials and relevant regulatory 

agencies should be contacted to determine what regulations apply to restoration project designs.

Regeneration Method

Several regeneration methods have been used effectively to restore bottomland hardwood forests. These 

methods include direct seeding, planting seedlings, 

planting cuttings, and transplanting saplings or larger 

trees. Natural regeneration and topsoiling (the spreading 

of topsoil from a healthy wetland over a restoration site 

to introduce seeds and other propagules) are other options that are effective in some cases and should also be 

considered. Regeneration methods are described in more 

detail in Chapters 7, 8, 9, and 10.

The final choice of regeneration method should be 

based on a thorough knowledge of the advantages and 

disadvantages of each method, characteristics of the 

species to be planted, condition of the site, availability of 

planting stock, personnel, equipment requirements, and 

costs. It is worth noting that, on many restoration projects, combinations of planting methods have been used 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 11

effectively. For instance, direct seeding might be used as 

a primary method for regenerating trees, while topsoiling 

could be employed to introduce understory species, and 

seedlings of some difficult to establish tree species could 

be planted.

Decisions about regeneration methods on a given 

project should be made well in advance of the planting 

date to ensure the availability of suitable planting stock. 

If planting is scheduled for late fall through spring, then 

the choice of planting methods should ideally be made 

the previous spring or summer for small sites (smaller 

than about 8 ha [~20 acres]), and even earlier for large 

sites.

In a survey of federal and state agencies involved 

in restoring/reforesting bottomland hardwood sites, 

King and Keeland (1999) found that nearly half of the 

restorationists experienced problems obtaining sufficient 

seed of the desired species, and that greater than 80% 

were unable to obtain the required number of seedlings. 

In many cases the restorationists were forced to use 

substitute species. For example, a general shortage of 

ash seedlings in 1998 forced restorationists to search for 

seedlings of a variety of other species as replacements.

Obtaining Planting Stock

In most cases, it is best to obtain planting stock from 

existing suppliers; exceptions will occur most frequently 

in the cases of large-scale or long-term restoration programs or when using cuttings, transplants from the wild, 

or direct seeding. A large number of suppliers operate in 

the region covered by this guide, including state forestry 

commission nurseries, private nurseries, and both largeand small-scale seed suppliers (see Appendix C for a 

partial listing of suppliers). 

In general, it is best to obtain planting stock as locally 

as possible. If purchasing planting stock from a local 

supplier, be sure that their seed was collected from an 

acceptable (local) source, which will help ensure (but not 

guarantee) that the stock is adapted to the region where 

the planting will take place. It may also help reduce 

damage to planting stock from shipping. Also, nurseries may need lead time greater than 1 year for unusually 

large orders of seed or seedlings.

Personnel Requirements

Project planning and supervision should be carried out 

by well-qualified personnel. The project manager should 

know which specific technical skills are needed to design 

a project (e.g., forestry, plant ecology, civil engineering, 

hydrology) and should take the necessary steps to ensure 

that skilled personnel are available for each task.

It is also important to ensure that personnel who actually implement the project in the field have the requisite 

skills and are closely supervised. Personnel may be 

required for skilled (and sometimes dangerous) tasks, 

such as heavy machinery operation and herbicide application, and for simpler tasks, such as tree planting. The 

temptation exists to hire an inexpensive, untrained labor 

force that is poorly supervised, especially for the simpler 

tasks. The success of some projects has been drastically 

reduced, however, by the use of poorly trained and inadequately supervised personnel (table 2.2).

Equipment

Some of the equipment needed for restoration projects 

is described in the following chapters. Actual equipment 

needs will obviously vary, depending on type of site 

preparation needed, planting method(s) used, etc. The 

restorationist should determine in advance what equipment will be needed and take steps to ensure its availability at the appropriate time. Table 2.3 lists some of the 

equipment that may be required for a restoration project.

Timing of Project Operations

The need to plan in advance for the acquisition of 

equipment and planting stock has already been mentioned. In addition, careful planning of the overall operations of the project is required.

Forested wetlands typically have periods where the 

soil is too wet for heavy equipment to operate. Even if 

the equipment can operate under wet site conditions, 

this practice should be avoided in order to minimize 

compaction and soil erosion. Dry seasons, usually in 

late summer or fall over most of the area covered by this 

guide, are a good time to do most of the jobs that involve 

Table 2.2. Seven “grievous errors” that have been made on 

restoration projects in the absence of adequate training and 

supervision (Clewell and Lea, 1990).

1. Vigorous saplings were loaded at a nursery into open trucks and 

delivered to a project site dead from windburn and desiccation. The 

unsupervised planting crew planted the dead trees.

2. Potted trees were delivered on a Friday afternoon and allowed 

to roast in the direct summer sun before being planted dead on 

Monday.

3. Gallon-sized trees were removed from flat-bottomed pots and 

planted in holes dug with pointed spades. Air pockets remained 

beneath their root balls and stressed or killed many saplings.

4. Nurseries shipped trees of the wrong species, the error was either 

unnoticed or unreported, and the trees were planted.

5. Mesic trees were planted in hydric sites.

6. Cuttings of willows and cottonwoods were planted upside down.

7. Project sites were not fenced or staked, and work crews planted up 

to 40% of their seedlings on adjacent land.
12 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLO

Table 2.3. Partial list of equipment 

used.

GY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

occasionally used in restoration projects and examples of how they are 

Equipment Use(s)

Dragline Excavation; removal of topsoil

Scraper Removal, segregation, and transport of soil and/or overburden

Bulldozer Removal and spreading of soil and/or overburden; surface contouring

Dump truck Transport of topsoil

Front-end loader Removal of soil and/or overburden; loading trucks

Tractor Site preparation; planting; weed control; fire lane construction

Rippers, chisel, plows, offset disks Reduction of soil compaction; preparation of soil surface for planting

Mechanical seed planter Direct seeding

Mechanical seedling planter Planting bare-root seedlings

Gasoline-powered soil auger Planting containerized seedlings

Tree spade Transplanting saplings and larger trees

Dibble bar, sharpshooter shovel Hand planting seedlings

Backpack sprayer Weed and exotic plant control

Brushhook, machete Vine control

earthmoving or other site preparation jobs requiring 

heavy equipment.

In some cases, sufficient time must be allowed between site preparation and planting so that the soil can 

settle, the hydrology can be double-checked, a green manure crop can be planted and plowed under, and so on. 

For relatively complex restoration projects, a schedule of 

operations should be prepared and approved by key personnel involved in project planning and implementation.

Selected References

Brown, D., 1977, Handbook: equipment for reclaiming 

strip mined land: Missoula, Mont., U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, 58 p.

Clewell, A.F., and Lea, R., 1990, Creation and restoration of forested wetland vegetation in the southeastern United States, in Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, 

M.E., eds., Wetland creation and restoration, the 

status of the science: Washington, D.C., Island Press, 

p. 195-231.

Duryea, M.L., and Dougherty, P.M., 1991, Forest regeneration manual: Boston, Mass., Kluwer Academic 

Publishers, 433 p. [Although this guide is for southern 

pine regeneration, it will still give the reader a very 

good overview of many of the operations involved in 

forest restoration.]

Kentula, M.E., Brooks, R.P., Gwin, S.E., Holland, C.C., 

Sherman, A.D., and Sifneos, J.C., 1992, An approach 

to improving decision making in wetland restoration 

and creation, in Hairston, A.J., ed.: Corvallis, Ore., 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, 151 p.

King, S.L., and Keeland, B.D., 1999, Survey of reforestation of southern forested wetlands: Restoration 

Ecology, v. 7, no. 4, p. 348-359.

Marble, A.D., 1992, A guide to wetland functional design: Boca Raton, Fla., Lewis Publishers, 240 p.

Myles, D.V., 1978, A compendium of silvicultural 

equipment, Forest Management Institute Information Report FMR-X-115: Ottawa, Canada, Canadian 

Forestry Service, Environment Canada, 233 p.

Soil Conservation Service, 1992a, Engineering field 

handbook, Part 650, Chap. 5, in Stanley, W.R., compiler, Preparation of engineering plans: Washington, 

D.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, p. 5-1 to 5-23.

Soil Conservation Service, 1992b, Engineering field 

handbook, Chap. 13, Wetland restoration, enhancement, or creation: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation 

Service, 79 p.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987, Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1: Vicksburg, 

Miss., Waterways Experiment Station, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, 165 p.

White, T.A., Allen, J.A., Mader, S.F., Mengel, D.L., 

Perison, D.M., and Tew, D.T., 1990, MiST: a methodology to classify pre-project mitigation sites and 

develop performance standards for construction and 

restoration of forested wetlands: results of an EPAsponsored workshop: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 85 p. 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 13

Chapter 3: Evaluation of the Site

Site is a central concept in the practice of forestry 

and forest restoration. The term “site” is rarely defined 

precisely but may be interpreted as being synonymous 

with the term “habitat.” It refers to the place in which 

trees grow and encompasses both the abiotic (nonliving) 

and biotic (living) factors that may have an impact on 

the survival and growth of the trees. The size of an area 

that is considered one site can vary considerably, as long 

as the critical environmental factors remain relatively the 

same.

The term “project site” is used occasionally in this 

guide. In some cases the project site may be homogeneous enough to be considered as one site in the ecological sense of the word. In other cases, variation within 

the project site, such as different degrees of flooding, 

different soil types, slope, aspect, existing vegetation, 

etc., may require that it be treated as a number of smaller 

sites, each of which may have different site preparation 

needs, specific levels of suitability for different species, 

and so on.

In this chapter, it is assumed that the site to be restored has already been chosen. It is expected that the 

choice of sites will be limited in most cases, either for legal reasons (e.g., permit requirements that a specific area 

be restored after surface mining) or for managementrelated objectives (e.g., the desire to provide a travel 

corridor for wildlife between two large blocks of forest). 

The principles described in this chapter, however, can 

also be used to select a site for restoration.

Once the site is identified, the first task is to conduct a site evaluation. Site evaluation can be informal, 

involving no more than a windshield survey, or it can 

be much more elaborate (and expensive), involving 

the development of ecological baseline information by 

means of prerestoration monitoring (e.g., hydrology) and 

analytical testing (e.g., soil characteristics). The intensity of the evaluation will depend on factors such as the 

restorationist’s prior experience with similar sites, the 

degree to which the site has been altered, and available 

funds. At a minimum, the site should be walked over or 

traveled by ATV to confirm the restorationist’s expectations

from various sources (e.g., NRCS soil survey, etc.). 

Whatever the intensity of the evaluation, the abiotic 

and biotic factors described in this chapter should be 

considered.

Abiotic Site Factors

The most important abiotic factors to be considered 

in bottomland areas are climate, hydrology, and soils. 

These three factors interact with each other but are 

treated separately in this section.

Climate

Climate is one of the major factors affecting tree species distribution and the growth of individual trees. The 

primary climatic factors operating on trees are precipitation (amount and distribution), temperature regime, and 

evapotranspiration.

Although climate is critical, it is generally not the 

most important aspect of a site evaluation as long as the 

species to be established are within their natural range. 

There is little or no practical need for a detailed climatic 

assessment if the planting stock is known to be well 

adapted to the area. Knowledge of the normal variation 

in local climate could be very important, however, as 

the success of any plantings could be adversely affected 

by extremes of temperature and/or precipitation (i.e., 

drought or flooding) during the first year or two after 

planting.

The consideration of climate becomes most important when the introduction of a species not indigenous 

to the area—or a different subspecies or provenance of 

an indigenous species—is contemplated. In such cases, 

it is important to know the general climatic characteristics of the site (see table 3.1), but it may be even more 

important to know the climatic extremes that can occur. 

Forestry literature is replete with examples of species 

introductions that were successful until some natural but 

uncommon event occurred, such as a prolonged drought 

or flood, an unusually long, deep freeze, or an ice storm. 

By definition, nonnative species should not be used in 

restoration projects.

Table 3.1. Abiotic site data that should be obtained if possible.1

Climate Hydrology Soils

Mean annual rainfall 

Mean monthly rainfall 

Mean monthly temperature 

Evapotranspiration potential 

Incidence of droughts, 

extreme cold, extreme heat, 

ice storms, and hurricanes

Mean annual flood duration 

Mean growing season flood duration 

Mean growing season water table depth 

Hydrologic system 

Topographic position 

Degree of soil saturation

Presence of pans or depressions

Degree of mottling

Percent organic matter

Soil type, texture, structure, 

depth, pH, compaction, and color

1

 Where mean data is specified above, it is also desirable to obtain an indication of variability (e.g., standard deviations).
14 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Occasionally, microclimate can be an important 

consideration, but this is less often the case on bottomland sites than on upland sites, where slope and 

aspect may greatly affect the temperature and moisture 

regime. The exposed nature of most restoration sites, 

which can result in hotter and drier conditions than in 

adjacent mature forested wetlands, must be considered. 

Frost pockets—low, concave areas that tend to trap cold 

air—are also sometimes a problem within restoration 

sites at relatively high elevations. Such areas are not 

likely to occur on large floodplains, but where present, 

frost pockets may result in direct damage to trees or may 

literally uproot seedlings by the process of frost heaving.

Hydrology

Hydrology is the most important factor affecting the 

local distribution of bottomland tree species within their 

natural ranges. Hydrology as treated in this guide refers 

to the frequency, duration, depth, seasonality, and source 

of flooding and/or soil saturation that occur on a site, as 

well as the depth of the water table.

Detailed hydrologic data, such as the first three items 

listed in table 3.1, will often not be available for a given 

site but should be obtained to the greatest extent possible. The U.S. Geological Survey’s Water Resources 

Division provides real-time hydrologic data online at 

http://water.usgs.gov. In most cases, the restorationist 

will have to make do with knowing only the hydrologic 

system type and the topographic position of the site. Fortunately, much can be inferred about a site’s hydrologic 

characteristics from this information.

The main hydrologic systems in the the lower Midwest and southeastern United States are large alluvial 

rivers, minor stream bottoms, blackwater rivers (those 

originating in the Coastal Plain), spring-fed streams, 

isolated basins, backwater swamps, bogs, and seep areas. 

Different hydrologic systems can have very different 

flooding patterns (fig. 3.1). Large alluvial rivers tend 

to have longer periods of high water, with most of the 

flooding occurring between November and May. Minor 

stream bottoms and blackwater rivers tend to have more 

erratic flooding, since these smaller systems are more responsive to local precipitation. Spring-fed streams, bogs, 

and seeps tend to have much more stable hydrologic 

patterns, and groundwater table levels assume greater 

importance than overbank flooding.

Topographic positions within floodplains include 

sloughs, natural levees, lower floodplain or first bottoms, 

terraces, and slopes (transitional areas to uplands; fig. 

3.2). The depth and seasonality of flooding, as well as 

numerous other site characteristics, varies substantially 

with topographic position. Other sites such as cypress 

domes support forested wetlands somewhat similar 

in nature to bottomland hardwoods. These wetlands 

Figure 3.1. Hydrographs of typical bottomland hardwood sites 

(redrawn from Wharton and others, 1982).

typically occur as isolated basins rather than within a 

riverine floodplain.

It is important to realize that hydrologic alterations 

have occurred at most sites. Drainage and flood control 

projects, diversions of flows, pumping from aquifers, 

road construction, and numerous other developments 

are so ubiquitous that nearly every site has a hydrologic 

regime different than it had 50-100 years ago. A tract 

of mature forest in the immediate vicinity can be very informative. If the existing overstory trees in the tract look 

stressed, or the understory trees are mostly either less or 

more flood tolerant than the overstory trees, then there 

may have been substantial hydrologic modifications to 

the site. Hydrologic records, maps, aerial photos, and 

interviews with people knowledgeable about the site 

may all be used to determine what types of hydrologic 

changes have taken place. It may be impossible to restore a site’s hydrology back to historic conditions.

In cases where the natural hydrologic pattern of a 

site has been altered drastically, or for areas that are 

not naturally bottomland hardwood sites, more specific hydrologic information may be necessary. Along 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 15

Upland forest (White oak, Blackgum, White ash,

Hickories, Winged elm, Loblolly pine)

or

or

Black willow

Cottonwood

Sycamore - Sweetgum - American elm

Sugarberry

American elm

Green ash

Overcup oak

Water hickory

Sweetgum

Willow oak

Baldcypress - Tupelo

Sweetgum

Willow oak

Swamp chestnut oak

Cherrybark oak

Willow oak

Water oak

Diamondleaf (laurel) oak Upland forest

A B C D E F G H I J

River channel First bottom (terrace) Second bottom (terrace) Upland

Figure 3.2. Topographic positions and associated forest cover types within a river floodplain (modified from Wharton and others, 1982).

reservoir shorelines, for example, water levels may 

fluctuate dramatically, and seasonal patterns of flooding 

and drawdown need to be understood in detail. In areas 

where heavy machinery has been operated, topsoil has 

been displaced, or water control structures have been 

installed, surface flooding and/or water table levels may 

vary considerably from an undisturbed site. On the most 

heavily disturbed sites, such as surface-mined areas that 

have been regraded, it is advisable to collect as much detailed information as is available or even to monitor the 

hydrologic regime of the site prior to selecting species 

and initiating planting (see Chapter 13).

Soils

Alluvial bottomland soils generally have more clay 

and organic matter than upland soils, and therefore they 

tend to have higher moisture-holding capacity, fertility, 

and productivity. There are numerous exceptions and 

potential soil-related problems, however, and an appreciation of soil conditions is important for ensuring the 

success of a restoration project.

A good place to start evaluating the soils on a site is 

with the county or parish soil survey. Even if the site has 

been drastically altered, county or parish soil surveys 

can provide information on the soil originally found on 

the site. Soil surveys should be used with caution, however, since the information on forested wetland sites is 

usually much less detailed than information on adjacent 

agricultural lands. In many instances, the mapped soil 

type within a wetland may include one to several areas 

of a different soil type. Soil surveys are available for 

most of the counties and parishes covered by this guide 

and can be obtained from local NRCS offices (also 

see NRCS National Soil Survey Center data at http:

//www.statlab.iastate.edu/soils/nssc). The restorationist 

should know what soil series are present on the project 

site and be familiar with their basic characteristics. A list 

of some of the soil characteristics that are often important to know and which are for the most part available in 

soil surveys is provided in table 3.1.

Soil texture (relative amounts of sand, silt, and clay) is 

basic information for a restorationist because texture affects other soil characteristics important for tree survival 

and growth and also because it may greatly affect planting operations. In particular, heavy clay (and organic 

soils) can present difficulties for planting operations.

Soil moisture characteristics are also critical (see hydrology section, this chapter). In addition to the hydrology data listed in table 3.1, soil color and mottling can 

provide good indications of the degree of soil saturation. 

Dark, dull soils (i.e., those with low chroma values) indicate prolonged soil saturation. Soils that are somewhat 

less saturated may contain brightly colored mottles.
16 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Although soil surveys can provide much information, 

they are not a substitute for an on-site examination or 

for soil testing, especially if the site has been heavily 

disturbed. If there is evidence of soil compaction (e.g., 

signs of overgrazing, ruts caused by heavy machinery, 

lots of puddles), it would be worthwhile to determine 

the bulk density of the soil. Most bottomland hardwood 

trees will not grow well if bulk density exceeds 1.4 

g/cm3

, and they may not survive if the bulk density exceeds 1.7 g/cm3

. Soil penetrometers (fig. 3.3), or simple 

soil probes, can be used as a quick means to assess the 

degree of compaction.

On some sites, in particular areas that have been surface-mined for coal, soil pH assumes great importance. 

Soil pH on these sites may be below 4.0 to 4.5, which is 

the lower limit that most bottomland species apparently 

tolerate. Soil can also be too alkaline. Some riverfront 

soils along the Mississippi and Red Rivers have pH values of 7.5-8, and this degree of alkalinity has probably 

been responsible for the failure of planting trials with 

oak species such as Nuttall and cherrybark. Sites mined 

Figure 3.3. Soil penetrometer being used to assess soil 

compaction.

for phosphate may also have a pH in excess of 7, which 

is high enough to affect the survival and growth of some 

bottomland hardwood species.

Nutrient deficiencies are generally not a problem on 

bottomland sites, except where soils have been drastically disturbed (e.g., by surface mining or topsoil 

removal) or have been in agricultural production over 

long time periods. In such cases, nitrogen is likely to be 

deficient. Nutrient deficiencies may be detected by soil 

tests. Guidelines for soil sampling, testing, analysis, and 

interpretation can be found in some of the references at 

the end of this chapter.

Biotic Site Factors

Four biotic factors may affect the success of a restoration project: plant competition (including competition 

from exotic species), animals, insects, and disease.

Plant Competition and Exotic Species

Competition from other plants for light, water, or 

nutrients may reduce the survival and growth of planted 

trees. Although there have been cases where the partial 

shade caused by competing vegetation actually increased 

survival of planted trees—and planted trees will usually win out over weeds given enough time—competition generally reduces both overall survival and initial 

growth. In addition, a heavy plant cover can (1) interfere with tree planting operations, (2) provide habitat 

for small rodents and other animals that can consume 

planted seeds or seedlings, and (3) serve as fuel for 

wildfire. It is therefore important to evaluate the current plant cover on the restoration site and also attempt 

to determine what type of plant competition may occur 

after planting.

Certain types of plants can be particularly harmful 

to planted trees. A heavy growth of vines, for example, 

can shade tree seedlings and their weight can cause 

bending or physical damage. Some exotic weeds, such 

as Johnson grass, Vasey grass, and cogongrass grow so 

tall and thick that they can reduce growth and significantly increase mortality of planted trees. Fescue, bahia 

grass, and other turf-forming grasses that are commonly 

planted for pasturage and erosion control often compete 

successfully against young planted trees for water during 

times of drought.

The amount and type of weeds that can be tolerated 

on a site before or after planting depends on the objectives of the project and the planting methods being 

considered. There is rarely a need to quantify the weed 

cover precisely, but it is useful to know if weeds cover 

much of the site, how tall the weedy vegetation is, and 

what dominant species are present.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 17

An attempt should be made to determine in advance 

what type of plant competition may arise after planting. This determination will aid in the planning and 

budgeting of postplanting operations and can be accomplished by examining similar restoration sites, reviewing 

available literature, the NRCS Plants Database (http:

//plants.usda.gov/), or talking to people with knowledge 

of the area (such as county foresters or agricultural 

extension agents).

In many restoration projects done as mitigation, there 

is a requirement that no more than a certain percentage of the total plant cover (typically 5-10%) consists 

of exotic species. Therefore, a special effort needs to 

be made to determine in advance what types of exotic 

plants are likely to become established and what control 

measures will be necessary. Exotic species of particular 

concern include melaleuca, Brazilian pepper, and cogongrass in peninsular Florida. Elsewhere, nuisance exotic 

species may include Chinese tallow, Japanese honeysuckle, kudzu, multiflora rose, wild grapes, and various 

turf grasses.

Animals

Both domestic animals and various wildlife species 

may damage or destroy planted trees. The animals most 

likely to cause damage to planted seeds or seedlings 

include deer, raccoons, beaver, nutria, small rodents, 

cattle, and hogs. The restorationist should therefore 

find out if any of these animals are present in numbers 

large enough to affect tree species selection or to make 

specialized protection measures necessary. An accurate appraisal of deer damage may best be obtained by 

requesting the assistance of a wildlife biologist from the 

state wildlife agency.

Field personnel need to be trained to look for and 

recognize animal damage in potential restoration sites 

(Larry Savage, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and 

Fisheries, oral commun.; Waller and Alverson, 1997) 

because grazing can affect the long-term species composition of the site. In the bottomland hardwoods of southern Illinois, deer browsing on planted oaks and natural 

sugarberry have resulted in an overabundant advanced 

regeneration of the less palatable sweetgum and boxelder 

(Larry Savage, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and 

Fisheries, oral commun.). Boerner and Brinkman (1996, 

p. 309) reported that “deer browsing was more important than environmental gradients or climate factors in 

determining seedling longevity and mortality.” Seedlings 

that are fertilized and irrigated in nurseries are especially 

preferred by browsing deer.

Rodents have caused extensive mortality to restoration 

projects that have used direct seeding. Savage and others 

(1996) reported successful seedling establishment by 

seeding willow oak acorns at rates 62% higher than normal (5,982 per ha [2,420 per acre]) in spite of extensive 

damage caused by rice and cotton rats. In areas subject 

to long-term flooding, nutria and beaver have been 

especially damaging. Nutria can decimate baldcypress 

regeneration and are a major factor limiting baldcypress 

regeneration in swamp forests of Louisiana (Conner and 

others, 1986). Damage to baldcypress usually consists 

of pulling up the seedling and eating the bark from the 

taproot. Although seedling protectors have proven successful in some studies, they have not been universally 

successful and add substantially to the cost of planting.

Insects and Disease

Numerous injurious insects and diseases affect bottomland hardwood tree species. Many of these agents 

can drastically lower the value of trees for timber production, but seldom will they cause the total failure of a 

restoration project. Most cases where insects or disease 

destroyed large numbers of planted seeds or seedlings 

occurred when the trees planted were not well suited to 

the site and were therefore heavily stressed. Although it 

will generally not be a problem, the potential for insect 

or disease outbreaks should be investigated any time the 

restorationist is working in an unfamiliar area.

Human Influences

In addition to abiotic and biotic factors, restorationists should assess the potential for human impacts on the 

restoration site. Among other things, people may use the 

site as a play area, drive over it in off-road recreational 

vehicles or farm machinery, accidentally douse it with 

herbicides from nearby farm or forestry operations, burn 

it with a carelessly thrown cigarette, or intentionally 

vandalize it.

Some indirect human influences are much less obvious but can still cause the total failure of a restoration 

project. For example, residual herbicides applied to 

previous agricultural crops can stunt or kill many tree 

species. Some tree planting failures in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley have repeatedly occurred on fields 

where milo was grown the previous year, and the effect 

of residual herbicides was a prime suspect. Although the 

effect of residual herbicides has not been demonstrated 

experimentally, it cannot be ruled out as a possible influence on restoration success.

Selected References

Baker, J.B., and Broadfoot, W.M., 1979, A practical 

method of site evaluation for commercially important 

southern hardwoods: New Orleans, La., U.S. Forest 
18 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, General 

Technical Report SO-26, 51 p.

Boerner, R.E.J., and Brinkman, J.A., 1996, Ten years of 

tree seedling establishment and mortality in an Ohio 

deciduous forest complex: Bulletin of the Torrey 

Botanical Club, v. 123, p. 309-317.

Conner, W.H., Toliver, J.R., and Sklar, F.H., 1986, Natural regeneration of baldcypress (Taxodium distichum

(L.) Rich.) in a Louisiana swamp: Forest Ecology and 

Management, v. 14, no. 4, p. 305-317.

Haynes, R.J., Allen, J.A., and Pendleton, E.C., 1988, 

Reestablishment of bottomland hardwood forests on 

disturbed sites: an annotated bibliography: U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service Biological Report, v. 88, no. 42, 

104 p.

Hodges, J.D., 1994, The southern bottomland hardwood 

region and brown loam bluffs subregion, in Barrett, 

J.W., ed., Regional silviculture of the United States 

(3rd ed.): New York, John Wiley and Sons, p. 227-

269.

Messina, M.G., and Conner, W.H., 1998, Southern 

forested wetlands: ecology and management: Boca 

Raton, Fla., Lewis Publishers, 616 p.

Pritchett, W.L., and Fisher, R.F., 1987, Properties and 

management of forest soils (2nd ed.): New York, John 

Wiley and Sons, 494 p.

Savage, L., Anthony, J., and Buchholz, R., 1996, Rodent 

damage to direct seeded willow oak in Louisiana, 

in Eversole, A.G., ed., Proceedings of the Fiftieth 

Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association 

of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Oct. 5-9, 1996, Hot 

Springs, Ark.: Southeastern Association of Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies, p. 340-349.

Smith, D.M., 1986, The practice of silviculture (8th ed.): 

New York, John Wiley and Sons, 527 p.

Waller, D.M., and Alverson, W.S., 1997, The whitetailed deer: a keystone herbivore: Wildlife Society 

Bulletin, v. 25, no. 2, p. 217-226.

Wharton, C.H., Kitchens, W.M., Pendleton, E.C., and 

Sipe, T.W., 1982, Ecology of bottomland hardwood 

swamps of the southeast: a community profile: U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Services Program FWS/OBS-81/37, 133 p.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 19

Chapter 4: Species Selection

Tree species selection is one of the more critical phases of a restoration project. An inappropriate choice can 

result in a total planting failure, an inadequately stocked 

and underproductive forest, or a forest of minimal value 

for wildlife.

The choice of species to be planted depends on the 

project goals, the characteristics of the site, and the 

availability of planting stock, equipment, and personnel. An informed choice also requires knowledge of the 

silvical characteristics (see Burns and Honkala, 1990a,b, 

“Silvics of North America, Volumes 1 and 2”) and uses 

of bottomland hardwood tree species (Putnam and others, 1960).

There is no standard or widely recommended procedure for selecting the species to be planted. Assuming 

the goal of the project is full restoration and the site has 

not been irreversibly modified, information about the 

original forest composition of the site, or of a nearby 

forest with similar site characteristics (see reference sites 

section, this chapter), should be used as the basis from 

which to begin the selection process. Once the restorationist has an idea of the original forest composition 

(keeping in mind that forest composition is continually 

changing), then he or she can begin to narrow the number of species to be planted. Species selected must be 

tolerant of the soils and hydrological conditions on the 

project site. Flood tolerant tree species (e.g., Nuttall oak 

or green ash) can be planted in areas that rarely flood, 

but less flood tolerant species cannot survive in flood 

prone areas.

Tree species that are likely to colonize the restoration 

project site by natural dissemination of seeds or other 

propagules need not be planted, or at least not in great 

numbers. Assuming a nearby seed source exists, such 

species generally include sweetgum, sycamore, and the 

common species of maple, elm, and ash. These species 

fruit prolifically almost every year and produce fruits 

that are carried great distances from parent trees by the 

wind. In contrast, heavy fruited species such as most 

oaks and hickories should be planted. Such species may 

produce mast prolifically only once in several years, and 

their dispersal mechanisms are weak or unreliable.

If the primary purpose of the restoration is for wildlife 

habitat, fast growing species such as cottonwood or 

sycamore can be planted to provide some vertical structure within a few years. These species can attain heights 

of 10 m or more within 3 to 4 years and could provide 

Neotropical migratory bird habitat during the early 

developmental stage of the restoration. As these fast 

growing trees begin to provide vertical structure, their 

use by birds will assist in increasing biodiversity through 

the introduction of numerous seeds (Twedt and Portwood, 1997). An additional consideration, especially on 

private land, might be the market value of cottonwood 

or sycamore for pulp within 10 years. Schweitzer and 

others (1999) reported on an experimental cottonwood 

plantation that was used to provide a financial return to 

the landowner within 10 years while acting as a nurse 

crop to Nuttall oak seedlings. Such innovative plantings 

can provide multiple benefits, including the development 

of improved soil structure and increased organic matter, 

while the long-term target vegetation (the underplanted 

seedlings such as oak) are developing. Upon harvest, 

some of the cottonwood trees can be retained to provide 

future sawlogs or den trees.

To assist with the process of species selection, several types of information are provided here. Selected 

silvical characteristics and wildlife-related uses of 69 

bottomland hardwood species are listed in table 4.1. 

Supplemental information on species associations and 

ecological relationships, based on the Society of American Foresters cover types listed in table 1.1, is provided 

in Appendix A. Additional information on matching 

species and soil types in the Midsouth is supplied in Appendix D, and for the Southern Atlantic Coastal Plain, 

information is in Appendix E. Also, several references to 

more detailed treatments of individual species or other 

aspects of species selection are provided at the end of 

this chapter (page 34).

Reference Sites

The concept of a “reference wetland” has been used 

for several years by professionals involved in wetland 

restoration and creation for mitigation purposes. Using 

the reference wetland approach, data are collected on the 

plant community, hydrology, and other characteristics 

of a natural, relatively undisturbed wetland on a site 

similar to and in the vicinity of the proposed mitigation 

site. These data are then used as a basis for designing the 

mitigation project and judging its success.

Because of the high degree of variability within 

natural bottomland hardwood forests, the use of a “reference forest ecosystem” has been proposed. A reference forest ecosystem has been defined as a conceptual 

forest selected for creation or restoration. It is based on 

forested wetlands represented locally (in the same or a 

nearby watershed) in terms of species composition and 

physiognomy. The key difference between a reference 

forest ecosystem and a reference wetland is that a reference wetland is a specific wetland, whereas a reference 

forest ecosystem is a composite description from several 

similar forested wetlands.
20 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Table 4.1. Characteristics of selected tree and shrub species suitable for reforestation in bottomland hardwood forests of the 

southeastern United States: typical habitat; flood and shade tolerance; seed ripening and storage requirements; reproductive 

characteristics; and suitability for direct seeding, wildlife food and habitat, and wood products.

Key to Flood Tolerance:

T (tolerant) —Species are able to survive and grow on sites where soil is saturated or flooded for long periods during the growing season. Species have special adaptations for flood tolerance.

MT (moderately tolerant) —Species are able to survive saturated or flooded soils for several months during the growing season, but mortality is high if flooding persists or reoccurs for several 

consecutive years. These species may develop some adaptations for flood tolerance.

WT (weakly tolerant) —Species are able to survive saturated or flooded soils for relatively short periods of a few days to a few weeks during the growing season; mortality is high if flooding 

persists longer. Species do not appear to have special adaptations for flood tolerance.

I (intolerant) —Species are not able to survive even short periods of soil saturation or flooding during the growing season. Species do not show special adaptations for flood tolerance.

Tolerance Seed

Species Name Habitat Flood Shade ripening Seed storage requirements1 

Ash, green First bottoms and newly MT Adult = I; Sept.- Oct. Sealed container at 

Fraxinus deposited sediments Seedling = MT 41°F (5°C) and 7-10% 

pennsylvanica except in deep swamps. to T seed moisture. 

Most common on flats

or shallow sloughs. 

Ash, pumpkin Widely distributed on new T Adult = I to MT; Oct. - Dec. Sealed container at 

Fraxinus profunda sediments, in first bottoms, Seedling = MT 41°F (5°C) and 7-10% 

and edges of swamps. seed moisture. 

Similar to green ash.

Ash, white Widely distributed; however, WT Adult = I; Sept. - Dec. Sealed container at 

Fraxinus americana limited to ridges and high Seedling = MT 41°F (5°C) and 7-10% 

hummocky flats of older seed moisture. 

alluvium, outwashes from 

uplands, and creek bottoms.

Bay, loblolly Swamps, bays, and wet MT T to I Sept. - Dec. Unknown. 

Gordonia lasianthus sites in pine barrens of 

Coastal Plain.

Bay, red Borders of swamps in rich, MT T Sept. - Oct. Unknown. 

Persea borbonia moist, mucky soil and wet 

pine and hardwood flats 

and bays. Not on alluvial sites.

Bay, swamp Pine barrens, swamp MT T Unknown Unknown. 

Persea palustris margins, and river bottoms. 

Bay, sweet Edges of headwater and MT MT July - Oct. Store in sealed 

Magnolia virginiana muck swamps and pocosins. container at 32-41°F 

(0-5°C). Seeds stored 

at higher temperatures

should not be cleaned.

Beech, American Mostly creek bottoms and I VT Sept. - Nov. Store loosely in sealed 

Fagus grandifolia occasionally in minor river polyethlyene bags from 

bottoms and on ridges of fall until February of the 

old alluvium or terraces. following winter at 

20-30% moisture and

33-41 °F (1-5 °C).
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 21

Key to Shade Tolerance:

In some cases a range of tolerance is given depending on the so 

others, 1960 and Burns and Honkala, 1990. 

Adult —Refers to the shade t 

Seedling —Refers to the shade tolerance of seedlings.

VT (very tolerant) —Species are able to survive and thrive in the deep shade of a closed canopy forest.

T (tole 

MT (moderately tolerant) —Species will 

WT (weakly tolerant) —Species will grow with partial shad 

overtopping competition.

I (Intolerant) —Species require open conditions and full sunlight for normal growth and development.

Key to Suitability: 

H = high 

M = medium 

L = low 

I = insufficient data to determine suitability or unsuitability

Direct Waterfowl Deer/turkey Neotropical Wood 

Reproductive characteristics seeding food food migrant products

Germination best on bare, moist soil I L L I M

in openings. Excellent natural seed

dispersal. Sprouts well.

Seedlings establish on bare, moist soil I L L I M

after water has drained off. Sprouts

well from stumps.

Seedlings establish best in openings I L L I H

on bare, moist soil after water has

drained off. Sprouts prolifically from 

stumps.

Seedlings establish best in relatively I L L I I

open areas with exposed soil. 

Seedlings establish in both understory I L L I L

and openings. Fire stimulates 

germination. Sprouts well from stumps.

Seedlings establish both in understory I I I I L

and openings. Sprouts well from stumps.

Seedlings establish both in shade I L L I L

and especially in openings and 

heavy thinnings. 

Regeneration is generally sparse but I L M I L-M

persistent. Seedlings establish best in

shade on moist, well-drained soil.

Sprouts well from roots and stumps.
22 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Tolerance Seed 

Species Name Habitat Flood Shade ripening Seed storage requirements1 

Birch, river 

Betula nigra

Blackgum 

Nyssa sylvatica

Boxelder 

Acer negundo

Buttonbush 

Cephalanthus

occidentalis

Cherry, black 

Prunus serotina

Cottonwood, eastern 

Populus deltoides

Cottonwood, swamp 

Populus heterophylla

Cypress, bald 

(baldcypress) 

Taxodium distichum

Cypress, pond 

(pondcypress) 

Taxodium distichum

var. nutans

Dogwood, flowering 

Cornus florida

Near river fronts and banks 

of minor streams. Not below 

Memphis in the Delta but 

extends to the coast on

secondary streams.

Throughout bottoms on 

ridges and high flats of 

older silty alluvium. Well 

drained, silty and loamy soils.

Scattered throughout 

riverfronts of major streams, 

bottomlands, ridges, and 

high flats.

Mostly in Gulf of Mexico 

coastal plains and Delta. 

Also in swamps along

streams and margins of

ponds.

Sparsely scattered throughout on oldest alluvium and 

outwash from uplands.

Often in hammocks.

Mostly on newly deposited 

soil along major streams, 

recently abandoned fields, 

right-of-ways, clean burns, 

wet spots in pastures, and

banks of small drainages

and ditches.

Scattered in shallow 

swamps, in deep sloughs, 

along often flooded creek 

bottoms, and on wet spots 

on low hammocks on the 

east coast. 

Very poorly drained organic 

or clay soils. Swamps, deep 

sloughs, borders of old lake 

beds, very wet areas with up 

to 3 m (10 ft) of flooding. 

Commonly originates as

dense, even-aged stands. 

Shallow piney woods, 

headwater and/or back 

swamps, perched ponds, 

sloughs, and wet flats on

lower Coastal Plain, mostly

east of the Mississippi River.

Common in bottoms of 

minor streams and on welldrained sites. 

MT I May - June 

WT I to WT Sept. - Oct. 

MT MT to T Aug. - Oct. 

T T Sept. - Oct. 

I I to MT Late Aug.-

Sept. 

WT - MT VI May - Aug. 

MT I to WT Apr. - July 

VT I to WT Oct. - Dec. 

T I Oct. - Dec. 

I VT Sept. - Oct. 

Store at 1-3% moisture 

content and 36-38 °F 

(2-3 °C).

Store over winter in 

cold, moist sand or in 

cold storage. 

Air dry to a moisture 

content of about 10-15% 

before storage. 

Unknown. 

Unknown. 

Air dry 4 days at room 

temperature. Store in 

stopper vials at 36-40°F 

(2-4 °C). 

Cold storage of 41°F 

(5 °C) and 5-8% 

moisture content. 

Seeds keep well in dry 

storage of 41 °F (5 °C) 

for at least one winter. 

Seeds keep well in dry 

storage of 41 °F (5 °C)

for at least one winter.

Store cleaned seeds in 

sealed containers at 

38- 41 °F (3-5 °C) for 

2-4 years.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 23

Reproductive characteristics 

Direct 

seeding 

Waterfowl 

food 

Deer/turkey 

food 

Neotropical 

migrant 

Wood 

products

Seedlings establish on moist, well-drained I L L I L 

soils. Rapid early growth from seed.

Sparse regeneration. Germination and I M M I L

establishment only on dry soil. Stumps to

30 cm (12 inches) sprout well.

Germinates best on moist, bare, mineral I L H I L 

soil in shade or openings. Sprouts well

from stumps.

Very moist seed bed is optimum. Stumps I M L I L

of all sizes sprout.

Seeds establish in bare mineral soil or in I L M I H

leaf litter. Sprouts from stumps.

Germination best on wet mineral soil. I L M I H 

Continued moisture and top light

imperative. Sprouts well from stumps up 

to 30 cm (12 inches).

Reproduction is erratic and sparse. I L M I L

Germination best on bare, moist, mineral 

soil. Rapid early growth. Sprouts from 

stumps up to 30 cm (12 inches).

Generally poor regeneration but I L L I H

occasionally excellent in openings. Best 

germination on very moist muck substrate. 

Sprouting inconsistent from stumps up to

50 cm (20 inches).

Similar to baldcypress. I L L I M 

Germination best on bare mineral soil in I L H H L 

understory or openings. Stumps of all 

sizes sprout well.
24 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Species Name Habitat 

To

Flood 

lerance 

Shade 

Seed 

ripening Seed storage requirements1 

Dogwood, Dry to very wet sites and T T Aug. - Oct. Store cleaned seeds in 

rough-leafed on soils that range from sealed containers at 

Cornus drummondii sand to clay. 38- 41 °F (3-5 °C) for 

2-4 years.

Elm, American Common on flats in newer MT MT to T Late Feb. - Store at 3-4% moisture 

Ulmus americana alluvium. June content in sealed 

containers at 25°F 

(-4 °C). 

Elm, cedar High flats, poorly drained MT MT to T Sept. - Oct. Air dry and store at 

Ulmus crassifolia ridges, usually on impervious 39 °F (4 °C) in sealed 

silty clay soils. containers. 

Elm, slippery Occasionally on banks of I T Apr. - June Sealed containers. 

Ulmus rubra secondary streams. 

Elm, water Swamps, deep sloughs or low, T T Early spring Unknown. 

Planera aquatica poorly drained flats. Usually 

found on clay soils covered with

water for part of the year.

Elm, winged Ridges and high flats of older WT - I T April Air dry and store at 

Ulmus alata alluvial soils and terraces. 39°F (4 °C) in sealed 

Generally in creek bottoms containers. 

and hammocks.

Hackberry Common on flats and river MT MT to VT Sept. - Oct. Store in sealed 

Celtis occidentalis fronts of new alluvium but not container at 41°F 

in deep swamps. (5 °C) for up to 5 1⁄2 

years without losing 

viability.

Hawthorn Dry, sandy, stony ridges to MT I July - Nov. Unknown. 

Crataegus spp. moist river bottoms and in 

margins of swamps.

Hickory, shagbark Moderately well-drained loams. WT MT Sept. - Oct. Same as for water 

Carya ovata hickory. 

Hickory, shellbark On river terraces and on loamy WT VT Sept. - Nov. Same as for water 

Carya laciniosa flats in second bottoms. Also hickory. 

grows well on clay and silt 

loams, dry and sandy soils.

Hickory, water Common to flats, sloughs, MT MT Sept. - Nov. Store at 41 °F (5 °C) in 

(bitter pecan) and margins of swamps of closed containers for 

Carya aquatica major alluvial streams. Poorly 3 to 5 years. Storage 

to moderately well-drained for one winter is 

clays and loams. achieved by

stratification.

Pecan, sweet Current or recent river fronts WT I to MT Sept. - Oct. Store at 41 °F (5 °C) 

Carya illinoinensis on moderately well-drained in closed containers for 

loams. 3 to 5 years. Storage for 

one winter is achieved

by stratification.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 25

Direct Waterfowl Deer/turkey Neotropical Wood 

Reproductive characteristics seeding food food migrant products

Seedlings establish best on moist soil I L H H L

under partial shade. Sprouts well from 

stumps. 

Germination and establishment on surface of I M M M L-M

moist mineral soil or on undisturbed humus; 

seldom on bare areas. Stumps up to 33 cm 

(13 inches) sprout well. Seeds remain viable

submerged for a month.

Seedlings establish in shade or in openings I M M M L

on moist, bare mineral soil. Stumps up to 

30 cm (12 inches) sprout well.

Seedlings establish in shade or in openings I M M M L

on moist, usually well-drained soil. Stumps up

to 30 cm (12 inches) sprout well.

Seedlings establish after water recedes. I M L M L

Sprouts well from stumps. 

Seedling establishment prolific in new I M M M L

openings but sparse in understory. Stumps

up to 30 cm (12 inches) sprout well. 

Seedlings often become established in full I L L-M H M

shade but cannot withstand submergence. 

Sprouts well from stumps up to 30 cm 

(12 inches).

Does not readily establish seedlings. Trees I L M-H M-H I

are good sprouters. 

Seedlings require moderately moist seedbed. L I M I L 

Sprouts well from stumps.

Needs moist soil for germination and I L M I L

establishment in understory and openings. 

Sprouts well from stumps. 

Prolific regeneration in full sunlight. Seedlings L L-M L I L 

are more common in new openings but also 

occur in understory. Sprouts well from stumps

to 50 cm (20 inches).

Adequate regeneration in small or partial M H H I H

openings. Seedlings establish best under

about an inch of loamy soil. 
26 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Tolerance Seed 

Species Name Habitat Flood Shade ripening Seed storage requirements1 

Holly, American Minor stream bottoms and on WT VT Sept. - Oct. Store in sealed 

Ilex opaca high ridges of oldest alluvium. container. 

Honeylocust Scattered in large bottoms on MT I Sept. - Oct. Seeds will retain 

Gleditsia triacanthos all sites except swamps and viability for several 

sloughs. Grows best on the years when stored in 

better ridges of new alluvium. sealed containers at

32-45 °F (0-7 °C).

Hophornbeam, Slopes and ridges, I T to VT Late Aug. - Unknown. 

eastern occasionally in bottoms. Oct. 

Ostrya virginiana

Hornbeam, American Rich, moist loams. MT VT Aug. - Oct. Store at 35-49 °F 

Carpinus caroliniana (2-9 °C) in moist sand, 

sand and peat, or soil 

for up to 2 years.

Magnolia, southern On old alluvium and outwash WT T July - Oct. Store in sealed 

Magnolia grandiflora areas. More common in minor containers at 32-41 °F 

or secondary stream bottoms, (0-5 °C). Seeds stored

hummocks, and wet flats. at higher temperatures

should not be cleaned.

Maple, Florida Drained sites in secondary WT T March - April Unknown. 

Acer barbatum bottoms. 

Maple, silver On riverfronts and stream- MT I to T April - June Air dry to 30% moisture 

Acer saccharinum banks on moderately well- content before storage. 

drained loams. 

Maple, swamp red Common on low, wet flats and MT T April - June Air dry to a moisture 

Acer rubrum edges of headwater swamps. content of about 

10-15% before storage. 

Mulberry, red Common on heavy, moist but WT - I T to VT June - Aug. Store dry seeds 

Morus rubra well-drained soils in first at subfreezing 

bottoms. temperature of about 

-10 to 0 °F (-23 to -17 °C).

Oak, bur On better flats and low ridges I WT Aug. - White oak group 

Quercus macrocarpa of older alluvium and tributary late Nov. 

bottoms north of latitude of 

Memphis. Commonly found on 

limestone ridges. 

Oak, cherrybark Widely distributed on the best WT - I I Sept. - Nov. Red oak group

Quercus pagoda loamy sites on all river-bottom 

ridges and all better drained 

creek bottoms and hammocks.

Predominantly on older

alluvium.

Oak, delta post Large bottoms of the lower WT - I WT Sept. - Nov. White oak group 

Quercus stellata Mississippi River. Well-drained, 

 var. mississippiensis silty clay and loam sites on 

older alluvium.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 27

Reproductive characteristics 

Direct 

seeding 

Waterfowl 

food 

Deer/turkey Neotropical Wood 

food migrant products

Seedlings occur in understory and openings. I L L I L

Sprouts well from stumps.

New seedlings are usually found in openings I L L H L

and rarely in the understory. Sprouts well from

stumps.

Seedlings establish best on moist mineral I L L I L

soil in understory and in openings. Sprouts

well from stumps of all sizes.

Seedlings establish best on moist mineral I L L I L

soil in understory and in openings. Sprouts 

well from stumps of all sizes. 

Usually good seed crops but low germination. I L L M-H L-M 

Sprouts well from stumps. 

Germinates best on moist mineral soil in I L I I L

shade or openings. Sprouts well from stumps.

Seedlings occur on bare mineral soil in shade I L H I M

or especially in openings. Sprouts well from

stumps.

Germinates best on moist mineral soil in I L M I L

shade or openings, often after water recedes. 

Sprouts well from stumps.

Seedlings occur in shade or openings. I L M-H H M

Sprouts well from stumps. 

Germination may be prolific in open I L H I H

bottomland areas. Seedlings are often killed

if flooded during the growing season. Sprouts

well from stumps and following burning of 

small trees, but the quality of sprouts is

usually poor.

Good regeneration with full light but never H H H I H

prolific. Poor quality stump sprouts. 

Good regeneration with light but seldom I I H I H

prolific. Seedlings most common in openings. 

Not a good stump sprouter. 
28 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Tolerance Seed 

Species Name Habitat Flood Shade ripening Seed storage requirements1 

Oak, laurel 

(diamondleaf) 

Quercus laurifolia

Oak, live 

Quercus virginiana

Oak, Nuttall 

Quercus nuttallii

Oak, overcup 

Quercus lyrata

Oak, pin 

Quercus palustris

Oak, Shumard 

Quercus shumardii

Oak, swamp 

chestnut 

Quercus michauxii

Oak, swamp white 

Quercus bicolor

Oak, water 

Quercus nigra

Near the coast on wet flats, WT - I - T Sept. - Oct. Red oak group 

margin of swamps, low clay MT 

ridges, or even low sandy loam 

ridges of blackwater streams.

Usually in well-drained loams WT - T I Sept. - Dec. White oak group 

and sandy soils along the 

coast but also may occur in

heavier clays.

Flats, low ridges, shallow MT I Sept. - Oct. Red oak group

sloughs, and margins of 

swamps in recent alluvial sites, and 

heavy, poorly drained clays and 

clay loams. Strictly limited to 

bottoms of major streams

entering the gulf and their

larger tributaries.

Widely distributed on poorly MT WT Sept. - Nov. White oak group 

drained, heavy soils of major 

alluvial bottoms. Prevalent in 

sloughs, on margins of 

swamps, and in backwater 

areas.

In first bottoms and terraces MT I Sept. - Dec. Red oak group 

on wet flats with heavy, poorly 

drained to moderately welldrained clays or clay loams. 

Restricted to well-drained WT I Sept. - Oct. Red oak group 

ridge soils in older alluvium 

and outwash from uplands and

to well-drained creek bottoms

and hammocks.

Common in large creek WT I to WT Sept. - Oct. White oak group 

bottoms and hammocks on 

best, well-drained loamy ridges. 

Occasionally on a wet, silty 

clay, high flat. 

Extreme northern part of the MT WT Sept. - Oct. White oak group 

lower Mississippi Valley, mainly 

in smaller bottoms on sites

with pervious but poorly drained

mineral soils.

Widely distributed on loam WT - MT I Sept. - Nov. Red oak group 

ridges in first bottoms and on 

any ridge and silty clay flats in 

second bottoms or terraces. 

Moderately well-drained silty 

clays and loams.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 29

Direct Waterfowl Deer/turkey Neotropical Wood 

Reproductive characteristics seeding food food migrant products

Regeneration erratic but plentiful with light. I H H I L

Seedlings establish in shade or openings

but require release. Sprouts when cut or burned.

Germination best on moist, warm soil. M H H I L

Sprouts well from roots. 

Acorns remain viable in water for up to 311 H H H I M

days. Seedlings establish in openings or 

shade but die soon under shade. Seedlings 

are killed by flooding during the growing 

season. Stumps of young trees sprout readily.

Germination is best on moist mineral soil in M M H I L

open or shade but dies under continued shade.

Seedlings may be killed by high water during

first growing season. Sprouts from small 

stumps only. 

Seedlings become established in understory H H H I L 

openings, but many are killed by flooding 

during the growing season. Seedlings among

most tolerant of oaks. Sprouts well from

stumps of small trees.

Seedlings establish best in full light. Overall H M-H H I H

poor quality of sprouts but better on young trees. 

Germination best on moist, well-drained soils M M H I H

with light cover of leaves. Seedlings require 

full sunlight for best development. Seedlings

are intolerant of flooding. Sprouts from small

stumps.

Regeneration is adequate to sparse, never I I M I M

prolific. Sprouts well from stumps. 

Seedlings establish best on moist, well- H H H I M

aerated soil under leaf litter. Prolonged

submergence of seedlings during the growing 

season is fatal. Sprouts readily from young

stumps. 
30 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Tolerance Seed 

Species Name Habitat Flood Shade ripening Seed storage requirements1 

Oak, white Widely distributed on well- I - WT WT Sept. - Nov. White oak group 

Quercus alba drained loams of the oldest 

alluvium. Common in better 

drained creek bottoms above 

the lower Coastal Plain.

Oak, willow Widely distributed on ridges WT - MT I Aug. - Oct. Red oak group 

Quercus phellos and high flats of major streams. 

Less common in creek bottoms. 

Moderately well-drained silty

clays and loams.

Pawpaw Rich soils along streams and I VT Aug. - Sept. Unknown. 

Asimina triloba in bottoms. 

Persimmon, Scattered widely on wet flats, MT VT Sept. - Nov. Clean, dry seeds 

common shallow sloughs, and swamp should be stored in 

Diospyros virginiana margins on poorly drained sealed containers at 

clays and heavy loams. Rare in 41 °F (5 °C). 

creek bottoms.

Poplar, yellow Mainly on high quality, well- I I to VI Aug. - Oct. Store dried seeds in 

Liriodendron drained terrace site and sealed cans or plastic 

tulipifera outwashes of minor streams. bags at 36-40°F 

Not primarily a bottomland (2-4°C) for 3 to 4 years. 

species. Moist storage in

outdoor soil pits or

drums of moist sand in

cold storage at 36°F

(2°C).

Possumhaw Margins of swamps, streams, MT VT Early autumn Unknown. 

Ilex decidua and in rich upland soils. 

Sassafras Scattered widely on any well- I I Aug. - Sept. Store in sealed 

Sassafras albidum drained site, especially moist containers at 35-41° 

but well-drained sandy loam (2-5 °C). 

soils.

Sugarberry Common on flats and river MT T to VT Sept. - Oct. Store in sealed 

Celtis laevigata fronts of new alluvium but not container at 41°F (5°C) 

in deep swamps. for up to 5 1⁄2 years 

without losing viability. 

Swampprivet Swamps, wet flats, and other T T Summer Unknown. 

Forestiera low lying areas. 

accuminata

Sweetgum On almost all but the wettest MT I Sept. - Nov. Store at a moisture 

Liquidambar sites. Best developed on clay content of about 10-

styraciflua loam ridges of newer alluvium. 15% in sealed bags at

35-40 °F (2-4 °C) for up

to 4 years.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 31

Direct Waterfowl Deer/turkey Neotropical Wood 

Reproductive characteristics seeding food food migrant products

Germination best on moist, well-drained soil M H H I H

under direct light. Seedlings intolerant of

flooding. Sprouts well from stumps and 

following fire damage. 

Germination best in full light on moist, well- H H H I M

aerated soil with light leaf litter. Sprouts from

young stumps. 

Seedlings establish well in shade or I L I I L

openings. Sprouts well from stumps.

Seedlings establish mainly in the understory I L H I M

but also in openings. Sprouts readily from 

stumps and roots. 

Seedlings establish best on moist seedbeds I L L I H

of exposed mineral soil and survive only in full 

sunlight. Seedlings cannot tolerate flooding. 

Sprouts readily from stumps. 

Seedlings occur in understory and especially I L L H L

in partial openings. Sprouts well from stumps.

Germination sparse but is best on moist, I L L M-H L

loamy soil with litter. Grows well in openings. 

Sprouts well from roots and stumps.

Seedlings often become established in full I L L-M H M

shade but cannot withstand submergence. 

Sprouts well from stumps up to 30 cm

(12 inches).

Germination is best in moist mineral soil. I L L I L

Sprouts well from stumps. 

Germination is best on mineral soil in the open. I M L H M

Sprouts well from roots and stumps. 
32 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Species Name Habitat 

Tolerance Seed 

Flood Shade ripening Seed storage requirements1 

Sycamore Widely distributed on fronts of MT WT to I Sept. - Oct. Short-term storage in 

Platanus major streams and on banks ventilated open-mesh 

occidentalis of minor streams, generally on bags. For longer 

moderately well-drained loams. storage, dry to 10-15% 

moisture content and

store in sealed

containers at 20-38°F

Tupelo, Ogeechee Limited to backwater streams T I July - Aug. 

(-7 to 3°C).

Store over winter in 

Nyssa ogeche and coastal swamps. cold, moist sand or in 

cold storage.

Tupelo, swamp Nonalluvial muck and coastal T I to WT Aug. - Oct. Store over winter in 

Nyssa sylvatica swamps, seepage areas of cold, moist sand or in 

var. biflora upland, and on edges of cold storage. 

secondary and minor bottoms. 

Tupelo, water Swamps and floodplains of VT I to WT Sept. - Oct. Store over winter in 

Nyssa aquatica alluvial streams. cold, moist sand or in 

cold storage. 

Walnut, black Scattered on well-drained WT I Sept. - Oct. Clean seed, 20-40% 

Juglans nigra loamy sites, typically a creek moisture content at 

bottom species. 37°F (3 °C) for 1 year in 

plastic bags or 50%

moisture content in

screen container

Waterlocust Swamps, sloughs, and wet flats. MT I Aug. - Oct. 

buried in pits for up to

5 years.

Seeds will retain 

Gleditsia aquatica viability for several 

years when stored in 

sealed containers at

Willow, black Margins and batture of sloughs T VI June - July 

32-45 °F (0-7 °C).

Wet seeds may be 

Salix nigra of principle rivers, also on ditch stored up to a month 

banks and swamp margins. if refrigerated in a 

sealed container. 

Willow, sandbar Along river margins, on newly MT VI Apr. - May Wet seeds may be 

Salix exigua formed, low bars and towheads. stored up to a month if 

refrigerated in a sealed 

container. 

1

 See seed handling section, C . Seeds from the red oak group can be 

stored for up to about 6 months. Seed storage for longer than 6 months should be dry, in sealed containers at 32-36 °F (0-2 °C), but viability loss will be significant.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 33

Direct Waterfowl Deer/turkey Neotropical Wood 

Reproductive characteristics seeding food food migrant products

Seedlings establish best on moist mudflats I L L I M

or other exposed mineral soils, never in shade.

Seedlings remain viable in water for 1 month. 

Sprouts well from stumps. 

Germination and establishment occurs in I M M I L

openings on bare mud when the water recedes. 

Germination best in openings on moist I L-M L-M I L-M

seedbed. Seeds remain viable for months

in water. Sprouts well from stumps.

Sprouts produce viable seed within 2 years.

Need full sunlight for germination. Seeds I L-M L I L-M 

remain viable for months in water. Stump 

sprouts produce viable seeds within 2 years.

Seedlings are mainly found in forest openings I L L I H

but are intolerant of flooding. Sprouts well from 

small stumps. 

New seedlings are usually found in openings I L M I L 

and rarely in the understory. Sprouts well from

stumps. 

Germination best on very moist, exposed I L H M-H M

mineral soil. Seeds will germinate in water. 

Sprouts well from stumps of small trees.

Intolerant of competition.

Germination best on very moist, exposed I L H I L

mineral soil. Seeds will germinate in water. 

Seedlings more flood tolerant than mature trees. 

Sprouts well from stumps of small trees. 

Intolerant of competition.
34 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

An inherent difficulty with using either reference 

wetlands or reference forest ecosystems is that forested 

wetland restoration projects are long-term efforts. Thus, 

many years will pass before the restoration project 

can be compared to the reference. Still, the process of 

characterizing similar natural wetlands in the vicinity of 

the restoration site is useful for species selection and for 

developing success criteria (see Chapter 2).

Selected References

Baker, J.B., and Broadfoot, W.M., 1979, A practical 

method of site evaluation for commercially important 

southern hardwoods: New Orleans, La., U.S. Forest 

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, General 

Technical Report SO-26, 51 p. [A useful method for 

matching species to site if good information on soil 

characteristics is available.]

Banks, R.C., McDiarmid, R.W., and Gardner, A.L., 

1987, Checklist of vertebrates of the United States, 

the U.S. Territories, and Canada: Washington, D.C., 

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Resource Publication 166, 79 p. 

Broadfoot, W.M., 1976, Hardwood suitability for and 

properties of important midsouth soils: New Orleans, 

La., U.S. Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment 

Station Research Paper SO-127, 84 p.

Burns, R.M., and Honkala, B.H., eds., 1990a, Silvics 

of North America, v. 1, conifers: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook 

654, 675 p.

Burns, R.M., and Honkala, B.H., eds., 1990b, Silvics of 

North America, v. 2, hardwoods: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook 

654, 877 p.

Dirr, M.A., 1990, Manual of woody landscape plants: 

their identification, ornamental characteristics, culture, propagation, and uses: Champaign, Ill., Stipes 

Publishing Co., 1007 p.

Hamel, P.B., and Buckner, E.R., 1998, So how far could 

a squirrel travel in the treetops? A Prehistory of the 

Southern Forest: Transactions of the 63rd North 

American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, March 20-25, 1998, Orlando, Fla: Washington, 

D.C., Wildlife Managment Institute, p. 309-315. 

Haynes, R.J., Allen, J.A., and Pendleton, E.C., 1988, 

Reestablishment of bottomland hardwood forests on 

disturbed sites: an annotated bibliography: U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(42), 104 p.

Martin, A.C., Zim, H.S., and Nelson, A.L., 1951, 

American wildlife and plants: a guide to wildlife food 

habits: New York, Dover Publications, Inc., 500 p.

Putnam, J.A., Furnival, G.M., and McKnight, J.S., 1960, 

Management and inventory of southern hardwoods: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook No. 181, 102 p.

Raifaill, B.L., and Vogel, W.G., 1978, A guide for revegetating surface-mined lands for wildlife in eastern 

Kentucky and West Virginia: U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service Biological Services Program FWS/OBS-78/

84, 89 p.

Schweitzer, C.J., Gardner, E.S., and Stanturf, J.A., 1999, 

A comparison of large scale reforestation techniques 

commonly used on abandoned fields in the lower 

Mississippi Alluvial Valley, in Haywood, J.D., ed., 

Proceedings of the 10th Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, February 16-18, 1999, 

Shreveport, La.: Asheville, N.C., U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-30, p. 136-141.

Twedt, D.J., and Portwood, J., 1997, Bottomland hardwood reforestation for Neotropical migratory birds: 

are we missing the forest for the trees?: Wildlife 

Society Bulletin, v. 25, no. 3, p. 647-652.

White, T.A., Allen, J.A., Mader, S.F., Mengel, D.L., 

Perison, D.M., and Tew, D.T., 1990, MiST: A methodology to classify pre-project mitigation sites and 

develop performance standards for construction and 

restoration of forested wetlands: results of an EPAsponsored workshop: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 85 p.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 35

Chapter 5: Site Preparation

The main purpose of site preparation is to create suitable growing conditions for tree seeds or seedlings. On 

sites with minimal disturbance, preparation may consist 

solely of improving soil structure and reducing the existing plant cover and debris by disking, mowing, or burning. Site preparation may also involve other treatments, 

such as fertilization, modifications of the site’s hydrology, replacing topsoil, or large-scale earthmoving.

Another function of site preparation is to create 

improved conditions for the use of mechanical planting 

equipment, which is often necessary following logging 

(because of all the logging slash, fallen snags, etc.) and 

is sometimes important in other cases, such as on surface 

mine sites, where grading may be required.

Site preparation is not always necessary and in some 

cases may hinder the invasion of woody species. In a 

study of natural invasion of woody seedlings onto abandoned agricultural fields, Allen and others (1998) found 

significantly more seedlings in areas that had not been 

disked. The effects of disking on the long-term survival 

of seedlings that did become established, however, 

was not examined in that study, and most studies have 

shown that site preparation will improve the survival 

and growth of planted seeds or seedlings. Even though 

site preparation can add a considerable amount to the 

costs of restoration, it should never be ignored if the site 

evaluation indicates it is needed.

Site Preparation on Old-Field Sites

A common type of restoration site is abandoned 

agricultural land. Since old-field sites are generally well 

suited for growing agricultural plants, they often require 

only minimal site preparation to grow trees and other 

forest vegetation. Trees have often been planted successfully on old fields with virtually no site preparation. 

The method of regeneration is a key factor in determining the level and type of site preparation on old fields. 

For example, if seedlings are to be mechanically planted, 

then the site should not be disturbed unless there is 

substantial soil compaction (see Restoring Soil section, 

this chapter). Crop stubble and/or standing weeds should 

be left alone because they tend to provide better support 

for the tractor. If seedlings are to be hand planted, then 

crop stubble should be left standing, but standing weeds 

in fallow fields should be mowed. For machine planting 

of acorns on heavy clay soils, the site should be double 

disked the fall prior to planting to prevent cracking of the 

soil along the furrow lines during dry weather. If acorns 

are planted on silty or lighter soils not prone to cracking, 

the site can be planted without tilling.

Restoring Hydrology

Before any restoration project can be considered 

complete, the hydrology must be restored to approximate some historic pattern of flooding. As mentioned 

previously, hydrological records, maps, aerial photos 

and personal interviews can provide information about 

hydrologic changes that have taken place. The hydrologic regimes of many old-field sites in the southern 

United States have been altered either by localized drainage efforts such as ditching or tiling or by larger scale 

drainage or flood control projects. Some fields are still 

subject to frequent flooding, although the flooding may 

not be as deep or as long in duration as it was originally. 

Other fields flood much less frequently or not at all. In 

some cases, flooding has been increased by large-scale 

projects. For example, the Atchafalaya Basin of southern Louisiana is now used as a floodway for a portion 

of the Mississippi River flow. As such, the bottomland 

hardwood forests in this area are subjected to increased 

frequency, duration, and depth of flooding, and they are 

further subjected to greatly increased sedimentation. The 

restorationist must also remember that the hydrologic 

regime refers to groundwater dynamics, soil saturation, 

and periods of low flow, not just to overbank flooding.

When localized drainage is the primary factor, it may 

be possible to restore hydrology to its original or an 

otherwise suitable condition by plugging ditches, removing tiles, building or removing dikes, or some similar 

manipulation. In many cases, only a portion or portions 

of a levee or dike will have to be removed, rather than 

spending the time, effort, and money to remove the 

entire structure. The remaining portions of the levee 

will provide topographic relief and increase biodiversity by supporting a different forest community type. In 

areas where land-leveling has removed ridge and swale 

topography, a complete restoration will require use of 

earthmoving equipment to restore surface microtopography and hydrology. Interpretation of historic aerial 

photography can often provide locations of natural 

swales and other topographic high and low areas, as well 

as connections to natural aquatic systems as they existed 

before land-use conversions, land leveling, and other human-induced modifications.

Ideally, hydrology should be restored by methods that 

require little, if any, long-term maintenance. Flashboard 

risers and other water control structures requiring occasional maintenance are acceptable if the area to be 

restored is under permanent management (e.g., a wildlife 

refuge) but will become problematic in projects that 

receive little postplanting attention. If long-term maintenance is required, it is likely that nature will eventually take over, and the area may not remain a wetland. 
36 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Wetland restoration projects that rely on pumped water, 

for example, are suspect because of the long-term maintenance and expense required.

Where hydrologic modifications are the result of 

larger scale drainage, it may not be feasible to restore the 

natural hydrology. Flood control projects on major rivers 

or channel modifications that have resulted in a dropping of the water table, for example, may put hydrologic 

restoration beyond the capability of the restorationist. It 

may still be possible to partially restore the hydrology 

with the realization that under some conditions, such as 

large-scale flood events, an unnatural hydrology may 

still dominate. In these situations, the best that can be 

done is to make sure the species planted are appropriate 

for the expected hydrology.

Whenever a modification of the existing hydrology 

of a field site is contemplated, every effort should be 

made to ensure that adjacent landowners will not be affected. Increasing the flooding on a field to be restored, 

for example, may also increase the flooding of adjacent 

fields that are still in crop production or possibly on 

roads or residential areas. Any modification to the local 

hydrology will likely have some effect outside of the 

project area. A reduction of flooding in one area almost 

always results in increased flooding somewhere else. 

The possibility of these unwanted effects should be 

investigated before project initiation.

Restoring Soil

Most old fields have at least a moderate degree of soil 

compaction, mainly because of repeated use of heavy 

farm equipment. Soil compaction can usually be easily 

overcome by disking (fig. 5.1). Ideally, fields should be 

disked no more than 2 months before planting. However, 

disking may need to be done earlier if mid- to late-winter 

planting is planned and if flooding is a possibility. Two 

passes with the disk plow or harrow should be made, and 

disking should be to a depth of at least 15 cm (6 inches) 

but preferably 20-35 cm (8-14 inches). Disking to these 

recommended depths may be difficult or impractical 

on some heavy clay sites, although it can sometimes be 

accomplished by waiting until soils are moist throughout 

the desired depth.

In cases where compaction is especially severe, the 

field should be subsoiled by using a chisel plow or 

ripper (fig. 5.2). Subsoiling is most effective when the 

soil is dry and should be done far enough in advance of 

planting to allow rainfall to close up and firm the soil. 

Normally, the soil should be ripped to a depth of 45-60 

cm (18-24 inches). On most soils, the tractor should 

have at least 40 horsepower per shank, but more power 

may be required on heavy clays. Ripped furrows should 

be oriented with the landform contour in areas with 

potential for erosion. Where trees are to be planted in 

rows, spacing between furrows should correspond to the 

desired spacing.

Although the soils on most bottomland old-field sites 

are naturally fertile, their fertility has often been reduced 

over time by repeated cropping or poor management. In 

general, nitrogen is the most limiting nutrient, followed 

by phosphorus and potassium. If the early growth rate of 

the planted trees is critical, a soil test should be carried 

out before planting, and the field should be fertilized as 

needed.

Since fertilization may cause a lush growth of weedy 

species, it may be necessary to plan for some postplanting weed control if fertilization is planned. If no postplanting weed control is carried out, fertilization may 

indirectly reduce survival of planted trees by increasing 

the population of small rodents, which are attracted to 

the increased weed cover.

Control of Plant Competition

On old fields that have been fallow through one or 

more growing seasons, weed cover may need to be reduced or eliminated before planting. Eliminating weeds 

will reduce plant competition and temporarily reduce 

the number of small mammals that may destroy planted 

seeds or seedlings. A particularly effective way to do this 

is by disking because not only does it reduce soil compaction but it increases soil organic matter (by turning 

the weeds into the soil). A variety of other types of farm 

or construction machinery can also be used for weed 

control if necessary (e.g., bushhog, mowers, scrapers, 

bulldozers), but disking is generally preferable.

Prescribed fire is another tool that can be used to 

reduce weed cover effectively. Late spring burns, for example, are generally very effective in reducing the cover 

of highly competitive pasture grasses such as fescue. 

Fire does, however, have some potentially serious disadvantages. There is always the danger of the fire escaping and causing damage to nearby property, smoke can 

reduce visibility on adjacent roads, and the time when 

burning can be done effectively (and safely) is relatively 

limited. Prescribed fire for weed control should be carried out only by trained personnel with adequate fire 

control equipment. Also, permits to conduct prescribed 

burns are required in some areas.

Herbicides are frequently used for weed control in 

commercial forestry applications but are not recommended for site preparation on old fields except as a last 

resort. Examples of situations where use of herbicides 

may be justified include sites where weed cover is too 

heavy to use a disk, where use of heavier equipment 

or prescribed fire is not feasible, and on sites with a
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 37

Figure 5.1. Old field being disked to alleviate soil compaction before planting. Disking can also be used to create a 

fire break around a restoration site.

Figure 5.2. Subsoiling for severe cases of soil compaction.
38 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

significant cover of exotic or particularly noxious native 

weed species.

Site Preparation on Heavily Disturbed 

Sites

Surface-mining and other activities that drastically alter a site have caused much less loss of bottomland hardwood forests than clearing for agriculture. Coal mining, 

however, has affected some bottomland hardwood areas, 

most notably in the lower Midwest, and phosphate mining has caused extensive losses in Florida and smaller 

losses in North Carolina and Tennessee. Peat mining 

has damaged pocosins in the Carolinas, and localized 

sand and gravel mining has affected sites throughout the 

lower Midwest and southeastern United States.

While the losses of forested wetlands due to mines are 

relatively small, areas affected are much more dramatically altered than agricultural fields (fig. 5.3). Restoration of these sites is costly and complex and should be 

attempted only by experienced restorationists working 

closely with mine managers and reclamation engineers.

Throughout this discussion about site preparation on 

heavily disturbed sites, the term “restoration” is used. 

The terms “created” or “constructed,” however, are 

often more appropriate for such discussions because an 

entire ecosystem must be established, including soils, 

hydrology, and biotic communities. Also, the newly 

established ecosystems may either be the same types of 

ecosystems originally on the project site but in different locations than the original systems, or they may be 

entirely new types of ecosystems.

Surface Contouring

The first consideration for site preparation on heavily disturbed sites is to establish an appropriate surface 

contour. Because the landscape has been so drastically 

altered, the restorationist first needs to decide what kind 

of ecosystems are to be created on the reclaimed land, 

how they should be placed in relation to each other, and 

how they should interact with existing ecosystems on 

adjacent unmined lands. The guiding principle is to integrate the new contour into the regional drainage system. 

A restored bottomland forest should function ecologically within the regional drainage system in a manner 

comparable to bottomland forests on undisturbed lands. 

Therefore, the restored forest must be positioned where 

Figure 5.3. Phosphate mine site showing the degree of habitat alteration.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 39

it receives adequate surface runoff and groundwater 

baseflow to maintain a desirable hydroperiod. Prediction 

of the hydrologic regime that will occur after contouring is probably the most technically difficult challenge 

involved in restoration. Such predictions require that 

surface and groundwater flows be determined, with full 

consideration given to seasonal hydrologic patterns and 

expected flows during extreme events (such as 100-yr 

storms and unusually dry periods). Ideally, the restorationist should work closely with a hydrologist when 

designing the surface contour for a project site.

The restorationist should know the types of materials 

that are available for use as fill for the site and how they 

will influence hydroperiod, surface and subsurface flow, 

groundwater quality, and soil development. Clayey materials, for example, may swell upon hydration, possibly 

affecting water table depths and zones of soil saturation. 

In other cases, much of the fill material might be nearly 

pure sand, which will cause entirely different groundwater dynamics and tree survival.

The construction of a stream channel poses special 

challenges. Extensive gullying and downstream sedimentation can happen during a single heavy rainstorm, 

requiring difficult repairs and disrupting other project 

activities. Stream channels are less prone to gullying 

if they are relatively broad, shallow, and have a gently 

rounded bottom configuration. They should also have 

a low gradient and be meandering, rather than straight, 

because this will act to retard erosive flows in storm 

events. The bottom should either consist of indurated 

materials or should be vegetated with densely rooted 

wetland plants. Grading techniques, soil treatments, 

and cover crops that encourage the rapid infiltration of 

surface runoff upslope will also diminish the potential 

for channel erosion.

It is difficult to create a natural-appearing yet completely stable channel, so it is likely that the shape of the 

channel will change somewhat over time. Natural stream 

channels also change over time, thus some change in the 

course of the created stream channel should be expected, 

tolerated, and even planned. One way to introduce a 

dynamic element is to place barriers made of logs at intervals along the created channel. The logs will help reduce stream velocities and initiate meandering. Logs are 

present in natural streams, and in addition to affecting 

stream morphology, play a major role in the stream ecosystem by acting as a substrate for invertebrate and algal 

production and as a site for feeding by fish and wading 

birds.

Restoring Soil Characteristics

Restoring soils on heavily disturbed sites is a much 

more difficult and expensive proposition than it is on old 

fields. Among other things, the soils on heavily disturbed 

sites may have the original soil horizons mixed together, 

may be more (or less) acidic, may be highly compacted, 

and typically have much less organic matter.

Where possible, the impacts of projects that drastically alter soils can be minimized by stockpiling the 

topsoil (organic material and surface mineral horizons) 

separately from the underlying horizons. Once the surface is contoured, the topsoil can be placed back on the 

surface. 

The postproject soil conditions will not be identical to 

preproject conditions, of course, but stockpiled topsoil 

is still generally preferable to a more thoroughly mixed 

soil. An exception is heavy clay topsoil, which may 

impede infiltration of water when spread over mined and 

reclaimed land. Also, it should be recognized that many 

bottomland soils are Inceptisols or Entisols (soils with 

relatively little profile development). This makes identification of topsoil rather difficult, but it is generally safer 

to mix surface and subsurface soil horizons of young 

soils than it is to mix more developed soils.

When using stockpiled topsoil, every effort should 

be made to minimize the time that soil is stored because 

organic matter and numbers of desirable soil organisms 

usually decline rapidly. Also, stockpiles should be kept 

as low as possible because the quality of stockpiled topsoil declines substantially when the depth exceeds 1 m.

The surface soil of a recontoured site will often be 

nearly devoid of organic matter. Cover crops and volunteering weeds contribute humus, but additional organic 

matter will accelerate forest establishment and soil maturation. If possible, organic matter should be added to the 

surface soil at the conclusion of final grading. Composted sludge has shown promise in experimental plots 

as a source of both organic matter and nutrients. Yard 

trimmings, which municipalities may provide without 

charge, are another source of organic matter. Experimental plantings conducted by the Florida Institute of 

Phosphate Research have shown that hay cover significantly increases tree survival and growth. Hay, if applied 

in a deep enough layer, conserves soil moisture, prevents 

the establishment of competitive weeds, retards erosion, 

and reduces the daily changes of soil temperatures in the 

root zone. If applied in a thin layer that allows sunlight 

through to the soil surface, though, seeds carried in 

the hay can foster pernicious growth of weeds and turf 

grasses. Pine straw (needles) have also been used effectively as a mulch.

Establishment of Ground Cover

In an effort to reduce soil erosion, many regulatory 

agencies require that surface mined and other highly disturbed sites be planted with a cover of grass immediately 
40 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

after surface contouring. Usually, a rapidly growing 

and spreading species such as fescue, Bahia grass, or 

Bermuda grass is required. Unfortunately, the same characteristics that make these ground cover species good 

for erosion control make them strong competitors with 

planted tree seeds or seedlings. Tree survival and growth 

are almost always diminished when the planting site is 

covered by these species.

While planting a ground cover species may reduce 

erosion in some cases, the nearly flat soil surface typical 

of forested wetland restoration sites and the rapid natural 

invasion of herbaceous species on these sites already 

reduce the potential for erosion. Such plantings, which 

are sometimes required in mitigation plans, are therefore 

of questionable value on wetland sites.

An alternative to planting aggressive grass species is 

to plant nitrogen-fixing species (such as clovers, alfalfas, 

or many other legumes) that can be disked under after 

one growing season as green manure. Green manuring 

can reduce erosion and at the same time improve soil 

structure and fertility. The main drawback to this practice, however, is that the desired tree species cannot be 

planted during the first growing season after contouring.

Selected References

Allen, J.A., McCoy, J., and Keeland, B.D., 1998, Natural establishment of woody species on abandoned 

agricultural fields in the Lower Mississippi Valley: 

first- and second-year results, in Waldrop, T.A., ed., 

Proceedings of the Ninth Biannual Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, February 25-27, 1997, 

Clemson, S.C.: Asheville, N.C., U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-20, p. 263-268.

Clewell, A.F., and Lea, R., 1990, Creation and restoration of forested wetland vegetation in the southeastern United States, in Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, M.E., 

eds., Wetland creation and restoration, the status of 

the science: Washington, D.C., Island Press, p. 195-

231.

Dennington, R.W., 1989, Ripping can improve tree 

planting success: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Region, Management Bulletin R8-MB 31, 2 p.

Federal Interagency Stream Corridor Restoration Working Group, 1998, Stream corridor restoration: principles, processes, and practices, National Engineering 

Handbook (NEH), Part 653: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Hutchison, M., 1992, Vegetation management guideline: 

fescue (Festuca pratensis Huds.): Natural Areas Journal, v. 12, no. 3, p. 157-158.

Myles, D.V., 1978, A compendium of silvicultural 

equipment, Forest Management Institute Information Report FMR-X-115: Ottawa, Canadian Forestry 

Service, Environment, Canada.

Rathfon, R.A., Kaczmarek, D.J., and Pope, P.E., 1995, 

Site preparation for red oak plantation establishment 

on old field sites in southern Indiana, in Gottschalk, 

K.W., and Fosbroke, S.L.C., eds., Proceedings of the 

10th Central Hardwood Forest Conference: Radnor, 

Penn., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, General 

Technical Report NE-197, p. 349-362.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 41

Chapter 6: Seed Collection, 

Handling, and Storage

Quality seed must be obtained regardless of whether 

the method of reforestation will be direct seeding or by 

planting seedlings. It is assumed for the purposes of this 

guide that the restorationist is not planning to grow his 

or her own seedlings; rather, it is expected that the seed 

will either be sown directly on the site to be restored or 

given to a nursery for seedling production. Guides to the 

production of seedlings in nurseries are provided in the 

references at the end of this chapter, but nursery management is too large in scope to be covered in this guide.

Seed Collection

Regardless of the type of seed to be collected, five 

principles will always apply. First, the restorationist must 

know when the seed of the species of concern ripens 

(see table 4.1) and should scout the seed crop as it nears 

maturity. If adequate storage facilities are available, it is 

advisable to take full advantage of years with good seed 

production because collection is easier, usually more of 

the seed is viable, and it ensures an adequate supply of 

seed during years with poor seed crops.

Second, collection should take place as soon as the 

seeds are mature. If seeds are collected too early they 

may not germinate, or high moisture content may lead to 

handling and storage problems. If collection begins too 

late, much of the crop may have been eaten or otherwise 

made inviable.

Seed maturity is often indicated by color. For instance, the fruits of ashes, sweetgum, yellow poplar, and 

sycamore all should have turned from green to greenishyellow or yellow by the time they are collected. Maturity 

of acorns can be recognized by the color of the nut (pericarp), which is green when immature, brown or black for 

mature acorns in the red oak group (e.g., cherrybark oak, 

laurel oak, Nuttall oak, pin oak, Shumard oak, water 

oak, and willow oak), and brown or a mottled-looking, 

yellow-brown for mature acorns in the white oak group 

(e.g., bur oak, Delta post oak, live oak, overcup oak, 

swamp chesnut oak, white oak, and swamp white oak). 

Another good criterion for acorn maturity is easy release 

from the cups; immature acorns are more difficult to 

separate from their cups.

Third, if possible, seeds should be collected from 

trees in the same general area as the site to be restored. 

The abiotic factors of the site where the seeds are collected (see Chapter 3) should resemble those of the 

restoration site as closely as possible to help insure that 

the seedlings will be adapted to the local environment.

Fourth, to enhance genetic diversity, seeds should be 

collected from numerous trees, preferably at least ten. To 

help maximize genetic diversity, seed trees should be at 

least 100 m apart. If timber production is an objective, 

collection should be from mature trees of good form, 

even though this may make collection more difficult. 

Likewise, if production for wildlife is the main objective, 

collection should be from the heaviest seedbearers.

Fifth, records should be kept on each batch of seed 

collected and include at a minimum the species, the date, 

and the specific location (provenance) of collection. Subsequent seedling performance for each lot can then be 

checked, and the best seed sources can be used in future 

restoration projects.

Most collection of bottomland hardwood seed is 

done in forests rather than in seed orchards. Seeds are 

typically collected manually, either by collecting freshly 

fallen seed from the ground, by using pruning poles, by 

climbing trees, or by collecting from logging slash (fig. 

6.1). When possible, it is worth taking advantage of logging operations, because seed collection directly from 

felled trees can be easy, and many other seeds will fall 

on the ground during felling. Mechanized seed collection techniques exist (see references at the end of this 

chapter).

Inevitably, nonviable seed will be collected along with 

viable seed, but this can be minimized by learning to 

recognize indicators of seed quality. If there is evidence 

of insect depredation, decay, or physical damage, or if 

the seed feels exceptionally light, it should be discarded. 

Cutting open a small number of seeds to look for signs 

of insect infestation, decay, or other problems is advisable.

In the field, freshly collected seed should NOT be 

kept in plastic or other containers providing low aeration 

(fig. 6.1), especially if large batches of seed are being 

collected at one time and it will be a day or more before 

the seed is processed. The combination of heat buildup 

due to cellular respiration and the high moisture content 

of fresh seed can damage seed and promote the growth 

of molds.

Seed Handling

Seed handling steps include seed extraction and drying, separation of chaff and nonviable seed from sound 

seed, and in some cases, prestorage treatments. Depending on the type of seed and the type of planting operation 

planned, not all of these steps may be necessary.

Most seeds, other than heavy-seeded species such as 

oaks and hickories, require some type of drying and/or 

extraction process. The first step is usually air-drying. 

Screens or trays can be set up outdoors (and protected 
42 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Figure 6.1. Fresh acorns being collected in an appropriate 

container in the field.

from rain, dew, and excessive direct sunlight) in a 

greenhouse or in a building. Fruits and cones should be 

air-dried only until the point where extraction is possible 

(e.g., the cones or pods open up); longer drying may reduce viability. Solar driers, kilns, and other mechanized 

means of drying are recommended when large batches of 

seed will be handled annually.

Seeds within fleshy coverings should be extracted 

before drying to avoid fermentation or spoilage. The 

fleshy material can be removed first by macerating 

the fruit by hand (perhaps by rubbing the fruits across 

hardware cloth) or with a machine such as a feed grinder 

or commercial seed macerator and separator. The seed 

of some small stony-seed species (e.g., the hollies) can 

be extracted using an ordinary blender with a little water 

added. Following maceration of the fruits, seed can be 

separated from the fleshy material and other debris by 

swirling in a bucket of water. Once the seed is completely separated, it will sink if viable.

Because viable acorns of most oak species sink in 

water, a float test is highly recommended (fig. 6.2). The 

float test will work for all oak species except overcup 

Figure 6.2. Processing acorns using the float test to determine 

viability. Nonviable acorns float to the top and are discarded.

oak, which floats when viable because it retains its cup 

after the acorns are mature. In addition to separating 

viable acorns from unsound acorns and other chaff, the 

float test can also serve to rehydrate desiccated acorns.

Acorns should be floated on the day of collection but 

can be placed in cold storage for several days before 

floating if necessary. If conditions are dry at the time of 

collection, acorns should be left in the water for 16-24 

h because many viable acorns will float at first if a little 

dry. The acorns should be stirred once or twice to allow 

all unsound acorns to float up to the surface. After flotation, the unsound acorns and chaff should be skimmed 

off the surface and the water drained away. Complete 

surface drying of the acorns is not necessary, but there 

should not be enough water remaining to form a pool in 

the bottom of the container.

Seed Storage

Seeds of many species can be stored for several years 

(at least five) if dried to a moisture content of 6-10%, 

placed in airtight containers, and kept at temperatures 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 43

slightly below freezing (-18 to -1 °C [0-30 °F]). Storage for shorter periods can often be successful at normal 

refrigerator operating temperatures of around 2-3 °C 

(36-37 °F) (table 4.1).

Acorns, however, are a special case. Even with the 

best of care, acorns of white oaks generally cannot be 

stored longer than a few months, and the percentage of 

viable red oak acorns drops substantially after 3 years. 

Following guidelines provided by the U.S. Forest 

Service’s Southern Hardwoods Laboratory (Johnson, 

1979; Bonner and Vozzo, 1985), the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries has been able to store 

overcup oak acorns for up to 2 years and Nuttall oak 

acorns for up to 6 years (Larry Savage, Louisiana State 

Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, personal communication).

To store acorns successfully, high moisture content 

must be maintained: about 35% for red oaks and 50% 

for white oaks (wet weight; see table 4.1). High moisture 

content is best accomplished by placing the acorns in 

storage immediately after completing the float test (fig. 

6.3). Occasional testing of moisture content is recommended during storage. If the moisture content drops 

below 30% for red oaks or 40% for white oaks, the 

acorns should be immersed in water for at least half a 

day. Actual measurements are not always required; when 

acorns are stored in clear plastic, condensed moisture on 

inside bag walls indicates that acorns are still moist.

It is important to keep acorns cool but at temperatures 

above freezing (1-3 °C [34-37 °F]). Bags or other containers used to store acorns should not be completely airtight but should be loosely fastened. Containers should 

be separated within the cold storage unit to allow for air 

circulation. If bags are used, they should be placed on 

wire racks rather than on solid shelves (fig. 6.3). Turning 

the bags frequently is also recommended. Polyethylene 

bags 0.1-0.15 mm (4-6 mils) thick holding up to about 

11 kg of acorns work very well because they hold in 

moisture but allow exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide, which is necessary because cellular respiration still 

occurs. Drums or boxes with polyethylene liners are also 

satisfactory. There is some evidence that because white 

oak acorns tend to respire more rapidly than red oak 

acorns, they may store better in cloth bags or polyethylene bags (or liners) as thin as 0.04 mm (1.5 mils) thick. 

If facilities for refrigeration are not available, acorns can 

be stored successfully over a winter by burying them 30-

60 cm (12-24 inches) underground.

Nuttall oak acorns have also been stored successfully 

over one winter in refrigerated tap water and wet sand. 

Storage in water apparently also reduces the number of 

acorns that germinate in storage.

A 4-8 week period of cold stratification is recommended for most southern oaks. A somewhat longer 

period (8-12 weeks) is recommended for Shumard oak 

and water oak. In general, the needs for stratification are 

met by proper cold storage.

Selected References

Aldhous, J.R., and Mason, W.L., 1994, Forest nursery 

practice: London, United Kingdom, Forestry Commission Bulletin, No. 111, 268 p.

Bonner, F.T., 1986, Good seed quality—how to obtain 

and keep it, in Proceedings of the Northeastern Area 

Nurseryman’s Conference, July 14-17, State College, 

Penn., p. 31-36.

Bonner, F.T., 1992, Hardwood seed, in Branan, J., and 

Morrhead, D., eds., Proceedings of the Southern Forest Nursery Association Conference, July 20-23, Pine 

Mountain, Ga.: Georgia Forestry Commission and 

Southern Forest Nursery Association, p. 67-90.

Figure 6.3. Sacks of acorns in a large cold storage unit.
44 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Bonner, F.T., 1993, Collection and care of acorns, in

Loftis, D.L., and McGee, C.E., eds., Oak regeneration: serious problems, practical recommendations, 

Oak Regeneration Symposium, September 8-10, 

1992, Knoxville, Tenn.: Asheville, N.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern 

Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report 

SE-84, p. 290-297.

Bonner, F.T., and Vozzo, J.A., 1985, Seed biology and 

technology of Quercus: New Orleans, La., U.S. Forest 

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, General 

Technical Report SO-66, 21 p.

Bribbo, L.S., and Jones, W.E., 1995, Test of the float 

method of assessing northern red oak acorn condition: 

Tree Planters’ Notes, v. 46, no. 3, p. 143-147.

Johnson, R.L., 1979, A new method of storing Nuttall 

oak acorns over winter: Tree Planters’ Notes, v. 30, 

no. 2, p. 6-8.

Liegel, L.H., and Venator, C.R., 1987, A technical guide 

for forest nursery management in the Caribbean 

and Latin America: New Orleans, La., U.S. Forest 

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station General 

Technical Report SO-67, 156 p. [Though not intended 

for the area covered in this report, this guide contains 

much useful information on seed handling and seedling production.]

Nisley, R.G., 1995, The container tree nursery manual, 

Volumes 1-5: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Agriculture Handbook 674.

Rink, G., and Williams, R.D., 1984, Storage technique 

affects white oak acorn viability: Tree Planters’ 

Notes, v. 35, no. 1, p. 3-5.

Suszka, B., Muller, C., and Bonnet-Masimbert, M., 

1996, Seeds of forest broadleaves: from harvest to 

sowing: Paris, France, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique.

William, R.D., and Hanks, S.H., 1994, Hardwood 

nursery guide: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Agriculture Handbook No. 473, 78 p.

Young, J.A., and Young, C.G., 1992, Seeds of woody 

plants in North America: Portland, Ore., Dioscorides 

Press, 407 p.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 45

Chapter 7: Direct Seeding

Direct seeding is an important bottomland hardwood 

forest restoration technique, particularly for establishing oaks on old-field sites and sites surface-mined for 

coal. In situations where it can be applied successfully, 

direct seeding is very appealing because it is relatively 

inexpensive compared with planting tree seedlings (table 

7.1). Direct seeding may cost as little as half of what 

planting seedlings costs on a per area basis, although 

the cost depends on factors such as the price of seed and 

labor, the availability of suitable equipment, and the success of the first direct seeding effort.

Direct seeding is also appealing because of its flexibility. The planting window for direct seeding is much 

longer than for planting seedlings (see the seasonal timing section, this chapter, and Chapter 8); therefore there 

is greater freedom in scheduling site preparation and 

planting operations.

Another advantage of direct seeding is that it allows the tree’s roots to develop naturally. In contrast, 

seedlings taken from a nursery or the wild usually have 

had their roots pruned, balled up, or twisted. Also, it is 

very difficult to plant a seedling so that its roots are as 

spread out as they would be naturally, even if seedlings 

arrived from the nursery in perfect condition. To do so 

requires digging a wider planting hole and taking much 

more care placing soil around the roots than is typically 

done. This extra attention to planting slows the planting operation and ultimately costs more money. Roots 

that develop unnaturally may cause the tree to be more 

susceptible to drought stress and windthrow.

On the other hand, many direct seeding projects have 

failed, sometimes because newly germinated seedlings 

lack sufficient energy reserves to survive stresses caused 

by events such as dry periods. It is likely, however, that 

most failures have been caused by lack of attention to 

one of eight controllable factors described by Toumey 

and Korstian (1942): (1) seed quality; (2) species selection; (3) competing vegetation present on planting site; 

(4) soil condition; (5) presence of seed predators; (6) 

seeding rate; (7) timing of seeding; and (8) depth of sowing. The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries 

suggests that proper handling of seeds from cold storage 

to actual planting be explicitly considered in item (1) 

above because seed quality can diminish very rapidly if 

the seed is not protected from heat and sun before planting.

Recent successes, such as those obtained by Louisiana 

Department of Wildlife and Fisheries personnel in northern Louisiana (fig. 7.1), demonstrate that direct seeding 

can be effective. In addition, recent evidence suggests 

that some sites planted by direct seeding of acorns that 

were considered failures were later determined to meet 

density requirements. The lack of apparent early success 

may have been a result of delayed germination, rodents 

clipping the stem (but not killing the roots), or the difficulty of locating small seedlings in dense herbaceous 

vegetation. Most practitioners recommend that sites 

planted by direct seeding should not be abandoned until 

they have been evaluated at least 5 years after planting.

A major limitation of direct seeding as currently 

practiced is that its use is restricted mostly to oaks and 

other large-seeded species. The few efforts that have 

been made with light-seeded species (such as ashes, 

sweetgum, and elms) have almost all failed, although 

some successes with green ash have been reported in 

West Virginia and eastern Kentucky. The failures were 

primarily due to depredation by birds and rodents or to 

drought stress shortly after germination. Because smallseeded species have low energy and moisture reserves 

they are particularly susceptible to drought. It is probable that these light-seeded species, which must be sown 

on or near the soil surface, will require some sort of 

protection in order to become established. Use of rodent 

and bird repellents may eventually prove successful, 

but none have been demonstrated to work on bottomland hardwood species at this time. Mulches, slurries, 

and other techniques may also work, but no evidence 

exists that these have been tried in bottomland projects. 

Limited trials in Florida suggest that direct seeding of 

light-seeded species requires exposed, moist mineral soil 

and regularly distributed rainfall for several months after 

seeding.

Seasonal Timing

Most direct seeding is done in late fall, spring, or early summer. Research with red oak acorns indicates that 

direct seeding may also be successful at all other times 

of the year; however, Wood (1998) showed that cumulative germination of Nuttall and willow oaks was greatest with December planting (~70%), less with March 

planting (~50%), and least with June planting (~15%). 

The period of June through October is not recommended 

in most of the Deep South.

Species such as the white oaks, which are difficult 

to store successfully, are most likely to do well when 

planted immediately after seed collection (i.e., in late 

fall). Other types of seed can be stored and planted when 

labor and equipment are not engaged in other activities or when planting conditions on the site are most 

favorable for the type of equipment being used. At least 

some red oaks (Nuttall and willow) perform best when 

planted in December, regardless of flood conditions 

(Wood, 1998).
46 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Table 7.1. Pros and cons of direct seeding and planting seedlings (from Haynes and others, 1995).

Pros Cons

Direct Seeding

Typically about half to one-third as expensive as 

planting seedlings. 

Roots develop naturally without problems caused by 

disturbing roots and removing seedlings from nursery. 

Acorns may remain in a dormant state for a period of 

time under adverse site conditions (drought or too wet), 

thereby increasing survival potential.

Can plant twice as fast, normally using a two-row 

planter versus a one-row with a seedling planter 

(however, there are some two-row seedling planters 

now being used).

Proven method of reforestation when site is properly 

prepared using viable seed that has been 

properly stored. 

Window for planting is longer than for seedlings 

(acorns can usually be planted successfully from 

October through April or May). 

Proven reliable only for oaks and some other large 

seeded species.

Slower initial establishment and development, 

although long-term growth and survival may not be 

significantly different from seedlings.

Local acorn supply for one or more species may be

scarce or difficult to obtain from commercial sources.

Rodents can sometimes be a problem by digging up

and eating the acorns; however, planting in large 

open fields typically results in little damage.

Cold storage of acorns is generally limited to red oaks

(see table 4) and sweet pecan. White oaks do not

usually store well for periods greater than 3 months.

Acorn-adapted planters (i.e., J.D. Max-Emerge 7100,

converted) have more working parts, thus more

potential for breakdowns than seedling planters.

More difficult to monitor success, since it takes several 

years for germinated seedlings to become large 

enough to find easily.

Planting Seedlings

Planting tree seedlings is a reliable and well 

established method of reforestation. 

Usually a good selection of reliable commercial 

suppliers of seedlings; seedlings available for 

many species. 

Initial seedling development is faster than for planting 

acorns, although long-term growth and survival may 

not be significantly different. 

Taller seedlings may be able to survive flooding events 

during the growing season if water does not top the 

seedling for extended periods. 

For monitoring compliance and determination of

planting success, planted seedlings are easier to

locate than newly germinated seedlings from acorns

or other seed.

About two or three times as expensive as direct 

seedling of acorns.

Seedlings subjected to adverse site conditions 

(drought or severe flooding) will perish quickly.

Seedlings must be planted during the dormant period

(January through March) when many bottomland

forest sites may be flooded. Planting in extreme wet 

conditions must be done by hand.

Seedlings that have been fertilized in the nursery are a

preferred food for rodents and deer.

Depth of Sowing and Spacing

Acorns and other large seeds can be sown successfully at depths between 5-15 cm (2-6 inches). Sowing 5-

10 cm (2-4 inches) deep usually results in better germination and survival than sowing between 10-15 cm (4-6 

inches), and is easier (and faster) than sowing deeper. 

Wood (1998) observed significantly greater germination 

for seeds sowed at 7-10 cm (3-4 inches) than sowed at 

3-5 cm (1-2 inches) in the absence of herbivory. Sowing deeper than 10 cm (4 inches) may pay off, however, 

in situations where there are a lot of rodents or the soil 

surface is subject to freezing or drying out completely.

Experience has shown that as many as 25% of acorns 

sown in relatively weed-free old fields, and about 10% 

of acorns sown in cleared forests, will produce trees 

still growing well after 10 years. Initial germination 

and establishment success may be as high as 80%, but 

usually it is closer to 35 or 40%. Based on these initial 

germination and longer term survival estimates, sowing 

of acorns should range from 1,700-3,700 acorns per ha 

(700-1,500 per acre). On old fields with good site preparation, 1,700-2,500 acorns per ha (700-1,000 per acre) 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 47

Figure 7.1. Restoration site where oaks have been successfully 

established by direct seeding (Ouachita Wildlife Management 

Area, Louisiana).

should be adequate. Sowing rates of 3,000-3,700 acorns 

per ha (1,200-1,500 per acre) are recommended for sites 

where seedling survival is questionable, including mine 

spoils and areas with a dense vegetative cover. Savage et 

al. (1996) reported that seeding rates of 5,900 acorns per 

ha (2,400 per acre) were necessary in a field with a particularly high population of rice and cotton rats. Because 

acorns are a relatively inexpensive part of the overall 

direct seedling operation, higher seeding rates should be 

seriously considered where appropriate.

Direct seeding is generally done in rows, which are 

most often spaced between 2.5-4.5 m (8-15 ft) apart. 

Spacing within rows will depend on the distance between rows and the number of seeds sown per acre; a 

range of possible spacings is depicted in table 7.2. If the 

aesthetics of the reforested site are an important consideration, the restorationist can avoid the appearance of 

a plantation, with its neat rows of trees, by planting in 

Table 7.2. Number of seed or seedlings required per hectare (acre) 

at various spacings.1

Spacing Number

Meters Feet per ha (acre) 

0.75 × 3.65 2.5 × 12 3,586 (1,452) 

0.9 × 1.80 3 × 6 5,977 (2,420) 

0.9 × 2.75 3 × 9 3,984 (1,613) 

0.9 × 3.65 3 × 12 2,989 (1,210) 

0.9 × 4.57 3 × 15 2,391 (968) 

1.8 × 1.80 6 × 6 2,989 (1,210) 

1.8 × 2.75 6 × 9 1,993 (807) 

1.8 × 3.65 6 × 12 1,494 (605) 

1.8 × 4.57 6 × 15 1,195 (484) 

2.44 × 3.05 8 × 10 1,346 (545)

2.75 × 2.75 9 × 9 1,331 (539)

2.75 × 3.65 9 × 12 995 (403)

2.75 × 4.57 9 × 15 798 (323)

3.05 × 3.05 10 × 10 1,077 (436)|

3.05 × 3.65 10 × 12 897 (363)

3.65 × 3.65 12 × 12 746 (302)

3.65 × 4.57 12 × 15 598 (242)

3.65 × 6.10 12 × 20 450 (182)

4.57 × 4.57 15 × 15 479 (194)

4.57 × 6.10 15 × 20 358 (145)

6.10 × 6.10 20 × 20 269 (109) 1

 Assuming a 25% survival rate for direct seeding of acorns, reduce number per area by 75% to 

estimate the number of surviving trees per area (ha or acre) (Haynes and others, 1995).

wavy lines or even at random. The main thing to keep 

in mind is to allow adequate growing space around each 

seed.

Hand Sowing

Direct seeding by hand can be accomplished using 

very simple and inexpensive equipment. The simplest 

approach is to use a metal bar, broomstick, or even a 

stick found in the woods, to make a planting hole. The 

seed is then dropped in the hole, after which the planter 

closes the hole with his or her foot. A hand tool, such as 

the one developed by the U.S. Forest Service (fig. 7.2), 

can make the job easier because the seed is dropped 

down the tube to a preset depth in the ground, thereby 

avoiding the need to bend over to put the seed in the 

hole. The hole is then closed by foot.

On a relatively clean site with favorable soil moisture 

conditions, a single planter with the Forest Service’s 

hand planter can sow 2.8-3.2 ha (7-8 acres) per day at a 

rate of 3,000-3,700 seeds per ha (1,200-1,500 per acre). 

A planter using just a stick or bar probably will plant no 

more than 2.0-2.5 ha (5-6 acres) per day. These rates can 

decline considerably depending upon the experience and 

physical condition of the planter, the depth of sowing, 

the distance the planter has to hand carry seed before being able to start planting, and the actual site conditions.
48 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Figure 7.2. This hand tool, developed by the U.S. Forest Service, 

can make hand sowing of acorns much easier.

Machine Sowing

On clean sites with slopes of 10% or less, sowing 

seeds with a mechanical planter may work very well. 

Almost all of the planters that have been used on bottomland hardwood sites in the past are modified agricultural planters.

Two main types of modifications to agricultural planters have been made to date. One modification involves 

placing seats behind the drop tubes and requires personnel to ride on the planter and drop seeds in by hand (fig. 

7.3a). The second modification involves adapting a notill planter so that it can handle both the deeper planting 

depths and larger seeds that are necessary when direct 

seeding acorns, while still dropping the seeds automatically (fig. 7.3b). Specifically, use of agricultural (no-till) 

planters requires modification of the hopper bottoms 

and drop tubes to handle acorns (especially the larger 

species, such as Nuttall oak) and installation of heavyduty coulters, down pressure springs, closing wheels, 

and other equipment that allows the planter to dig deep 

enough into the soil, cut through a heavy weed cover, 

and drop in large seeds.

Although not essential, an electronic seed monitor 

is desirable when using modified no-till planters. Seed 

monitors let the tractor operator know if the hoppers become jammed and seeds are not being planted properly, 

which is a frequently encountered problem. Jammed 

hoppers are common because tree seeds tend to be more 

irregular in size, and more foreign matter is likely to be 

present than in agricultural seed lots.

Electronic seed monitors are expensive, yet they can 

be very cost effective. They eliminate the need for constant checking of the hoppers (and replanting rows that 

were “planted” with a jammed hopper). They can also 

reduce the size of the planting crew needed, since one 

person can both drive the tractor and continually ensure 

that seed is actually being planted.

Use of modified agricultural seed planters can greatly 

increase the rate of planting. Three people can sow at 

least 16-24 ha (40-60 acres) per day with the first type of 

modified planter, and one person can sow up to 8 ha (20 

acres) per hour with the second type of planter equipped 

with a seed monitor.

At least two recently developed planters designed 

specifically for acorns or other large, irregular seeds appear to have real potential: the Truax large seed planter 

(fig. 7.4), and a planter designed by the U.S. Forest 

Service’s Missoula Technology and Development Center 

for sowing multiple rows of acorns in nursery seedbeds 

(fig. 7.5a,b). The basic design of the U.S. Forest Service 

planter (fig. 7.5a,b) could probably be adapted for use on 

restoration sites.

To date, very little direct seeding has been done using 

broadcast seeders, but this would appear to be quite possible and may become a viable method when there is a 

desire to avoid the look of a tree farm (i.e., with the trees 

in neat rows). One trial on the Ouachita Wildlife Management Area in Louisiana showed that the technique is 

feasible, but another trial showed that the method is less 

efficient than direct seeding by hand or machine, mostly 

because of rodent damage (Tom Dean, Louisiana State 

University, School of Forestry, Wildlife, and Fisheries, 

unpub. data). A few attempts at broadcast seeding have 

been made in Florida, but most have resulted in failure. 

The few successes were on freshly disked sites. More 

research and development work is needed before any 

specific guidelines on this approach can be published.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 49

a.

b.

Figure 7.3. Two types of modified agricultural planters used for direct seeding: (a) planter requiring 

personnel to drop seeds in manually and (b) planter that drops seeds in automatically.
50 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Figure 7.4. The Truax large seed planter.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 51

Figure 7.5. Machine developed by U.S. Forest Service for sowing acorns in nursery seedbeds: (a) machine sowing acorns and (b) 

schematic drawing of hopper mechanism.
52 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Aerial Seeding

Aerial seeding has been widely used in the southern 

United States to sow pine seed, but it has rarely been 

used for direct seeding of hardwood species. The primary advantages of aerial seeding are that seeding rates 

are increased dramatically over manual and mechanical 

seeding; it can be more cost effective on large projects; 

it can be employed on sites too wet or unstable for 

mechanical seeders; and, because it is much faster than 

machine planting, more area can be planted during the 

sometimes brief window of suitable site conditions that 

exist on heavy clay soils. Also, in much of the area covered by this guide, aircraft normally used for crop dusting can be hired for direct seeding. Crop dusters often 

are not busy at the time of year direct seeding is carried 

out and may welcome the additional business.

Several small trials carried out between 1989 and 

1992 in southern Arkansas, and more recently in the 

Mississippi delta by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Division of Refuges (Larry Threet, Felsenthal National 

Wildlife Refuge, oral commun.), have shown that aerial 

seeding has potential on bottomland sites. In these trials, 

fields were disked in the fall prior to seeding so that 

large clods were produced. Then, a crop duster was loaded with acorns (fig. 7.6), and the seeds were broadcast 

over the field either in the fall or the following spring.

Several methods of burying the seeds after aerial 

seeding have been tried by the various refuge staffs. The 

simplest method was aerial seeding immediately before 

predicted rains with the hope that acorns would be buried as soil clods were broken up by raindrops. In other 

cases, the soil surface was rebroken in the spring just 

before seeding using a cutting disk or a field cultivator. 

All fields in the latter trial were also disked or cultivated 

after seeding, and some of the area was compacted using 

a roller drum.

These trials, although promising, showed that several 

aspects of the process need to be resolved before aerial 

seeding of bottomland hardwoods is considered a truly 

Figure 7.6. Crop duster used for sowing acorns.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 53

effective technique. One problem with aerial seeding is 

that the standard hopper and gate system on cropdusters cannot handle more than one size class of acorns at 

a time. Unless a more flexible system is developed that 

allows several sizes of acorns to be sown simultaneously, 

multiple passes over a field will be required.

Applied research on calibration of hoppers, gates, 

and air speeds is needed to ensure desired sowing rates 

are achieved. Also, definitive guidelines need to be 

developed on the best ways to ensure that seed is buried 

deeply enough. For example, the field cultivator worked 

better than disking when the soil moisture was high. 

In short, testing of aerial seeding methods needs to be 

expanded and replicated over a variety of site and soil 

types.

Selected References

Haynes, R.J., Bridges, R.J., Gard, S.W., Wilkins, T.W., 

and Cook, H.R., Jr., 1995, Bottomland hardwood 

reestablishment efforts of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service: Southeast Region, in Fischenich, J.C., Lloyd, 

C.M., and Palermo, M.R., eds., Proceedings of the 

National Wetlands Engineering Workshop: Vicksburg, 

Miss., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways 

Experiment Station, Technical Report WRP-RE-8, p. 

322-334.

Johnson, R.L., and Krinard, R.M., 1985a, Oak seeding 

on an adverse site: New Orleans, La., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest 

Experiment Station, Research Note SO-319, 4 p.

Johnson, R.L., and Krinard, R.M., 1985b, Regeneration 

of oaks by direct seeding, in Proceedings of the Third 

Symposium of Southeastern Hardwoods: Atlanta, 

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

Southern Region, p. 56-65.

Johnson, R.L., and Krinard, R.M., 1987, Direct seeding 

of southern oaks: a progress report, in Proceedings 

of the Fifteenth Annual Hardwood Symposium of 

the Hardwood Research Council, May 10-12, 1987, 

Memphis, Tenn.: Memphis, Tenn., Hardwood Research Council, p. 10-12.

Philo, G.R., 1982, Planting stock options for forestation of surface-mined lands, in Kolar, C.A., and 

Ashby, W.C., comps., Post-Mining Productivity with 

Trees, Proceedings of a Seminar in the Department 

of Botany, March 31-April 1-2, 1982, Carbondale, 

Ill.: Carbondale, Ill., Southern Illinois University, p. 

65-74.

Richards, T.W., Wittwer, R.F., and Graves, D.H., 1982, 

Direct-seeding oaks for surface-mine reclamation, in

Kolar, C.A., and Ashby, W.C., comps., Post-Mining 

Productivity with Trees, Proceedings of a Seminar in 

the Department of Botany, March 31-April 1-2, 1982, 

Carbondale, Ill: Carbondale, Ill., Southern Illinois 

University, p. 57-62.

Savage, L., Anthony, J., and Buchholz, R., 1996, Rodent 

Damage to Direct Seeded Willow Oak in Louisiana, 

in Eversole, A.G., ed., Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of 

Fish and Wildlife Agencies, October 5-9, 1996, Hot 

Springs, Ark.: Southeastern Association of Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies, p. 340-349.

Smith, D.M., 1986, The practice of silviculture (8th ed.): 

New York, John Wiley and Sons, 527 p.

Toumey, J.W., and Korstian, C.F., 1942, Seeding and 

planting in the practice of forestry: New York, John 

Wiley and Sons.

Wood, F.A., 1998, First-year performance of direct-seeded Nuttall and willow oak in response to flooding in a 

farmed wetland of the Mississippi delta: Mississippi 

State University, M.S. thesis, 124 p.
54 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Chapter 8: Planting Seedlings

Planting tree seedlings is an old, well-established 

method of reforestation. The primary advantage of using 

seedlings is that, overall, the chances for success appear 

to be higher than with direct seeding. Also, the initial 

development of the trees is usually somewhat faster. The 

main disadvantage is the higher cost, since seedlings 

must first be raised in a nursery (or dug up from under 

existing stands; see Chapter 9).

Although chances for success are high when planting 

seedlings, incorrect or careless handling or planting of 

seedlings can easily result in an expensive failure. In addition to selection of the appropriate species for the site, 

the keys to successful establishment of tree seedlings are 

obtaining good quality seedlings, taking proper preplanting care of the seedlings, and using proper planting 

techniques.

Choice of Seedling Type

There are two major types of seedlings used in planting operations, bare-root and containerized. Bare-root 

seedlings have been separated from the soil in which 

they were growing at the nursery by a process known as 

“lifting,” which usually involves cutting the tap root 15-

30 cm (6-12 inches) below the soil surface and mechanically loosening the soil around the roots. Containerized 

seedlings come in a variety of forms, ranging from very 

small seedlings in small tubes to larger seedlings (or 

saplings) in gallon-sized or larger pots or bags (fig. 8.1). 

The choice of seedling type depends to a large degree 

on the conditions at the restoration site. In some situations bare-root seedlings will be preferred, and in other 

situations containerized stock will be preferred.

Bare-Root Seedlings

Bare-root seedlings can be expected to survive and 

grow well as long as the planting site is not too droughtprone and the soil conditions are not otherwise unfavorable. They are less expensive, lighter, easier to transport, and generally easier to plant than containerized 

seedlings. Bare-root seedlings must be planted during 

the dormant season, December through mid-March. 

Some species, such as baldcypress, can be planted along 

water bodies in flood prone areas later in the season as 

the water recedes.

Bare-root hardwood and cypress seedlings should 

have a top height of at least 46 cm (18 inches). The 

root collar (the part of the root just below ground level) 

should be at least 0.6 cm (1/4 inch) thick. When possible, though, selected seedlings should have a minimum 

top height of 60 cm (24 inches) and a minimum root 

collar diameter of 0.9-1.3 cm (3/8 to 1/2 inch). The 

use of larger seedlings may be especially important for 

projects where no site preparation or weed control will 

be carried out. Although larger seedlings may be more 

expensive, their use will still generally be cost-effective 

because mortality will be lower, meaning that less seedlings need to be planted. The cost of planting is usually 

considerably more than the cost of seedlings; therefore, 

the higher cost of large, good-quality seedlings may be 

more than offset by the reduced expense of planting a 

large number of seedlings. On the other hand, seedlings 

that are much larger than about 90 cm (36 inches) in 

top height are difficult to handle and plant. Seedlings 

in the 60-90 cm (24-36 inches) range are ideal for most 

applications.

In addition to their large size, bare-root seedlings 

should have a good balance between shoot size and root 

volume. The roots should be healthy looking, well-developed (i.e., have several lateral roots greater than about 

1 mm [1/25 inch] in diameter), and pruned to a length of 

about 20 cm (8 inches) (fig. 8.2). Seedlings that have too 

much top growth for the roots to support will often die 

back and resprout from the root collar. It is preferable to 

top prune the seedlings back to a favorable size.

Figure 8.1. Selection of larger sized containers for growing 

seedlings.
55

Figure 8.2. Good quality bare-root oak seedlings.

In some cases, it might be desirable to obtain toppruned, bare-root seedlings. Top-pruned seedlings are 

cheaper to ship and easier to plant, and they may have 

better survival or less dieback on sites prone to drought 

stress. Seedlings can be top-pruned after purchase using 

simple equipment such as a machete. In general, though, 

few differences in long-term performance have been 

found, so the primary advantages of top-pruning may be 

in lower shipping costs and easier planting.

Containerized Seedlings

When planting on harsher sites and/or outside of the 

dormant season, containerized seedlings are preferable 

because their roots are protected by the same soil they 

were grown in at the nursery. This can lessen the initial 

shock of transplanting and ensures that the roots of the 

seedlings remain moist for a longer period after planting.

Containerized seedlings are used most extensively 

in peninsular Florida, where prolonged dry, hot seasons 

occur in late spring and again in late autumn. Small 

containers are also gaining in popularity in the Lower 

Mississippi Alluvial Valley. The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers has planted over 800 ha (2,000 acres) with 

A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 

containerized stock. Most containerized seedlings 

are grown in gallon-sized pots, and the seedlings are 

outplanted upon attaining heights of 45-125 cm (18-48 

inches); however, a wide variety of small containers 

have been recently developed for seedling propagation. 

Containerized seedlings offer the advantage of reducing transplant shock and have a wider planting window. 

Burkett (1996) suggested that the more extensively 

developed root system of containerized stock may offer 

potential advantages when seedlings are planted at sites 

prone to drought. Also, inoculation of the containerized 

seedlings with mycorrhizae slightly but significantly 

enhanced root fibrosity (Burkett, 1996). If grown in too 

small of a container, however, containerized seedlings 

can often be root bound with the roots curled around the 

inside of the pot (fig. 8.3). Root-bound seedlings tend 

not to form vigorous root systems when planted. They 

may grow for several years as vigorous saplings and then 

suddenly die, their roots apparently unable to supply 

adequate water during especially dry periods. Quality is 

Figure 8.3. Root-bound seedling grown in a 1-gallon container.
56 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

hard to summarize for containerized seedlings because 

of the variety of container types. In general, seedlings 

should have good root development but should not be 

root bound. There should be a good balance between 

root mass and size of the shoot.

Recently, restorationists in Florida have been planting sack-grown trees with much better success. The thin 

plastic sacks are 0.3 m (12 inches) long cylinders with 

drain holes at the bottom (fig. 8.4). Roots of sack-grown 

trees grow downward without curling. After the roots 

have reached the sack bottom, the seedling is approximately 60 cm (24 inches) tall and ready for planting. 

Gasoline-powered soil augers drill holes into which the 

root ball fits snugly. The roots are deep enough when 

planted to reach moist soil layers during dry seasons. 

Experimental plot studies by the Florida Institute of 

Phosphate Research are corroborating the generally 

superior results of restorationists who have tried sack 

trees. Costs of growing and planting sack trees are lower 

than for gallon-sized seedlings, but start-up costs are 

much higher. The substitution of fabric containers for 

sacks is still more promising because aeration and root 

development are more uniform than in plastic sacks. No 

large-scale trials with fabric containers, however, have 

been tried.

Another seedling type, used in Florida, is the tubeling 

or “plug.” Plugs have features of both bare-root seedlings and containerized stock. Their densely compacted 

roots enclose only a very small amount of soil (fig. 8.5). 

They are grown in specially designed flats, called “liners,” from which they are removed before delivery at a 

project site. Planting of plugs can be accomplished with 

a bulb planter that extracts a plug of soil, leaving a cylindrical hole (fig. 8.6). They combine the convenience and 

low cost of bare-root seedlings with a somewhat higher 

probability of survival on harsh sites. They are less likely 

to survive during prolonged dry seasons, however, than 

seedlings grown in larger containers. For this reason, 

Figure 8.5. Dahoon tubelings removed from their pots and ready for 

Figure 8.4. Carolina ash seedlings grown in plastic sacks. planting.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 57

Another method of temporary storage is “heeling-in.” 

Using this method, seedlings are spread out in a Vshaped trench (dug in a shaded location), and their roots 

covered with loose soil. The soil is then watered and 

gently packed down to remove any air pockets, and the 

roots are kept moist throughout the storage period.

Only as many seedlings as can be planted in one day 

should be taken to the field. The seedlings should either 

be taken out of the nursery-supplied bundles and planted 

immediately or transferred in small groups to a bucket 

or a planting bag (fig. 8.7). A group of seedlings should 

never be carried by hand while planting. Smith (1986, 

p. 296) wrote, “In any step in handling bare-rooted 

seedlings it is vital that the roots always remain visibly 

moist. They should not be uncovered for more than 2-3 

minutes at any time whether it is just after lifting, in the 

packing shed, or when it is finally planted. Even briefer 

exposure is preferable . . . Tree roots are so easily killed 

Figure 8.6. A bulb planter is a 

commonly used hand tool for 

planting seedlings.

most restorationists opt for more traditional types of containerized stock. No matter what type is used, only good 

quality seedlings should be planted. The importance of 

this cannot be overemphasized. Even if everything else 

is done right on a restoration project, the project will still 

be a failure if poor quality seedlings are used.

Handling Seedlings

As discussed, bare-root seedlings have important 

advantages, but they require especially careful handling. 

Because their roots are exposed, care must be taken to 

prevent them from drying out. The seedlings will typically come from the nursery in bundles of about 50 to 

200 (up to 400), ideally with their roots packed together 

and wrapped in sphagnum moss or some type of waterretaining material and the whole bundle wrapped in 

waterproof paper bags or cardboard boxes.

If the seedlings are not planted immediately, they 

should be stored at a temperature slightly above freezing, preferably in a cold storage unit. Storage in a barn, 

shed, or dense shade will be adequate for a few days to a 

few weeks, as long as the seedlings stay reasonably cool Figure 8.7. A good field method to protect the roots of seedlings is 

and the roots are not allowed to freeze or dry out. to carry them in a planting bag.
58 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

that it is remarkable indeed that many millions of barerooted seedlings survive planting.”

Although containerized seedlings are less susceptible 

to freezing or drying out, they can also be damaged or 

destroyed by careless handling. If containerized seedlings are transported in a closed truck, they can become 

overheated, especially when planting in late spring or 

summer. On the other hand, if seedlings are transported 

in an open vehicle they can become desiccated or damaged by having their stems and leaves blown about in 

the wind. Seedlings should be transported in ways that 

provide good ventilation (especially on hot days so that 

they do not overheat), although too much wind directly 

on the leaves causes desiccation.

Timing of Planting

The best time to plant bare-root seedlings is when 

they are dormant and the soil is moist. Generally, 

planting conditions in the South are most suitable from 

January through March. Planting can usually be done in 

November and December, especially for species which 

have lost their leaves, such as green ash and sycamore, 

but planting earlier than November is not usually recommended. Planting can also be done later than March if 

the seedlings are kept in cold storage and the roots kept 

moist until planting. Planting bare-root seedlings that 

have broken dormancy is not recommended.

The most frequent limitations on planting are excessive cold and flooding. Bare-root seedlings should 

not be planted in subfreezing temperatures. The more 

flood-tolerant species can be planted in shallow water, 

up to about 15 cm. Disked soils should be moist but not 

flooded.

An advantage of containerized seedlings is that they 

can be planted safely once they have broken dormancy. 

It is still advisable to plant in the winter or early in 

the growing season while the temperatures are cool 

and the soil is moist, but as long as conditions are not 

excessively hot and dry, later plantings will usually be 

successful. In Florida, containerized seedlings are also 

successfully planted at the beginning of the summer 

rainy season, which usually starts in June.

Spacing

Spacings of planted seedlings will depend on objectives. Spacings of 3 × 3 m (10 × 10 ft) or closer are often 

used for wood production and may be required to ensure 

the number of surviving seedlings stipulated in some 

permits. In other cases, wider spacings can be used, such 

as 3.6 × 3.6 m (12 × 12 ft), 4.5 × 4.5 m (15 × 15 ft), or 6 

× 6 m (20 × 20 ft). The standard spacing for the Natural 

Resources Conservation Service and the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service is 3.6 × 3.6 m (12 × 12 ft). Because 

fewer seedlings are required per hectare (see table 7.2), 

wider spacings are more economical and may be just 

as effective in meeting the project objectives. Also, using a wider spacing will allow openings for the natural 

invasion of light-seeded tree species. Wide spacing of 

the seedlings is one potential, but not always reliable, 

method for increasing species diversity on the restoration 

site.

As mentioned previously, making the spacing very 

precise is undesirable unless timber production is the 

primary goal or weed control by mowing or disking is 

planned. A tree farm appearance should be avoided if 

wildlife, aesthetics, or a more natural appearing forest 

are the primary goals.

Planting with Hand Tools

Bare-root seedlings can be planted using a dibble bar 

or sharpshooter shovel (fig. 8.8). The proper technique 

for use of these tools is shown in fig. 8.9. Occasionally, other tools are used, such as grub hoes, mattocks, 

and hoedads. Regardless of what type of tool is used, 

roots should be placed in the hole so they can spread out 

naturally; they should not be twisted, balled up, or bent. 

Figure 8.8. Bare-root seedlings can be 

planted using a sharpshooter shovel, dibble 

bar, or bulb planter.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 59

Figure 8.9. Planting technique for use with hand tools.

Moist soil should then be firmly packed around the roots. 

Hand planting of most types of containerized seedlings 

is done with a shovel, although specialized hand tools 

have been developed for some of the smallest types of 

containers.

Planting a tree by hand is a simple task but nevertheless is often done incorrectly. If a crew of inexperienced tree planters is used, it is essential to demonstrate 

clearly to them the proper way to plant. The crew should 

be supervised closely, especially the first time they plant 

and late in the day after they have become tired and 

perhaps careless.

Seedlings should be planted with their root collars 

just below the soil surface (fig. 8.10a). One of the most 

common planting mistakes is planting seedlings either 

too deep (fig. 8.10b) or not deep enough (fig. 8.10c). 

Another common mistake is digging a hole too shallow 

for proper root placement. If this occurs, roots may be 

bent upwards, or “J-rooted” (fig. 8.10d), which results 

in roots not penetrating deeply enough into the soil to 

protect the tree from windthrow or drought. Additional 

mistakes are planting so that settling soil leaves the rootcollar exposed and leaving an air pocket near the roots 

after closing the hole (fig. 8.10e), which allows the roots 

to dry out.

Figure 8.10. It is critical that tree seedlings be (a) planted properly; 

they should not be planted (b) too deep, (c) too shallow, (d) with 

roots bent upwards, or (e) with air pockets.
60 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

When planting containerized seedlings, the container 

should be removed first, although this may not be as critical if the container is biodegradable. If a biodegradable 

container is not removed, it should be trimmed so as not 

to protrude above the ground, since this can cause drying 

of the soil through a process known as “wicking.” When 

seedlings are removed from their containers, any roots 

encircling the outside of the root ball should be loosened 

up and pointed outwards and downwards or removed. 

Otherwise, these roots will not spread out properly and 

could even girdle the stem. The seedlings should be 

planted in a hole deep enough so that the tops of the root 

balls are slightly below ground level. The final step in 

planting a containerized seedling is to fill the hole and 

pack the soil firmly around the root ball to remove any 

air pockets and keep the seedling pointed straight up.

Just like the number of seeds a single person can plant 

in a day will vary widely, the number of seedlings that 

can be planted will also vary, depending on factors such 

as the size and type of seedling, degree of site preparation, spacing, soil type, soil condition, weather, experience and physical condition of the planter, and distance 

the planter has to carry seedlings before being able to 

start planting. On a clean, level site, a planter should 

be able to plant at least 500 to 800 bare-root seedlings 

per day or sometimes up to 1,000 seedlings per day for 

planters with more experience. Because planting quality 

can diminish through the day as the crew becomes tired, 

planting quality should be monitored more closely after 

several hours of work. The number of seedlings planted 

per day will be much less if containerized seedlings are 

being planted, the locations of individual seedlings must 

first be marked, or if planting conditions are suboptimal.

Planting with Machines

When site conditions are favorable, machine planters 

can speed up the planting of bare-root seedlings dramatically on soils other than heavy clays. An experienced 

crew of two or three may plant from 4,000 to 10,000 

seedlings a day with a machine planter. Also, survival will often be better than that achieved by a large, 

relatively inexperienced crew of hand planters. Some 

of the newer planting machines perform well in heavy 

clays, planting 5,000 to 8,000 seedlings per day with an 

experienced crew.

One disadvantage of machine planters is that intensive 

site preparation may be required. Machines cannot readily operate where there are stumps or heavy debris. On 

heavy clays, planters may become clogged or be unable 

to penetrate deeply enough to ensure that the roots are 

completely covered. Also, the furrows dug by the planter 

may reopen in the summer when the clay dries out, 

thereby exposing the roots. On abandoned agricultural 

Figure 8.11. Mechanical seedling planter.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 61

fields, no site preparation may be needed for mechanically planting seedlings. Machine planting is becoming 

a more extensively used reforestation method and, as 

new tools are being developed, may become preferred 

even on heavy clay soils as long as soil conditions (e.g., 

moisture) remain favorable.

Another disadvantage of mechanical planters is their 

high cost, which is prohibitive for most small planting 

projects. It is possible in some areas to rent or borrow 

a planter; a good source of information on the local 

availability of planters is the county, parish, or district 

forester.

An example of one type of mechanical planter is 

shown in fig. 8.11. Other types of planters, including 

some that are considerably less expensive, are available 

through sources such as forestry supply companies.

The planting rate for containerized seedlings may also 

be increased by using machines to dig the planting holes. 

Machines that have been used for this purpose range 

from augers to backhoes, depending on the size of the 

planting stock.

Selected References

Burkett, V., 1996, Effects of flooding regime, mycorrhizal inoculation and seedling treatment type on 

the establishment of Nuttall oak (Quercus nuttallii

Palmer): Nacogdoches, Tex., Stephen F. Austin State 

University, Ph.D. dissertation, 140 p.

Burkett, V., and Williams, H., 1998, Effects of flooding regime, mycorrhizal inoculation and seedling 

treatment type on first-year survival of Nuttall oak 

(Quercus nuttallii Palmer), in Waldrop, T.A., ed., 

Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, February 25-27, 1997, 

Clemson, S.C.: Asheville, N.C., U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-20, p. 289-294.

Conner, W.H., Toliver, J.R., and Askew, G.R., 1993, 

Artificial regeneration of baldcypress in a Louisiana 

crayfish pond: Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, 

v. 17, no. 1, p. 54-57.

DeYoe, D., Holbo, H.R., and Wadell, K., 1986, Seedling protection from heat stress between lifting and 

planting: Western Journal of Applied Forestry, v. 1, p. 

124-126.

Howell, K.D., and Harrington, T.B., 1998, Regeneration efficiency of bareroot oak seedlings subjected to 

various nursery and planting treatments, in Waldrop, 

T.A., ed., Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, February 

25-27, 1997, Clemson, S.C.: Asheville, N.C., U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Southern 

Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-20, 

p. 222-226.

Humphrey, M.N., 1994, The influence of planting date 

on the field performance of 1-0 bareroot, container 

grown, and direct seeded Quercus nuttallii Nuttall 

oak on sharkey soil: Alcorn State University, Miss., 

M.S. thesis, 52 p.

Johnson, R.L., and Krinard, R.M., 1985, Oak regeneration by direct seedling: Alabama’s Treasured 

Forests, v. 4, no. 3, p. 12-15.

Rietveld, W.J., 1989, Transplanting stress in bareroot 

conifer seedlings: its development and progression to 

establishment: Northern Journal of Applied Forestry, 

v. 6, p. 99-107.

Smith, D.M., 1986, The practice of silviculture (8th ed.): 

New York, John Wiley and Sons, 527 p.

South, D.B., 1996, Top-pruning bareroot hardwoods: a 

review of the literature: Tree Planters’ Notes, v. 47, 

no. 1, p. 34-40.

White, D.P., Schneider, G., and Lemmien, W., 1970, 

Hardwood plantation establishment using container 

grown stock: Tree Planters’ Notes, v. 21, no. 2, p. 

20-25.

Williams, H.M., and Craft, M.N., 1998, First-year survival and growth of bareroot, container, and directseeded Nuttall oak planted on flood-prone agricultural 

fields, in Waldrop, T.A., ed., Proceedings of the Ninth 

Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, 

February 25-27, 1997, Clemson, S.C.: Asheville, 

N.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station, General Technical Report 

SRS-20, p. 300-303.
62 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Chapter 9: Other Options for 

Revegetation

Although direct seeding and planting seedlings are the 

two most widely used techniques for reestablishing bottomland hardwood trees, there are several other regeneration methods available. In this chapter, four methods of 

revegetation are covered: use of cuttings, transplanting, 

topsoiling, and natural regeneration.

Cuttings

Several species of bottomland hardwoods can be 

readily propagated with cuttings, or short lengths of 

young shoots. Cuttings can be rooted first in a nursery 

and then planted as seedlings, or they can be directly 

planted on the restoration site. Cuttings of black willow, 

cottonwood (fig. 9.1), green ash, and sycamore have 

been successfully planted as unrooted cuttings. For most 

other species, using rooted cuttings is likely to be more 

successful.

Cuttings should be obtained in the dormant season 

and can either be stored until spring or planted right 

away. Effective temporary storage methods include 

placing the cuttings in cool water or covering them with 

wet burlap or similar material. Long-term storage can be 

achieved by bundling cuttings and refrigerating them in 

moist sand or plastic bags.

Success has been obtained with cuttings ranging 

in size from 10-15 cm (4-6 inches) “slips” to poles of 

2.5-3 m (8-10 ft) in length, depending on the species. In 

general, cuttings 40-50 cm (16-20 inches) long and no 

less than about 0.6 cm (1/4 inch) in diameter at the top 

end should be used. Larger cuttings may be necessary on 

sandy or drought-prone soils.

Cuttings are usually planted vertically with the buds 

pointing upwards and the tops of the cuttings projecting 

Figure 9.1. Bundle of cottonwood cuttings.

5-10 cm (2-4 inches) above the soil surface. Cuttings of 

cottonwood, green ash (fig. 9.2), sycamore, and black 

willow have also been planted horizontally, in slits about 

2.5-5 cm (1-2 inches) deep.

Cuttings should be planted when dormant because 

survival generally decreases substantially if they are 

planted once the buds have begun to open. Ideal planting 

sites are moist but not flooded for long periods. Seedlings usually survive better than cuttings in areas with 

extensive flooding in the growing season.

Transplants

Seedlings or saplings transplanted from natural forests 

(also known as “wildlings”) are sometimes used in restoration projects. Depending on size, the planting material 

can be transplanted by using hand tools or heavy equipment such as tree spades (fig. 9.3) or backhoes. Unless 

the transplanting is done very carefully, mortality will be 

high, and surviving transplants will suffer so much shock 

that they will not begin to grow for a year or more after 

transplanting.

Figure 9.2. One-year-old green ash seedling grown from a 

horizontally planted cutting.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 63

Figure 9.3. Tree spade used for planting large saplings or small 

trees. Photo courtesy of Dr. Schilling, Louisiana State University 

School of Forestry. 

Transplanting is most successful when done in the 

dormant season. The roots of large transplants (those 

with basal diameters larger than about 5 cm) should be 

balled and bagged before transporting to the restoration site. Smaller transplants can be transported without 

being placed in bags, as long as their roots are protected 

from drying out. If possible, transplants should be taken 

from open sites, rather than from under dense forest 

canopies, since the chances of shock caused by exposure 

to full sunlight and high temperatures will be somewhat 

reduced.

Transplanting has been most frequently employed 

on restoration projects in Florida (Clewell, 1981; Posey 

and others, 1984). Clewell (1981) suggests that about 

200 saplings can be transplanted in a week using a tree 

spade.

Some restorationists working in Florida observed that 

transplanting can also introduce desirable understory 

plants (Clewell, 1999). A few species appear to become 

successfully established by transplanting yet not by 

topsoiling, perhaps because the soil surrounding the 

seedling’s or sapling’s roots is kept more intact than it is 

with topsoiling. Of course, undesirable species may also 

be introduced by transplanting, depending on the species 

composition of the donor site. Another advantage of 

transplanting is that the larger size stock provides perches for birds and therefore provides vertical structure and 

enhances natural seed dispersal of some plant species.

Topsoiling

Topsoiling involves the transfer of topsoil from a natural wetland site to a restoration site. With this method, 

topsoil is spread out over a restoration site in the hopes 

that the seeds, stumps, rhizomes, and other plant parts 

contained within it will produce new plants. Topsoiling 

is commonly employed in marsh restoration but has been 

used much less frequently to restore forested wetlands.

A major advantage of topsoiling is that it has the 

potential to introduce many of the native understory tree, 

shrub, and herbaceous species that ordinarily are not 

planted. Also, it may result in successful introduction of 

mycorrhizal fungi or soil biota that enhance soil conditions.

There are several possible disadvantages, however, 

of topsoiling. A potentially serious drawback is that 

topsoiling requires disturbance of an intact wetland. Unless the topsoil can be taken from a wetland about to be 

destroyed, it means that one wetland has to be damaged 

to restore another. A second disadvantage is that species 

composition is difficult to predict and control. In some 

cases, topsoiling may also introduce exotic or otherwise 

undesirable species.

A variety of methods have been employed to remove 

topsoil from the donor site, transport it, and spread it on 

the restoration site. If tree cover exists on the donor site, 

the first step is usually removal of the trees. The topsoil 

can then be removed using equipment such as draglines, 

scrapers, or bulldozers. Only the top 20-30 cm (8-12 

inches) of topsoil should be removed because below that 

depth the number of viable seeds drops off significantly.

Transportation methods for moving topsoil will depend on the distance between the donor and the restoration sites. Dump trucks are generally used for transportation distances in excess of 1.6 km (1 mile). Scrapers (fig. 

9.4) can be cost effective for shorter hauls, although they 

do not work well in very wet situations or with heavy 

clay soils that may require additional heavy equipment 

to push or pull them. For very small distances, simply 

pushing the topsoil to the restoration site with a bulldozer or transporting it with a front end loader may be 

effective. Light, crawler-mounted bulldozers (fig. 9.5) 
64 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Figure 9.4. Scrapers are useful for short-distance transport of topsoil.

are recommended for spreading the topsoil on the restoration site because they minimize soil compaction.

Topsoil should be spread on the restoration site to a 

depth of about 10-20 cm (4-8 inches). Depths shallower 

than about 7 cm (3 inches) may not contain enough 

seeds and other plant material to ensure adequate plant 

establishment. Spreading topsoil to depths much greater 

than 20 cm (8 inches) may actually be counterproductive 

because costs become excessive, and many seeds will be 

buried too deep for germination.

In general, topsoiling will be most successful on 

sites where the topsoil will remain moist. In most of the 

Southeast, spring is the best time of year for topsoiling. On exposed sites where the soil surface is likely to 

dry out, irrigation will be required. In most situations, 

topsoiling should be viewed as a useful secondary means 

of revegetation with one of the other methods used as the 

primary means of reestablishing trees.

The term “mulching” is often used when referring to 

topsoiling, but mulching is technically a broader term 

that describes the process of applying any organic or 

inorganic material to the soil surface. Examples of other 

materials occasionally used as mulches include agricultural residues such as straw, hay, or bagasse and wood 

residues such as bark, sawdust, or wood chips.

Natural Regeneration

Natural regeneration—allowing vegetation to become established from natural sources—is an attractive 

alternative for restoration because the cost of planting 

is avoided. Also, any plants that become established on 

the restoration site should be well adapted to the site. If 

conditions are suitable, natural regeneration can be quite 

rapid, but highly degraded sites or sites far from a seed 

source will take much longer to naturally revegetate.

Many restoration projects rely on natural regeneration for all or part of vegetation establishment. In the 

Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley and on some western 

Kentucky coal-mined sites, for example, only hard mast 

producing tree species are planted on most old-field restoration projects, and natural regeneration is relied upon 

for establishment of light-seeded tree species, understory 

tree species, and herbaceous vegetation.

Sites where use of natural regeneration is most appropriate include small or narrow sites where most of the 

site is no farther than about 70-90 m (75-100 yds) from 

an existing forest and sites that are subject to frequent 

flooding. A general rule of thumb is that natural regeneration will succeed without intervention in areas that are 

within a distance from an existing forest no greater than 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 65

Figure 9.5. Bulldozer spreading topsoil at Hall’s Branch restoration site.

twice the height of the dominant canopy trees. Although 

disking is often used to reduce competition for the newly 

planted seedlings, Allen and others (1998) showed that 

disking of old-field sites reduced the number of invading 

woody seedlings that became established. They proposed 

that the added soil drying and elimination of microrelief 

(old bedding rows) resulted in reduced opportunity for 

seedling establishment.

Seedlings of species not dispersed by wind are often 

missing from naturally regenerated stands, or stands 

show a clumped distribution related to bird roosting 

and/or animal eating habits. Providing perches, planting 

of a few large trees, and even placing snags on a restoration site can encourage the natural regeneration of plant 

species dispersed by birds.

The major disadvantage of natural regeneration is that 

species composition is difficult to control. Light-seeded 

or undesirable species may need to be thinned out to 

allow the higher value heavy-seeded species time and 

space to become established and grow.

Another potentially serious disadvantage is the longer 

time period required for establishment of tree cover. 

A naturally regenerated site is likely to go through a 

successional process where the site is first dominated 

by annual plants, then perennial herbaceous plants, then 

shrubs and light-seeded, shade-intolerant tree species, 

and finally heavy-seeded and shade-tolerant tree species. 

On large old-field sites, the herbaceous plants may dominate a site for 10 years or more. On other types of sites 

(e.g., clay settling basins), willows, boxelder, swamp 

red maple, river birch, or other species that provide less 

wildlife value (compared with hard mast species) may 

dominant for many years (see table 4.1).

Selected References

Allen, J.A., 1997, Reforestation of bottomland hardwoods and the issue of woody species diversity: 

Restoration Ecology, v. 5, p. 125-134.

Allen, J.A., McCoy, J., and Keeland, B.D., 1998, Natural establishment of woody species on abandoned 

agricultural fields in the Lower Mississippi Valley: 

first- and second-year results, in Waldrop, T.A., ed., 

Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, February 25-27, 1997, 

Clemson, S.C.: Asheville, N.C., U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-20, p. 263-268.
66 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Battaglia, L., 1991, Early secondary succession in a bottomland hardwood area: Northeast Louisiana University, Monroe, La., M.S. thesis, 82 p.

Bonck, J., and Penfound, W.T., 1945, Plant succession on abandoned farm land in the vicinity of New 

Orleans, Louisiana: American Midland Naturalist, v. 

33, p. 520-529.

Clewell, A.F., 1981, Vegetational restoration techniques 

on reclaimed phosphate strip mines in Florida: Wetlands, v. 1, p. 158-170.

Clewell, A.F., 1999, Restoration of riverine forest at Hall 

Branch on phosphate-mined land, Florida: Ecological 

Restoration, v. 7, no. 1, p. 1-14.

Dirr, M.A., and Heuser, C.W., Jr., 1987, The reference 

manual of woody plant propogation: from seed to tissue culture: Athens, Ga., Varsity Press, 239 p.

McClanahan, T.R., and Wolfe, R.W., 1993, Accelerating 

forest succession in a fragmented landscape: the role 

of birds and perches: Conservation Biology, v. 7, p. 

279-288.

Posey, D.M., Jr., Goforth, D.C., and Painter, P., 1984, 

Ravenwood shellrock mine: wetland and upland restoration and creation, in Webb, F.J., ed., Proceedings 

of the 11th Annual Conference on Wetland Restoration and Creation, 1984: Tampa, Fla., Hillsborough 

Community College, p. 127-134.

Wolfe, R.W., 1990, Seed dispersal and wetland restoration, in Odum, H.T., Best, G.R., Miller, M.A., 

Rushton, B.T., Wolfe, R.W., Bersok, C., and Friertag, 

J., eds., Accelerating natural processes for wetland 

restoration after phosphate mining: Bartow, Fla., 

Florida Institute of Phosphate Research, p. 51-95.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 67

Chapter 10: Establishing Native 

Undergrowth Vegetation

Most species of plants occurring in forests are not 

trees. For example, a bottomland hardwood forest in 

western Kentucky contained 143 species, of which 80 

(56%) were terrestrial herbs, and only 38 (27%) were 

overstory trees; the remainder were shrubs and woody 

vines. In hardwood forests along the upper reaches of the 

Alafia River near Tampa, Florida, 71% of the 409 plant 

species were terrestrial herbs (292 species), consisting largely of ferns, sedges, grasses, and wildflowers 

(Clewell and others, 1982). Only 36 plant species were 

overstory trees. The remaining 81 species were small 

understory trees, shrubs, woody vines, and epiphytes.

These and similar observations elsewhere demonstrate 

that bottomland hardwood forest restoration is incomplete until a representative contingent of undergrowth 

species is established. This conclusion complicates 

revegetation activities, which, in the past, have focused 

on tree planting. Four basic questions are immediately 

raised: (1) are understory species so important ecologically that we should be concerned about them? (2) will 

undergrowth species colonize a newly restored forest by 

means of natural regeneration? (3) how many undergrowth species should be established to restore a forest 

adequately? and (4) how can undergrowth species be 

intentionally established at restoration project sites? This 

chapter attempts to answer these questions.

Although the importance of understory species is 

widely recognized by virtually all involved with bottomland hardwood restoration, some are of the opinion 

that, over time, the overstory plantings will develop 

conditions conducive to the natural establishment of 

understory species from an existing seedbank or from 

species brought into the area by wind, wildlife, or floodwater. Such natural invasion of understory species has 

not been conclusively demonstrated, but most restoration 

projects are still relatively young. The restorationist must 

determine if the time and resources spent on physically 

establishing understory species are well spent or if they 

may be better spent on other projects.

Ecological Importance of Understory 

Plants

Biodiversity

The aforementioned 292 species of terrestrial herbs 

occurring along Florida’s Alafia River were tallied in 

sample areas totaling only 4.6 ha (11.3 acres). In spite 

of this small sample size, these herbs represented 8% of 

all vascular plant species known from the entire state of 

Florida. This floristic wealth vividly demonstrates the 

importance of forest undergrowth with respect to regional biodiversity. If ample biodiversity is a goal of restoration, then undergrowth cannot be ignored. Undergrowth 

vegetation that would likely overtop newly planted tree 

seedlings may best be planted one to several years later 

to allow the tree seedlings time to attain sufficient height 

to be above the undergrowth.

Ecological Functions

When considered by forest ecologists, the numerous undergrowth species are generally treated collectively by stratum or by life form. The functional roles 

of individual species are poorly known because the 

autecology (relationship between an individual species 

and its environment) of very few have been investigated. 

Perhaps the best known functional roles of undergrowth 

are those pertaining to wildlife habitat in terms of providing cover, forage, and nesting sites. Another obvious 

benefit provided by undergrowth is anchorage of the soil, 

which counters the erosive forces of runoff and overbank 

flooding. Undergrowth vegetation also contributes friction (roughness) to the forest surface, thereby retarding 

the velocity of floodwater. Anchorage and reduction of 

flood velocities both contribute to substrate stability and 

encourage sedimentation on floodplains. Sedimentation, 

in turn, increases the reservoir of nutrients available to 

vegetation.

Another function of the undergrowth that is not well 

documented but may contribute substantially to herbivore control and food chain stability is the harboring 

of predacious arthropods, mainly insects and spiders. A 

given species of arthropod spends much of its lifetime 

inhabiting a particular species of plant. The greater the 

number of plant species available in an area, the greater 

the diversity of predacious arthropods. This feature is 

realized by specialists in the biological control of crop 

pests. They have found that pest control is enhanced by 

having a diverse array of native plant species growing in 

close association with crops. It seems likely that these 

same predacious insects and spiders are also controlling 

herbivorous insects that attack native forest trees. Another array of insects associated with floristically diverse 

undergrowth may serve to pollinate flowers, including 

those of trees.

Undergrowth vegetation adds complexity to biogeochemical cycling of nutrients because root systems 

vary from species to species. The greater the diversity 

in the kinds of root systems, the greater the efficiency 

of conserving and cycling nutrients released by detrital 

decomposition. Undergrowth vegetation contributes to 

detrital biomass upon which soil microflora and detritivores depend. Undergrowth vegetation may also provide 
68 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

benefits to a forest in terms of mycorrhizal associations 

(a symbiotic relationship between certain fungi and the 

roots of some plants). In addition, understory vegetation 

can incorporate a tremendous amount of organic matter 

into the soil.

In summary, undergrowth plays various roles in forest 

processes and ecological functions. The importance of 

these roles may be much greater than has thus far been 

appreciated.

Natural Regeneration of Undergrowth

A considerable area of bottomland forests has been 

cleared for agriculture and later left to lay fallow. These 

lands generally become reforested through the well 

known process of old-field succession. This natural 

regeneration includes a substantial development of 

herbaceous and shrubby vegetation beneath the new 

forest canopy. Initial undergrowth may consist largely 

of relatively undesirable species that persist for some 

time following canopy closure. The undergrowth may be 

dominated by one or a few species such as goldenrod or 

wild onions or exotics such as Johnson grass or Japanese 

honeysuckle.

In contrast, forests occupying undisturbed soils have 

more undergrowth species, with no one species being disparately abundant. These species tend to be less 

weedy and more characteristic of deep forest conditions. 

The weedier species predominate only in disturbed 

areas, such as in canopy gaps formed by the loss of 

an overstory tree. Plant species (including overstory 

trees) that are typical of mature, undisturbed forests are 

particularly welcome at a restoration project site because 

they may hasten forest development. For this reason, 

they may be termed “preferred species.”

Even old-growth forests contain contingents of weedier undergrowth species in their canopy gaps that presumably contribute to ecological functioning and should not 

be discounted. In fact, four categories of undergrowth 

species can be distinguished, although some species 

may defy easy classification. Each category description 

is followed by examples of species for the category, as 

they occurred in mature forests along the Alafia River 

(Clewell and others, 1982). These species do not necessarily belong in the same categories in other regions or 

other forest types. See appendix B for scientific names 

of all species.

Category 1. Species largely or entirely restricted 

in their regional distribution to mature, undisturbed 

stands (e.g., restricted to a floodplain swamp and 

also to adjacent mesic forests in the same valley). 

These are all preferred species: aquatic milkweed, small-spike falsenettle, shiny spikegrass, 

millet beakrush, water pimpernil, and species of 

swamplily, bugleweed, lizard’s tail, and ferns (Osmunda, Thelypteris, and Woodwardia).

Category 2. Species that are frequent or at least 

locally abundant in mature stands and are also 

abundant in other regional ecosystems (e.g., in 

a floodplain swamp as well as in open marshes). 

These are all preferred species: small-fruit beggartick, Mexican water-hemlock, hairlike mock 

bishop-weed, and species of pickerel weed, smartweed, and burreed.

Category 3. Species occurring much more 

frequently or abundantly in other regional ecosystems or species that are much more abundant in 

disturbed or early serial stages than in more mature 

stands. These are not preferred species: bushy 

bluestem, southern carpetgrass, sheathed flatsedge, 

small dogfennel, Peruvian seedbox, Florida pokeweed, licorice weed, and cattail.

Category 4. Species occurring adventively or

exotic species, including naturalized exotics. These 

are not preferred species: annual ragweed, American wormseed, crabgrass, Japanese climbing fern, 

and coffeeweed.

A satisfactory restoration should have a diversity 

of undergrowth species, including most species from 

Category 1. In order to determine in which category each 

species belongs, an experienced botanist will have to use 

baseline information to group the undergrowth species 

into the four categories.

Number of Species Necessary for 

Restoration

A mature, fully restored forest should contain most 

of the “preferred species,” as determined from baseline 

studies, particularly those from Category 1. In the Alafia 

River study (Clewell and others, 1982), at least 60 (20%) 

of the 292 terrestrial herbaceous species qualified as 

preferred species (i.e., Categories 1 and 2).

Preferred species need not be planted concurrently 

with trees. Several years will pass before the planted 

trees can provide the shade that many forest undergrowth plants require for their survival. At that time, 

an inspection can be made to determine what preferred 

species have already colonized the project site through 

natural regeneration. Category 1 species that are absent 

may then be planted. Preferred species of vines, however, should not be intentionally established. As a class, 

vines tend to proliferate and become nuisance species at 

new restoration sites, sometimes threatening the establishment of key tree species.

The remaining question is, how many plants of each 

preferred species should be established? The answer is 

only a few of each species. The guiding assumption is 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 69

that as forested conditions develop, preferred plants will 

proliferate at the expense of the weedier species, which 

initially colonized the site and are succumbing to competition from the planted trees. Such proliferation indeed 

happened at two maturing restoration sites on mined and 

reclaimed land in central Florida: Hall Branch Restoration (Clewell, 1999) and Dogleg Branch Restoration 

(Clewell et al., 2000). Clusters of a few plants of each 

preferred species should be planted at wide intervals to 

ensure establishment on different parts of the project 

site. Clustering is needed to ensure cross-fertilization 

in self-incompatible species. Particularly large project 

sites can be partitioned into smaller units of perhaps 4 

ha (10 acres), in which each preferred species will be 

established.

Establishing Undergrowth Plantings

Transplanting

There is currently little demand for preferred species 

of forest undergrowth, and native plant nurseries rarely 

stock them. Over time, this situation should improve, but 

presently it is usually necessary to collect seeds, rootstocks, or whole plants from natural populations. Ideally, 

collections of rootstocks and whole plants should be 

made as rescue or salvage operations at sites that are 

scheduled for development. These collections can be 

transferred directly to the project site, or, if a nursery is 

available, salvaged stock can be propagated for later distribution. Some Natural Resources Conservation Service 

facilities are making space available to propagate such 

native plant materials.

Plant material may have to be removed from donor 

forests that are not scheduled for development. Plants 

selected for removal should be spaced far enough apart 

to prevent localized extirpation. Holes where plants are 

removed should be filled. A posthole digger frequently 

proves useful in removing herbaceous plants. This work 

is labor-intensive and expensive in the absence of volunteer effort. Transplants should be planted in semishade in 

moist soil. Care should be taken not to leave air pockets 

around the root balls. For many species, transplanting 

from the shade of a closed canopy forest to an open field 

is fatal, therefore, the restoration site must have developed sufficiently enough to provide at least semishaded 

conditions for these species.

Topsoiling

Topsoiling (mulching with topsoil) is another method 

of preferred species establishment. The method has 

been attempted at reclaimed phosphate mines in central 

Florida. A layer of topsoil only 10 cm (4 inches) thick 

can provide a bountiful regrowth of vegetation (see topsoiling section, Chapter 9). Topsoiling has proven most 

successful when the soil is transferred from the donor 

site directly to the restoration site without stockpiling 

and when the restoration site is permanently moist or 

wet (see restoring soil characteristics section, Chapter 5).

Plant propagules (seeds, rootstocks, spores) can 

quickly lose their viability when stockpiled, owing to 

poor aeration and to the generation of lethally high internal temperatures. Topsoil that is subjected to seasonal 

drying after being spread at an open restoration site is 

unable to sustain most undergrowth plants as they arise 

from its propagule bank. These plants are adapted to 

uniformly moist soils. If the amount of topsoil is scarce, 

it can be transferred from a donor site with a tree spade 

and planted as if it were a tree. The soil is transferred 

intact, and undergrowth plants within the soil are less 

traumatized than they would be if they were spread in a 

layer. Topsoiling by any method introduces both organic 

matter and soil microbiota, both of which may hasten 

soil development, especially on surface-mined sites.

Topsoiling as a technique is largely limited to salvage 

operations at wetlands that are being cleared for development. Because such sites are rarely permitted for development, the opportunity of using topsoil is becoming 

rare. Whenever a wetland is permitted for clearing, its 

topsoil should be salvaged for restoration projects in the 

vicinity. Unfortunately, hauling costs are prohibitive for 

transport of topsoil to all but local projects.

Selected References

Altieri, M.A., and Whitcomb, W.H., 1980, Weed 

manipulation for insect pest management in corn: 

Environmental Management, v. 4, p. 483-489. 

Clewell, A.F., 1999, Restoration of riverine forest at Hall 

Branch on phosphate mined land, Florida: Restoration Ecology, v. 7, p 1-14.

Clewell, A.F., and Beaman, R.S., 1992, Vegetational restoration at Hall Branch reclamation area, 1990 monitoring report: Brewster Phosphates, 16 p. [Deposited 

in the Library of the Florida Institute of Phosphate 

Research, Bartow, FL]

Clewell, A.F., Goolsby, J.A., and Shuey, A.G., 1982, 

Riverine forests of the South Prong Alafia river system, Florida: Wetlands, v. 2, p. 21-72.

Clewell, A.F., Kelly, J.P., and Coultas, C.L., 2000, Forest 

restoration at Dogleg Branch on phosphate-mined 

and reclaimed land, Florida, in Proceedings of the 

17th Annual National Meeting, American Society for 

Surface Mining and Reclamation, Tampa, Fla., June 

11-15, 2000, p. 197-204.
70 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Chapter 11: Postplanting 

Control of Undesirable 

Vegetation

Bottomland hardwood forests have an abundance of 

naturally occurring woody and herbaceous plants that 

may be regarded as undesirable in a restoration project, 

especially in the early stages when they might affect the 

survival and growth of planted trees. Also, exotic species 

are very well established in all areas covered by this 

guide. In southern Illinois, for example, early stages of 

succession on old-field sites used to be dominated by native broomsedge, smooth and winged sumac, sassafras, 

and common persimmon. Now, similar sites might be 

dominated by sericea lespedeza, Chinese bushclover, 

Japanese honeysuckle, multiflora rose, and autumn olive, 

all of which are exotics.

Control of undesirable plant species is typically only 

needed in the first few years of a restoration project, after 

which the planted vegetation should be large enough to 

compete on its own. Control can be achieved manually, 

with machines, or with herbicides.

Although an intensive program of postplanting weed 

control may substantially increase survival and growth 

of planted stock, control should be employed sparingly. 

Weed control will reduce the initial value of a restoration site for small mammals and bird species that use 

the weeds as food and cover. Also, these weeds may be 

promoting forest development by contributing humus to 

the soil and partial shade to forest tree seedlings.

Another reason to use postplanting weed control sparingly is that the long-term benefits may not justify the 

costs. In some experiments where a significant growth 

enhancement with weed control was found over the first 

5 to 10 years, the effect virtually disappeared after a few 

more years.

Manual Vegetation Control

Vegetation control using hand tools such as hoes, 

axes, brushhooks, and machetes has the potential advantage of being highly selective in what is removed (fig. 

11.1). A disadvantage of manual methods is that they 

usually result in a very temporary form of control; unless 

the undesirable plants are being uprooted, they are likely 

to resprout quickly. Because the labor forces employed 

for weeding are likely to be relatively inexperienced, 

there is also a high probability of injury to workers and 

inadvertent damage to desired species.

Manual weed control may be best employed on small 

projects or as a supplement to other forms of weed 

control on larger projects. It also may be the safest 

method to use to remove vines from young hardwood 

Figure 11.1. Manual vine control can be accomplished using 

brushhooks or machetes.

trees because the vines grow too close to the tree to be 

removed by cultivation, and herbicide applications may 

also damage the tree.

Mechanical Vegetation Control

Mechanical weed control is widely used in commercial forestry operations and has proven to be highly 

effective on bottomland sites. A disadvantage of mechanical weed control is that it is difficult to employ if 

the trees are not planted in rows. Other disadvantages are 

the high equipment costs and energy consumption.

Cultivation should begin early in the first growing 

season (March or April) and may need to be repeated as 

many as three to four times during the first year. Supplementary hand weeding may also be needed to control 

vines that are too close to planted trees to be removed 

mechanically. There are many types of equipment available for cultivating bottomland hardwoods, but most 

foresters prefer tractors of about 110 horsepower. Tractors of this size are small enough for cultivating between 

rows but also large enough for other jobs such as clearing, disking, and planting.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 71

Front-mounted cultivators allow the driver to have 

better visibility and control than rear-mounted cultivators, resulting in less damage to planted trees. Cultivators equipped with chisel- or shovel-type plows allow 

tillage close to the young trees but do not damage them 

appreciably. Two types of cultivators are most frequently used. One is a large, front-mounted cultivator 

with 19 to 21 shanks that will straddle one row while 

covering the space within the rows. The second type is 

an offset front-mounted cultivator equipped with five or 

six shanks that straddle the row while covering a small 

area on each side; with this system, a disk or springtooth harrow drawn behind the tractor covers the area 

between rows.

The unit in a cultivation operation therefore consists 

of a tractor plus either a large cultivator or a small cultivator with a disk or harrow (fig. 11.2). When the trees 

become too tall to straddle, the cultivators are removed 

and tillage between rows is accomplished with just a 

disk or harrow.

To ensure the best results from cultivation and to 

minimize tree damage and equipment breakage, the restoration site should be as free as possible from stumps, 

large roots, and other debris. The cultivator shanks that 

straddle the trees should be set to plow 8-10 cm (3-4 

inches) deep to within 8-10 cm (3-4 inches) on each side 

of the tree. The area between rows should be plowed to 

a depth of 10-15 cm (4-6 inches). Cultivation to these 

depths will probably cut some of the roots that lie in 

the top 20 cm (8 inches) of soil, but some researchers 

believe that cutting causes root proliferation and is 

therefore beneficial because it increases the absorptive 

surface.

Disking patterns should be alternated during cultivation; that is, a row cultivated in, say, a north-south 

direction during the first trip down a row should be cultivated south-north during the next trip. If tandem disks 

are used, the front blades should be set to throw soil toward the trees and the rear ones to throw soil away from 

the trees. The disk blades should be about 50-60 cm 

(20 to 24 inches) in diameter. The width of the disk or 

harrow would be determined by tree spacing but would 

be 0.6-0.9 m (2-3 ft) narrower than the spacing to allow 

plowing to within 30-45 cm (12-18 inches) of the trees.

Cultivation should be postponed during wet weather 

to avoid soil compaction, damage to tree roots, and 

equipment damage.

Figure 11.2. Mechanical cultivation of a restoration site.
72 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Vegetation Control with Herbicides

The many different herbicides and herbicide application methods available for use on restoration projects 

are continuously evolving. It is important to refer to the 

most up-to-date sources of information on such issues 

as personal and environmental safety and relevant State 

and Federal regulations. Recent sources of information 

on herbicides for forestry and agricultural use are cited 

at the end of this chapter, but keep in mind that little 

research on the appropriate herbicides for use in bottomland hardwood sites has been conducted (but see Miller, 

1993 and Ezell and Catchot, 1998). When herbicide use 

is planned, a combination of proper herbicide prescriptions, technically sound applications, and a commitment 

to minimizing negative impacts to the environment are 

the keys to successful use.

Table 11.1 lists some of the most commonly used 

herbicides for control of herbaceous and broad-leaved 

(woody) vegetation. This table is meant to serve as an 

initial source of information on herbicides, not as the 

final basis for herbicide selection and does not constitute 

an endorsement of any of the herbicides listed. Also, not 

all these herbicides are labeled for herbaceous or woody 

vegetation control in all states.

The weed species controlled by specific herbicides 

should be investigated thoroughly before making the 

final selection(s) for use on a particular project. Information such as that presented in table 11.2 is available 

Table 11.1. Commonly used herbicides (adapted from Mitchell and 

Lowery, 1994).

Common Name Trade Name Use

Atrazine Atrazine 4L Herbaceous

AAtrex 4L Herbaceous

AAtrex 80W Herbaceous

AAtrex Nine-O Herbaceous

Dicamba Banvel CST Broad-leaved

Dicamba + 2,4,D Banvel 720 Broad-leaved

Fluazifop-butyl Fusilade 2000 Herbaceous

Glyphosate Accord CR Herbaceous

Roundup Herbaceous

Hexazinone Pronone 5G Herbaceous

Velpar L Herbaceous

Imazapyr Arsenal Applicator Herbaceous

Concentrate 

Oxyfluorfen Goal Herbaceous

Picloram + 2,4-D Tordon Broad-leaved

Sethoxydim Poast Herbaceous

Sulfometuron methyl Oust Herbaceous

Triclopyr Garlon 3A Broad-leaved

Triclpoyr + Butoxyethyl Garlon 4 Broad-leaved

ester 

2,4-D Weedone 2,4,DP Broad-leaved

for most herbicides and should be referred to once the 

restorationist knows which weeds are most in need of 

control.

The optimum timing for herbicide applications varies 

with the type of weeds being controlled and the particular herbicide and application method being used. 

Guidance on timing for some of the most common 

herbicides used in commercial forestry operations is 

presented in fig. 11.3.

Since weed control should be used very sparingly on 

most restoration projects, only the most selective application methods are recommended. To control herbaceous 

vegetation around individual planted trees, backpack 

or hand-held sprayers (fig. 11.4) are very effective. To 

control undesirable woody species, tree injectors, hypohatchets, hatchet and spray bottle combinations, or spot 

guns are recommended.

Selected References

Cantrell, R.L., ed., 1985, A guide to silvicultural 

herbicide use in the southern United States: Auburn 

University, Ala., Alabama Agricultural Experiment 

Station, 592 p.

Ezell, A.W., 1995, Importance of early season competition control in establishing eastern cottonwood 

(Populus deltoides) plantations, in Edwards, M.B., 

ed., Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, November 1-3, 1994, 

Auburn, Ala.: Asheville, N.C., U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-1, p. 94-97.

Ezell, A.W., and Catchot, A.L., Jr., 1998, Competition 

control for hardwood plantation establishment, in

Table 11.2. Weed species susceptible to Oust (Mitchell and 

Lowery, 1994).

Susceptible Moderate Tolerant

Controlled by Controlled by Not controlled

3 oz/acre 5 oz/acre 

Panic grasses Goldenrod Bermuda grass

Fescue Dogfennel Morning glory

Horseweed Bahia grass Broomsedge

Burnweed Johnson grass Wooly croton

Boneset Trumpet creeper

Ragweed Sicklepod

Sunflower Cocklebur

Poorjoe Nutsedge

Dewberry

Vetch

Geranium

Goldenweed

Sweet clover

Crabgrass
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 73

Dates are approximate for the upper coastal plains. Spring dates will shift 

plains to the mountains because of earlier frost.

Figure 11.3. Guidance on the timing of herbicide applications in commercial forestry (modified from Miller and Bishop, 1989).

Figure 11.4. Herbicide application with a backpack sprayer.
74 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Waldrop, T.A., ed., Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, 

February 25-27, 1997, Clemson, S.C.: Asheville, 

N.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

General Technical Report SRS-20, p. 42-43.

Hamel, D.R., 1983, Forest management chemicals, 

Agricultural Handbook 585: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 645 p.

Kennedy, H.E., Jr., 1981, Bottomland hardwood research 

on site preparation, plantation establishment, and 

cultural treatments at the Southern Hardwoods Laboratory, in Barnett, J.P., ed., Proceedings of the First 

Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, 

November 6-7, 1980, Atlanta, Ga.: New Orleans, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern 

Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report 

SO-34, p. 75-78.

Kennedy, H.E., Jr., and Henderson, W.H., 1976, Cultivation in cottonwood plantations—practice and 

equipment, in Thielges, B.A., and Land, S.B., Jr., 

eds., Proceedings of the Symposium on Eastern Cottonwood and Related Species, September 28 - October 2, 1976, Greenville, Miss.: Baton Rouge, La., 

Louisiana State University, Division of Continuing 

Education, p. 379-384.

Miller, J.H., 1989, Optimum timing for ground-applied 

forestry herbicides in the South: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Management Bulletin R8-MB 28.

Miller, J.H., 1993, Oak plantation establishment using mechanical, burning, and herbicide treatments, 

in Loftis, D.L., and McGee, C.E., eds., Oak regeneration: serious problems, practical recommendations: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

SEFES Publication GTR SE-84, p. 264-289.

Miller, J.H., and Bishop, L.M., 1989, Optimum timing 

for ground-applied forestry herbicides in the south: 

Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service Management Bulletin R8-MB 28.

Miller, J.H., and Mitchell, R.J., eds., 1994, A manual on 

ground applications of forestry herbicides: Atlanta, 

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

Management Bulletin R8-MB 21. [Orientation is 

towards commercial pine production but still contains 

much useful information on application methods, 

safety, pertinent laws, and specific herbicides.]

Mitchell, R.J., and Lowery, R.F., 1994, Herbaceous weed 

control in young pine plantations, in Miller, J.H., and 

Mitchell, R.J., eds., A manual on ground applications 

of forestry herbicides: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service Management Bulletin 

R8-MB 21 (revised), p. 4-1 to 4-8.

Rhodenbaugh, E.J., and Yeiser, J.L., 1994, Hardwood 

seedling tolerance to selected Oust® treatments: 

Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society 

Annual Meeting, v. 47, p. 98-103.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 75

Chapter 12: Protection of the 

Restoration Site

Restoration projects can be damaged or destroyed by 

a variety of agents, ranging from depredation by herbivores to vandalism. To the degree possible, the needs for 

protection from these agents should be anticipated in the 

site evaluation stage, and plans should be drawn up for 

implementing protective measures.

Protection from Animals

Herbivores (and the occasional omnivore) can seriously damage or destroy planted seed or seedlings. The 

most frequent offenders are deer, raccoons, squirrels, 

beaver, nutria, and small rodents. In some cases, cattle, 

hogs, or birds may cause damage. 

One of the best forms of protection against the smaller 

rodents is to plant seed or seedlings on a relatively weedfree site, since this minimizes the amount of cover available to protect rodents from predation. Usually by the 

time the weeds provide enough cover for small rodents, 

the seedlings are relatively safe; however, if there is 

evidence of damage to seedlings (e.g., girdling, clipped 

twigs), it is advisable to carry out some postplanting 

weed control.

Protection of some planted sites can be achieved by 

controlling water levels, but specific guidelines for use 

of this technique are not available. For example, water 

tolerant species can be temporarily flooded to protect 

a.

them from small rodents, or in the case of beaver and 

nutria, the site can be kept drained until the seedlings 

are well established. In large open fields, provision of 

perches for raptors may be an effective strategy for 

reducing rodent populations.

More direct forms of control may be necessary in 

cases where animal populations are particularly high 

and/or cover cannot be reduced adequately by other 

means. These forms of control, however, should only 

be employed as a last resort, especially near populated 

areas and on public lands. Traps or poison can be used to 

temporarily reduce populations of small rodents. Larger 

animals can also be shot. For instance, shooting nutria or 

beaver can be a very effective means of short-term control; one technique is to go out at night with a light and 

use a .22 rifle (which is fairly quiet). The only practical 

direct control measure for deer is an either-sex harvest 

in conjunction with state hunting seasons, which is obviously out of the control of most restorationists.

Fencing the site will protect it from cattle and hog 

damage. Fencing may also provide protection from 

beaver and nutria, although these animals, especially 

nutria, may be able to burrow under or even climb over 

a fence. Fencing will only work well if it is done right 

(using good quality fencing material and sturdy, metal or 

treated wooden posts) and if it is periodically inspected 

and maintained.

Individual seedlings can be protected by using 

either wire predator guards or plastic tree shelters (fig. 

12.1a,b), but costs can be prohibitive on large projects. 

b.

Figure 12.1. Herbivory protection by (a) wire predator guard and (b) plastic tree shelter.
76 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Tree shelters have the additional advantages of enhancing growth and making it easier to safely apply herbicides around the base of individual seedlings. While 

generally effective, neither wire guards nor tree shelters 

can ensure complete protection in cases where animal 

populations are high and alternative food sources are 

low. For example, both methods have occasionally failed 

to protect newly planted baldcypress seedlings from nutria, which have burrowed under, climbed over, knocked 

over, and chewed through these protectors. In extreme 

cases, these wire guards or tree shelters should be used 

in conjunction with direct population control measures.

Protection from Fire

Although most bottomland hardwood sites are wet 

throughout much of the year, they do occasionally dry 

out, and there are several instances in which restoration 

sites have been damaged by fire. The best protection is to 

make a firebreak around the site, usually by disking (see 

fig. 5.1). Firebreaks should be periodically inspected and 

maintained, particularly before and during periods of 

peak fire danger. Firebreaks are particularly important in 

areas where prescribed fire is frequently used or where 

the restoration site is close to a heavily traveled road.

In peninsular Florida and in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico Coast the rapid spread of cogongrass, an exotic 

species, has created a fire hazard. This species burns 

readily and can spread and intensify a fire rapidly. Heavy 

applications of herbicides are being made to eliminate 

this grass as it appears in bottomland hardwood creation 

sites on mined lands. As cogongrass continues to spread, 

its threat of carrying fires could increase substantially in 

the next few years.

Protection from Human Impacts

In most areas, restoration sites are subject to some 

damage from humans, be it intentional or unintentional. 

Fencing and “No Trespassing” signs may prove necessary in areas that could be used by off-road recreational 

vehicles, play areas for children, or places to dump trash 

and yard wastes. Informing nearby residents of the project and/or putting an informative sign about the project 

on the site (fig. 12.2) may also help reduce damage.

Figure 12.2. An informative sign such as this can provide useful information to individuals using or visiting the site.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 77

In agricultural areas, some restoration sites have been 

damaged or destroyed by farm machinery or aerial drift 

from nearby herbicide applications. Farmers on adjacent 

land should be informed about restoration sites on which 

they might potentially have an impact.

In urban areas, plants have actually been stolen from 

some restoration sites. This is most likely to happen 

when larger, high-value planting stock has been used, 

such as tree seedlings that were in 1-gallon or larger 

size containers. Sites where theft is a possibility should 

be protected by fencing. In some cases armed guards 

have been employed to protect restoration sites. Where 

theft or vandalism is likely to be a problem, it may be 

desirable to use smaller, less conspicuous (and less valuable) planting stock.

Selected References

Allen, J.A., and Boykin, R., 1991, Tree shelters help protect seedlings from nutria (Louisiana): Restoration 

and Management Notes, v. 9, no. 2, p. 122-123.

Clewell, A.F., and Lea, R., 1990, Creation and restoration of forested wetland vegetation in the southeastern United States, in Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, 

M.E, eds., Wetland creation and restoration: the status 

of the science: Washington, D.C., Island Press, p. 

195-231.
78 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Chapter 13: Monitoring

Monitoring is an important element in any properly 

conducted restoration project. Too often, however, restoration projects are put in place and monitored poorly if 

at all. Failure to follow up on a project obviously results 

in a lack of information on how well the project is succeeding in meeting its objectives. Success criteria (as 

discussed in Chapter 2) can only be evaluated through 

a program of monitoring. The lack of monitoring also 

eliminates the chance for promptly carrying out postplanting corrective measures (midcourse corrections) 

that may save a project. Furthermore, the failure to 

monitor projects may result in repeating mistakes in 

future projects.

Monitoring does not always have to be sophisticated 

and expensive to be effective. Simply walking through 

a restoration site may be enough to spot some problem that needs to be remedied, such as excessive weed 

competition, damage to a fence, herbivory problems, or a 

malfunctioning water control structure. To be most effective, this type of monitoring should be done frequently at 

first (at least monthly), especially if extensive earthmoving or hydrologic modifications were done, or the site is 

an area subject to human disturbance.

When designing a monitoring program involving the 

collection of quantitative information, five things should 

be considered carefully: (1) what is the purpose of the 

monitoring program? (goals which are tied directly to 

success criteria should be specified), (2) what are the 

most appropriate methods for achieving the goals? (3) 

how should the data be handled and analyzed? (4) how 

will the data be interpreted (and who will do the interpretation)? and (5) when will the monitoring program 

achieve its goals and be terminated? Two guiding 

principles should be to keep the program as simple as 

possible and to collect data only if it meets a specific 

need and addresses a specific success criterion. It should 

also be kept in mind that because of the relatively longterm nature of many monitoring projects, personnel will 

change over time. Good records should therefore be kept 

on all aspects of the program, including sampling protocols, plot locations, and information on how and where 

data are stored.

Vegetation Monitoring

A wide range of techniques developed by plant 

ecologists and foresters is available for use in vegetation monitoring. Most of these techniques are based 

on the sampling of vegetation along transects and/or in 

plots. Some of the most commonly used measures of 

vegetation abundance or plant performance are summarized in table 13.1. In general, an effective monitoring 

program will use a combination of absolute measures of 

abundance and selected measures of performance.

If transects or plots are used, they should be permanently marked because remeasuring the same area each 

time will provide information on trends in survival and 

plant performance. Sections of PVC pipe placed at 

either end of transects or in plot centers works well in 

most cases, especially where vandalism is not a major 

problem. Plots and transects should also be located in a 

truly random or systematic fashion, not selected subjectively.

One example of a simple, inexpensive, and yet appropriate monitoring system is that used by the Louisiana 

Department of Wildlife and Fisheries to evaluate the survival of their direct-seeded reforestation sites. They establish 50-ft (15.2 m) transects along every third row at 

the time of planting. The transects are marked with five 

flags; some of the flags are tagged in such a way that the 

exact position of the transect can be relocated if one or 

more flags are lost. The transects are established so they 

stretch out either diagonally across the field (fig. 13.1) 

or in another arrangement that captures the variability of 

topography within the field. In late summer and again 2 

or 3 months later, at the end of the first growing season, 

the seedlings along these transects are counted. If the 

average number of seedlings per transect is below the 

target of three, then the field may be replanted. Since the 

only stated goal of these restoration projects is reestablishment of the hard mast producing species that were 

actually planted, there is no need for more extensive 

monitoring. The decision to replant a site should only be 

made after consideration of the fact that many seedlings 

may be difficult to see (hidden by herbaceous vegetation, 

delayed germination of direct-seeded acorns, clipped 

by rodents but retaining living roots, etc.). It is usually 

advisable to wait until at least 3 to 5 years post planting 

before evaluating seedling survival and stocking rates.

An example of a somewhat more complicated and 

expensive vegetation monitoring system is that used by 

Agrico Chemical Company on their Morrow Swamp 

restoration site in central Florida. They established a system of 12 permanent belt transects (elongated quadrats) 

that are 29.5 ft (9 m) in width and from 300 to 900 ft 

(90-275 m) in length (fig. 13.2). All trees were measured 

for height and crown diameter and classified into one 

of seven categories based on the tree’s condition (live, 

stressed, tip dieback, basal sprouts, apparently dead, 

dead, and missing). The transects are measured annually, 

and the data are summarized in a series of tables and 

graphs (fig. 13.3).

Where reference wetlands have been used as a guide 

for designing the restoration project, various indices can 

be employed to compare the reference and restoration 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 79

Table 13.1. Measures of vegetation abundance and plant performance that can be used for monitoring.

Abundance measures Description

Presence or absence of vegetation This is a simple list of what species are present without more specific information on abundance.

Presence or absence of In addition to listing species present, an estimate of frequency (e.g., common, occasional, rare) is 

vegetation combined with frequency made. Simple, but relatively imprecise.

estimates

Absolute measures

Density Number of individuals per unit area. Easy to use with trees but difficult with herbaceous plants.

Cover Proportion of ground covered by a species (should be envisioned as a vertical projection of the 

species to the ground). Often estimated by eye, although this can be inaccurate, and results 

will vary from worker to worker.

Biomass/yield Usually involves destructive sampling of plots to obtain dry weight estimates for each species. 

Cannot be recommended for restoration projects unless samples are small or biomass/yield 

can be accurately estimated from variables such as plant height and diameter.

Basal area Cross-sectional area of each species per unit area (e.g., ft2/acre). Widely used for tree and shrub 

species.

Nonabsolute measure

Frequency The proportion of plots containing a particular species. Simple, but results may vary with plot size 

and sampling intensity.

Measures of plant performance

Growth Most commonly defined as height or diameter growth.

Mast/seed production Could include proportion of individuals producing seed and/or a quantitative measure of seed 

production (i.e., yield). 

Indicators of plant Possible indicators include evidence of branch dieback, defoliation, nutrient stress, and fire or

health or damage browsing damage.

sites. These include simple tallies of the number of species on each site (species richness) and more complex 

diversity and similarity indices. Index values should be 

evaluated with caution, however. High species richness 

or diversity, for example, may be due to the presence 

of weeds and undesirable exotic species. It is therefore 

advisable to limit some index comparisons to those 

preferred species that are typical of mature, undisturbed 

forest. Also, such indices are of limited use for most 

restoration projects because of the large differences that 

naturally occur between forests in early successional 

stages (the project site) and mature forests (the reference 

sites).

Hydrologic Monitoring

On restoration sites with minimal disturbance, qualitative monitoring of hydrology may be adequate. Hydrologic monitoring could involve visiting the site during 

seasons when flooding or saturated soils are expected to 

occur, or inspecting the site at other times for evidence 

that the hydrology is adequate (e.g., drift lines, sediment 

deposited on leaves, water lines on trees).

The use of quantitative monitoring techniques is 

worthwhile for projects on heavily disturbed sites. Staff 

gages, piezometers, and shallow monitoring wells (fig. 

13.4) can be used for measuring water table levels and/or 

groundwater flow directions. Staff gages provide a measure of standing water above the soil surface. They are 

inexpensive, easy to install, and easy to read. Piezometers, which are screened for water entry (and sediment 

exclusion) only near their bottom end, are used to measure the potentiometric surface, which is not necessarily 

the same as water table level. These data are used to 

determine groundwater flow directions and water levels 

(pressures) below a confining layer in the soil. Piezometers are especially useful for monitoring contaminant 

movement (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). Shallow monitoring wells are screened along most of their length and 

are useful for measuring the water table depth in soils 

without a confining layer. Great care must be exercised 
80 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Figure 13.1. Diagonal layout of sample transects across a directseeded field.

in the installation of monitoring wells (Sprecher, 1993). 

If a well is installed through a confining layer, such as 

a clay layer, water may be able to flow through the well 

casing from a perched aquifer above the confining layer 

into a lower layer below the clay, resulting in bad data 

and possible damage to the local wetland.

Staff gages, piezometers, and monitoring wells should 

be distributed to cover the range of hydrologic variability 

within the restoration site. As an example, figure 13.5 

shows the placement of piezometers and staff gages on 

a phosphate mine reclamation site in Florida. Readings 

of these gages and wells should be taken on at least a 

monthly basis for the first year of most projects. The actual measurement interval will depend on the hydrologic 

regime, soil type, topography, and type of study.

In some cases periodic water level measurements 

may be inadequate, and more frequent monitoring will 

be necessary. Several methods are available to provide 

continuous measurements of above- or belowground 

water levels. Chart type water level recorders have been 

used extensively in the past. These recorders typically 

use a chain/cable and weight attached to a float in a 

stilling well. As the float moves up and down with water 

levels, a chart is rotated under a pen and water levels 

are recorded on the scaled chart. The main shortcoming of these types of recorders is that they are relatively 

expensive and can only measure one variable (water 

level) at one location. Another disadvantage is that the 

data on the chart must be read and recorded separately, 

adding another step and delay in making the data available. Updated (and more expensive) versions of these 

recorders that log the measurements electronically are 

also available.

More recently, dataloggers have been used extensively 

for recording water levels and numerous other variables, 

such as wind direction and speed, total solar radiation 

and/or photosynthetically active radiation, temperature 

of the air, soil or water, relative humidity, precipitation, 

etc. A good quality datalogger can be obtained for about 

the same price as a chart type recorder, but individual 

probes push the cost somewhat higher. Although some 

probes such as air/water/soil temperature probes are 

inexpensive at about $70 each, other probes such as 

commercially available water level sensors can be quite 

expensive at about $600 each. Inexpensive water level 

sensors can, however, be constructed using readily available materials for about $60 or less each (Keeland and 

others, 1997).

Many researchers have started using single purpose 

water level recorders, such as the WL-40 or WL-80 

manufactured by Remote Data Systems (fig. 13.6). 

Figure 13.2. Location of forest reclamation strip quadrats at the 

Morrow Swamp (Agrico Swamp West) restoration site (from Kevin 

L. Erwin, Consulting Ecologist, Inc., 1990).
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 81

Figure 13.3. Tree survival trends at Morrow Swamp (Agrico Swamp West) restoration site (from Kevin L. Erwin, Consulting Ecologist, Inc., 

1990).

Figure 13.4. Staff gages, piezometers, and monitoring wells can be used to determine the pattern of flooding (hydrologic regime) of a 

restoration site. Such piezometers and wells can be purchased commercially or made from PVC pipe.
82 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

An advantage of these instruments is the ease of data 

downloading, which is accomplished with a hand held 

calculator using an infrared-light communications 

pathway. The instruments can be easily camouflaged (do 

not use paint for camouflage as it may block the water 

entry pathways) in field situations where tampering may 

be likely. A disadvantage is that they only work over a 

limited range (1 or 2 m - 40 or 80 inches) and are almost 

as expensive as the chart type recorders or more capable 

dataloggers which work over a much wider range of 

water levels. In areas with a limited range of water level 

fluctuations, single purpose water level recorders are 

probably the instrument of choice, but in riverine sites 

where water levels fluctuate more than 2 m, they may 

not be adequate.

90 89

88

88

89

90

94 98 110

87

Perimeter

Berm North

Basin

South

Basin

Outfall

Peace River Floodplain

Piezometers

Staff gages

Water quality sampling points

Water level recorder

Water Quality Monitoring

Water quality monitoring of bottomland hardwood 

restoration projects may be required to demonstrate 

compliance with state water quality regulations; otherwise, monitoring will be useful primarily in those cases 

where specific problems are anticipated. Examples of 

water quality parameters that may be measured include 

pH, alkalinity, dissolved oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, 

turbidity, suspended solids, total organic carbon, presence of heavy metals, water temperature, redox potential, specific conductance and/or salinity, etc.

Considerations for a water quality monitoring 

program include measurement protocols (these should 

generally conform to Environmental Protection Agency 

standards), sample size and frequency, distribution of 

Figure 13.5. Placement of piezometers and staff gages on a reclaimed phosphate site 

in Florida (from Kevin L. Erwin, Consulting Ecologist Inc., 1990).
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 83

Figure 13.6. Example of an automated, single purpose water 

level recorder, the WL-80 being downloaded. The WL-80 (arrow) 

is mounted next to the stilling well of a Stevens type recorder. 

Inset shows the head of the WL-80 and the calculator used for 

downloading.

sampling stations, and the availability of a suitable 

site for comparison (i.e., a reference site or a suitable 

upstream location). The MiST document (White and 

others, 1990) suggests that at a minimum, 24 sets of 

samples from surface water and groundwater be taken 

on a monthly basis from both the restoration site and a 

reference site for the first 2 years of the project (see table 

2.1). Other monitoring programs, such as the Agrico 

phosphate mine site in Florida, have sampled water quality on a quarterly basis.

In addition to regular sampling, it may be desirable to 

sample water quality during unusual conditions, such as 

peak floods and low water events. Water quality conditions during these times may be a controlling influence 

on the overall success of the wetland restoration project.

Soils Monitoring

On sites with minimal soil disturbance, such as oldfield sites, very little soil monitoring is necessary, especially if the project is not being conducted as mitigation 

for a specific development project. It might be worthwhile, however, to inspect the site and determine if one 

or more of the field indicators of hydric soils described 

in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) are present. These field indicators include presence of organic 

soils; histic epipedons; sulfidic material; an aquic or 

peraquic moisture regime; direct evidence of reducing 

conditions; gleyed, low chroma and low chroma/mottled 

soils; and iron and manganese concretions. The delineation manual provides additional indicators of wetland 

hydrology for special soils, such as highly sandy soils or 

soils with spodic horizons.

On heavily disturbed sites, bulk density, soil pH, 

nutrient status, organic matter, and in some cases, 

redox potential or specific phytotoxin levels need to be 

assessed. Measurement of soil macroinvertebrates and 

microorganisms may also be worthwhile, especially 

when compared to an appropriate reference wetland, 

since the biomass and species composition of these communities are two of the best indicators of whether a soil 

is functioning as desired.

Wildlife Monitoring

Monitoring the wildlife use of restored bottomland 

forests is in some ways more difficult than monitoring 

vegetation, hydrology, and soils. For one thing, many 

animal species are secretive, and it may therefore be 

very difficult to determine whether they are using the 

restoration site. A more fundamental problem is that 

many years must pass before an adequate evaluation can 

be made if the goal is to provide habitat for wildlife that 

use mature forest habitat.

One way to address the difficulties of monitoring 

wildlife is to characterize use of the site by common, 

relatively conspicuous (or easily trapped) species that 

use forested wetlands in early stages of succession. Table 

13.2 lists some wildlife species that use forested wetland 

sites in the early stages of forest development, from open 

fields or forest gaps to a stage just before crown closure. 

More extensive lists of expected species could be developed for particular project sites and compared with the 

species actually found on the site.

Where direct monitoring is employed, techniques will 

vary depending on the species being sought and whether 

the goal is simply to determine presence or absence 

(qualitative monitoring) or approximate numbers of 

individuals present (quantitative monitoring). Another 
84 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Table 13.2. Wildlife species that use early successional stages of bottomland hardwood forested wetlands (order of species, common 

names, and scientific names follows Banks and others, 1987).

Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name

Amphibians Birds, continued

Eastern newt Notophthalmus viridescens Wild turkey Meleagris gallopavo

Flatwoods salamander Ambystoma cingulatum Northern bobwhite Colinus virginianus

Eastern tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum American woodcock Scolopax minor

Southern dusky salmander Desmognathus auriculatus Mourning dove Zenaida macroura

Two-lined salamander Eurycea bislineata American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos

Dwarf salamander Eurycea quadridigitata House wren Troglodytes aedon

Mud salamander Pseudotriton montanus American robin Turdus migratorius

Many-lined salamander Stereochilus marginatus Gray catbird Dumetella carolinensis

Greenhouse frog Eleutherodactylus planirostris Brown thrasher Toxostoma rufum

Bird-voiced tree frog Hyla avivoca Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus

Pine woods treefrog Hyla femoralis White-eyed vireo Vireo griseus

Squirrel treefrog Hyla squirella Yellow-rumped warbler Dendroica coronata

Gray treefrog Hyla versicolor Common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas

Ornate chorus frog Pseudacris ornata Yellow-breasted chat Icteria virens

Striped chorus frog Pseudacris triseriata Northern Parula Parula americana

Wood frog Rana sylvatica Prothonotary warbler Protonotaria citrea

Northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis

Reptiles Bachman’s sparrow Aimophila aestivalis

Common mud turtle Kinosternon subrubrum Dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis

Snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina Song sparrow Melospiza melodia

Painted turtle Chrysemys picta Rufous-sided towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus

Diamondback terrapin Malaclemys terrapin White-throated sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis

Eastern fence lizard Sceloporus undulatus Red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus

Eastern glass lizard Ophisaurus ventralis Common grackle Quiscalus quiscula

Ground skink Scincella lateralis

Eastern indigo snake Drymarchon corais couperi Mammals

Black rat snake Elaphe obsoleta White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus

Yellow rat snake Elaphe obsoleta quadrivittata Virginia opossum Didelphis virginiana

Green rat snake Elaphe triaspis Nine-banded armadillo Dasypus novemcinctus

Eastern mud snake Farancia abacura Carolina shrew Blarina carolinensis

Rainbow snake Farancia erythrogramma Least shrew Cryptotis parva

erythrogramma Prairie mole Scalopus aquaticus machrinus

Common kingsnake Lampropeltis getulus Gray fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus

Plain-bellied water snake Nerodia erythrogaster Red fox Vulpes vulpes

Gopher snake Pituophis melanoleucus Black bear Ursus americanus

Pine woods snake Rhadinaea flavilata Raccoon Procyon lotor

Midland brown snake Storeria delayi wrightorum Mink Mustela vison

Eastern ribbon snake Thamnophis sauritus Striped skunk Mephitis mephitis

Common garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis River otter Lontra canadensis

Southern copperhead Agkistrodon contortrix contortrix Bobcat Lynx rufus

Eastern cottonmouth Agkistrodon piscivorus piscivorus Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus

Beaver Castor canadensis

Birds Eastern woodrat Neotoma floridana

Great blue heron Ardea herodias Marsh rice rat Oryzomys palustris

Green-backed heron Butorides striatus Southern golden mouse Peromyscus aureolus

Great egret Casmerodius albus Cotton mouse Peromyscus gossypinus

Yellow-crowned night heron Nycticorax violaceus White-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopus

Wood stork Mycteria americana Fulvous harvest mouse Reithrodontomys fulvescens

Wood duck Aix sponsa Eastern harvest mouse Reithrodontomys humulis

Blue-winged teal Anas discors Hispid cotton rat Sigmodon hispidus

Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Nutria Myocaster coypus

Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis Swamp rabbit Sylvilagus aquaticus

American swallow-tailed kite Elanoides forficatus Cottontail rabbit Sylvilagus floridanus

American kestrel Falco sparverius Marsh rabbit Sylvilagus palustris
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 85

alternative for monitoring wildlife is to take an indirect 

approach. Indices such as those provided by habitat suitability index models (Schamberger and Farmer, 1978; 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1981), the Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET; Adamus, 1983), the Hydrogeomorphic Method (Brinson and others, 1994; Smith and 

others, 1995), or the Rapid Impact Assessment Method 

(Stein and Ambrose, 1998) can be used to evaluate the 

suitability of wildlife habitat for key species or species 

groups.

Selected References

Adamus, P.R., 1983, A method for wetland functional 

assessment: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 

FHWA-IP-82-23.

Banks, R.C., McDiarmid, R.W., and Gardner, A.L., 

1987, Checklist of vertebrates of the United States, 

the U.S. Territories, and Canada: Washington, D.C., 

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Resource Publication 166, 79 p.

Bookhout, T.A., ed., 1994, Research and management 

techniques for wildlife and habitats: Bethesda, Md., 

The Wildlife Society, Inc., 740 p.

Brinson, M.M., Kruczynski, W., Lee, L.C., Nutter, W.L., 

Smith, R.D., and Whigham, D.F., 1994, Developing 

an approach for assessing the functions of wetlands, 

in Mitch, W.J., ed., Global wetlands: old world and 

new: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Elsevier Sciences 

B.V., p. 615-624.

Environmental Laboratory, 1987, Corps of Engineers 

wetlands delineation manual, Technical Report Y-87-

1: Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Waterways Experiment Station, 165 p. [This, or the 

current edition of the manual, provides information 

on field indicators of wetland hydrology, soils, and 

vegetation.]

Freeze, R.A., and Cherry, J.A., 1979, Groundwater: 

Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 604 p.

Keeland, B.D., Dowd, J.F., and Hardegree, W.S., 1997, 

Use of inexpensive pressure transducers for measuring water levels in wells: Wetlands Ecology and 

Management, v. 5, p. 121-129.

Kentual, M.E., Brooks, R.P., Gwin, S.E., Holland, C.C., 

Sherman, A.D., and Sifneos, J.C., 1992, An approach 

to improving decision making in wetland restoration 

and creation: Washington, D.C., Island Press, 151 p.

Kevin L. Erwin, Consulting Ecologist, Inc., 1990, Agrico swamp west eighth annual report: Mulberry, Fla., 

Prepared for Agrico Chemical Company.

Ludwig, J.A., and Reynolds, J.F., 1988, Statistical ecology: New York, John Wiley and Sons, 337 p.

Schamberger, M., and Farmer, A., 1978, The habitat 

evaluation procedures: their application in project 

planning and impact evaluation: Transactions of the 

Forty-Third North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, p. 274-283.

Schamberger, M., and Krohn, W.B., 1982, Status of 

the habitat evaluation procedures: Transactions of 

the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources 

Conference, v. 47, p. 154-164.

Schemnitz, S.D., ed., 1980, Wildlife management 

techniques manual: Washington, D.C., The Wildlife 

Society.

Smith, R.D., Ammann, A., Bartoldus, C., and Brinson, 

M., 1995, An approach for assessing wetland functions using hydrogeomorphic classification, reference 

wetlands, and functional indices: Vicksburg, Miss., 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, WRP-DE-9, 72 p.

Sprecher, S.W., 1993, Installing monitoring wells/

piezometers in wetlands, WRP Technical Note HYIA-3.1: Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, USA.

Stein, E.D., and Ambrose, R.F., 1998, A rapid impact 

assessment method for use in a regulatory context: 

Wetlands, v. 18, no. 3, p. 379-392.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1981, Standards for the 

development of habitat suitability models, Ecological 

Services Manual 103: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Division of Ecological Services.

Van Horne, B., and Wiens, J.A., 1991, Forest bird habitat 

suitability models and the development of general 

habitat models: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department 

of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Research 8, 31 p.

White, T.A., Allen, J.A., Mader, S.F., Mengel, D.L., 

Perison, D.M., and Tew, D.T., 1990, MiST: a methodology to classify pre-project mitigation sites and 

develop performance standards for construction and 

restoration of forested wetlands, Results of an EPAsponsored workshop: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 85 p.
86 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Chapter 14: Rehabilitation 

and Management of Existing 

Forests

Although this guide emphasizes restoration of bottomland forests on sites without tree cover, there are 

extensive areas of degraded natural forests in need of 

rehabilitation. Often the degradation is due to past mismanagement such as high grading or holding water late 

into the growing season in green-tree reservoirs. In other 

cases, hydroperiod alterations, hurricanes, severe floods, 

or insect outbreaks may have degraded the stands. Many 

southern bottomland hardwood stands have deteriorated 

to such a point that they have little value for timber, 

wildlife production, recreation, or aesthetics (fig. 14.1).

This chapter presents basic information on bottomland hardwood silviculture. The suite of techniques 

employed by silviculturists can be used to achieve a 

wide range of objectives, including forest rehabilitation. 

The principles described in this chapter can be applied 

not only to rehabilitating existing degraded stands but 

also to the long-term management of restoration forests 

as described in the preceding chapters of this guide.

There are three key steps in planning the management of bottomland hardwood forests: (1) understanding 

current forest and environmental conditions; (2) clarifying objectives (the desired future condition); and (3) 

defining feasible actions that will transform the stand to 

the desired condition. In most cases, the silviculturist 

has several options for intervening in stand development, 

as there are multiple silvicultural pathways toward the 

desired future condition. The choice of silvicultural 

treatment will affect the financial cost, the nature of 

intermediate stand conditions, and the time it takes to 

achieve the desired condition. In general, silvicultural 

treatments consist of partial to complete removal of the 

trees on a site. Partial removals may consist of thinnings 

of desirable species to allow greater growing space of 

the leave trees or removal of undesirable species. If the 

silvicultural treatment can be combined with a timber 

sale, the landowner may be able to accomplish the treatment at no cost or even at a profit. It is imperative that 

silvicultural decisions are made with clear objectives in 

mind and with an eye toward rehabilitation success.

Determining Present Site and Stand 

Conditions

Diagnosing present site and stand conditions requires 

information to be gathered in an organized and rigorous 

fashion. The first step in forest management, including 

rehabilitating degraded bottomland forests, is to determine what currently occupies the site. A simple reconnaissance can give much of the preliminary information 

Figure 14.1. Bottomland hardwood stand degraded by years of mismanagement.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 87

needed for planning subsequent forest management. 

The initial reconnaissance should be followed by a more 

detailed site inventory before a silvicultural system is selected and interventions are prescribed. These activities 

should be performed by a knowledgeable forester.

Site Reconnaissance and Inventory

In the reconnaissance, boundaries of the site should 

be located and possible boundary-related problems identified. Potential problems could stem from trespassing 

or land-use practices on adjacent tracts, such as burning or herbicide spraying that may endanger the forest 

to be rehabilitated. Examples of other urgent problems 

discovered at this stage include destructive grazing, the 

presence of dump sites containing hazardous materials, 

or beaver dams in areas where they will cause excessive 

damage to the stand or limit access to the site. These 

problems should be addressed immediately.

The operability of the site, including soil and flooding 

conditions affecting accessibility to logging and other 

heavy equipment, existence of roads, and other practical considerations that will affect management options, 

should also be assessed during the reconnaissance. 

Included in this assessment should be a rough estimate 

of the timber volume and quality on the site. Getting a 

contractor to carry out desired management on the site 

may depend on the existence of enough timber to cover 

the costs of the operation.

A final goal of the reconnaissance should be to identify logical subunits of the site, called compartments, 

for subsequent inventory and management. Identifying 

subunits is important if the project site is large enough 

to contain different forest types, stands of different ages, 

or areas with special problems such as lack of access. 

Readily identifiable compartment boundaries, such as 

roads, streams, or power lines, should be used when 

possible.

A more detailed inventory of the site should generally 

follow the reconnaissance. If an area is large and rehabilitation will proceed over several years, it may be advantageous to delay the inventory until just before the first 

managed cut (i.e., the first thinning or the regeneration 

cut). The main advantage of delaying the inventory is 

that more accurate information on timber volume and 

quality will be available for setting up a contract with a 

timber buyer. Several references listed at the end of this 

chapter describe forest inventory techniques. Most often, 

the inventory will make use of randomly or systematically located sample plots for the overstory trees and 

nested subplots for seedlings and saplings. Methods for 

evaluating regeneration potential are discussed later in 

this chapter.

Assessment of Site Potential

Site “potential” refers to the combination of relatively 

unchanging physical factors which affect species composition and stand vigor: soil and landform (characteristics 

of which determine moisture availability, aeration, and 

fertility) and hydroperiod (flood frequency, duration, 

depth, and seasonal timing). These physical factors are 

not immutable, however, and changes in hydroperiod 

especially can degrade a site. On the other hand, selectively logging the biggest and best trees of a few species 

may degrade the stand without lowering the potential of 

the site.

Often a stand is so degraded that true site potential, 

in terms of species composition and productivity, is 

masked. Conversely, one must be careful to avoid attributing a higher potential than is warranted and mistakenly 

blaming degradation for inherently poor site conditions. 

A site’s potential, and whether it has been degraded, sets 

limits on what can be achieved by silvicultural intervention. Site potential also determines the general direction 

of stand development and the likely outcome of any 

major disturbance that affects the existing stand. Because site potential has to do with physical factors, it is 

necessary to first place a site within a landscape context; 

for example, a silviculturist should assess whether a site 

occurs in the floodplain of a major or minor river system 

(Hodges, 1998; Kellison and others, 1998). On major 

river systems, sediment deposition causes a pattern of 

higher sites (ridges, fronts, natural levees) nearer to 

present or historic river channels, with lower lying sites 

farther away (flats). Inactive older channels (sloughs) 

and depressions are the wettest sites. Each of these 

“topographic sites” has the potential of being managed 

as a different compartment. Minor river bottomlands 

occur within a narrow floodplain, and therefore landform 

patterning is at a much finer scale. Stands in minor river 

bottoms may not differentiate into large enough areas to 

manage as separate compartments.

Each of these differences in topography and hydrology affect the species composition of the individual 

stands. Eight important species groups of bottomland 

hardwood forests are described briefly in table 14.1; 

more detail can be found in Meadows and Stanturf 

(1997); Hodges (1997); Johnson (1981); and Kellison 

and others (1988). The adaptation of species important 

for timber production to specific site conditions can be 

found in Baker and Broadfoot (1979), and the important 

silvical characteristics of most bottomland hardwood 

trees are treated by individual authors in Burns and 

Honkala (1990). Once a site’s potential is understood, it 

is important to compare that to actual stand conditions 

and then to diagnose why there may be a difference.
88Table 14.1. Species groups and expected regeneratio 

Meadows and Stanturf, 1997).

Site Preference

Species Association Major Bottom Minor Bottom Silvicultural System Species Favored

Cottonwood

Black willow

Cypress-water tupelo

Elm-sycamorepecan-sugarberry

Elm-ash-sugarberry

Sweetgum-red oaks

Red oakswhite oaks2-mixed

Overcup oak-bitter pecan 

Front (new land) Seed tree with site preparation

Clearcut 

Bar (new land) Seed tree with site preparation

Clearcut 

Swamp Slough Group selection

Clearcut 

Front, high ridge Group selection or clearcut 

Wide flats Clearcut or group selection 

Ridges High flats Group selection

Clearcut

Shelterwood 

Second bottoms, Terrace Shelterwood or group selection

high ridges

Low flats, sloughs Flats Group selection

Shelterwood 

Eastern cottonwood

Sycamore, sweet pecan, green ash,

boxelder

Black willow

Sugarberry, green ash, baldcypress, American

elm, overcup oak, bitter pecan, Nuttall oak

Baldcypress, water tupelo, sometimes green

ash, overcup oak, bitter pecan

Baldcypress, water tupelo, sometimes green

ash, overcup oak, bitter pecan, or elm and maple

Sweetgum, red oaks1, sycamore, sweet pecan,

sugarberry, green ash

Elm, green ash, sugarberry, Nuttall oak, 

willow oak

Sweetgum, red oaks, green ash

Sweetgum, red oaks, and green ash favored,

with sweetgum favored the most

Red oaks, sweetgum, green ash

Red oaks, white oaks, hickory, green ash, 

sweetgum, American hornbeamOvercup oak, bitter pecan

Overcup oak, bitter pecan, Nuttall oak,

green ash

INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

1 Cherrybark oak, laurel oak, Nuttall oak, pin oak, Shumard oak, water oak, and willow oak.2 Bur oak, Delta post oak, live oak, overcup oak, swamp chestnut oak, white oak, and swamp white oak.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 89

Site Inventory

Ideally, the inventory should quantify the species 

composition, timber volume, and quality of the overstory 

trees. Just as important is the inventory of the seedling 

and sapling component of the stand. This understory 

component, called advance regeneration, has the potential to dominate the stand in time. Quantifying advance 

regeneration helps the silviculturist predict the future 

species composition of the stand and decide whether 

planting of desired species will be necessary. Quantifying existing regeneration is particularly important if the 

management goal is to obtain a large component of oak 

species (or other heavy-seeded species with limited or 

unreliable seed dispersal) in the stand.

Advance regeneration can also alert the silviculturist to possible changes in site hydrology; if the flood 

tolerance of the species making up the overstory and 

understory differ substantially, hydrologic changes probably have occurred. At this point, the silviculturist will 

have to decide whether to work with the new hydrologic 

regime or attempt to restore the former regime. 

Oaks are an important component of bottomland 

hardwood forests, valued for their timber quality, their 

hard mast production for wildlife, and generally for their 

aesthetically pleasing growth habit. As a group, oaks, 

and red oaks in particular, are difficult to perpetuate in 

successive stands on a site. In addition, oaks are the most 

likely species to have been selectively removed in high 

grading. Therefore a key challenge for silviculturists is 

successfully maintaining a viable oak component, which 

can be done by ensuring that adequate oak advance 

regeneration exists before timber removal or by artificial 

regeneration (i.e., planting seedlings or direct seeding 

of acorns). Information on oak regeneration potential 

is critical in most stand rehabilitation efforts. Johnson 

(1980) developed a system for assessing regeneration 

potential for a variety of bottomland hardwoods. Belli 

and others (1999) evaluated Johnson’s system for high 

quality sites in terms of red oaks and green ash, which is 

another valuable timber species. Their method is based 

upon 1/100-acre (0.004 ha) circular plots systematically 

located throughout a stand. Each plot is evaluated for 

the number of red oak or green ash seedlings in three 

height classes: less than 1 ft (30 cm), 1 to 3 ft (30-90 

cm), and greater than 3 ft (90 cm) tall. In addition, points 

are given for trees with high potential for producing 

acceptable stump sprouts (red oak or green ash trees 1 

to 5 inch [2.5-12.7 cm] dbh). Each plot can be evaluated 

for the probability that it will have at least one seedling 

in a free-to-grow position after three growing seasons. 

From this information, one can determine the number 

and distribution of “stocked” plots, an indication of the 

future stocking of the stand.

Identifying Cause of Site Degradation

The cause of site or stand degradation should be identified. Stand degradation from high grading can often be 

remedied through vegetation manipulation alone. Alteration of the site by changed hydroperiod, on the other 

hand, poses broader questions. Can the hydroperiod be 

restored or the effects of alteration somehow mitigated? 

Should the rehabilitation effort target a different vegetation assemblage more adapted to the present hydroperiod 

and site conditions? Hydroperiod alterations caused by 

flood control projects, dams, or highway construction 

tend to be irrevocable, at least in the short-term. Flooding caused by beaver dams, however, can be reduced by 

removing the dam, but ongoing management of beaver 

population levels will be required to avoid recurring 

problems. Management of green-tree reservoirs is often 

politicized, and management of water levels to protect 

the vigor and survival of the hardwood stand in many 

instances conflicts with public perception of how to 

optimize waterfowl habitat. The guiding principle should 

be to rehabilitate or restore in accordance with existing 

hydroperiod, unless alteration is feasible, affordable, and 

within the control of the silviculturist.

Clarifying Objectives

Appropriate silvicultural practices can be designed for 

any objective. Most common objectives include timber, 

wildlife habitat for game species, or aesthetics. Increasingly other objectives are considered, including carbon 

sequestration, biological diversity, nongame mammals 

and birds, endangered animals and plants, protection 

of water quality and aquatic resources, and recreation. 

Different outputs may be sought for each objective. The 

timber management objective, for example, may be for 

sawlogs and veneer logs, or for pulpwood. Appropriate 

timber management, in particular rotation length, will 

vary according to the desired product size. Appropriate management techniques for wildlife will also vary 

for different species. Even Neotropical migratory birds 

have different habitat requirements, from mature closed 

forests to early successional seres. Choosing the appropriate silvicultural techniques presents a challenge 

for those individuals managing for apparently incompatible objectives. Slight modifications in technique may 

have negligible impacts on outcomes or outputs for one 

objective but major effects on another objective. Clarity 

of objectives, combined with an adequate understanding of feasible goals developed from information on 

current conditions, allows the silviculturist to choose a 

silvicultural system that will maximize satisfaction of 
90 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

multiple objectives; however, no single objective is usually optimized when multiple objectives are undertaken. 

Nevertheless, the chosen system may be adjusted to 

minimize impacts on other ecosystem functions.

The most developed basis for specifying a silvicultural system to meet an objective is for timber production. To the extent that we know the habitat requirements 

for a wildlife species, we can prescribe an appropriate 

silvicultural system that will provide suitable habitat. All 

species of bottomland hardwoods provide some benefit 

to wildlife (table 14.2), but we lack the knowledge to 

specify optimal habitat conditions for many species. 

Nevertheless, most objectives can be tied to some combination of vegetation species composition and stand 

structure, which can be manipulated by silvicultural 

techniques.

Choosing the Silvicultural System

Silvicultural systems in southern bottomland hardwoods integrate regeneration and intermediate treatments in an orderly process for managing stand development (Meadows and Stanturf, 1997). Techniques can 

be designed for manipulating species composition and 

stand structure to meet any management objective. Species favored under any silvicultural system can support 

several objectives. Although the greatest emphasis is 

usually placed on maintaining an oak component, forests 

can be managed without oaks and still yield multiple 

benefits. Silvicultural systems are commonly divided 

into even-aged and uneven-aged management, with the 

regeneration method used defining the system. Evenaged regeneration methods include clearcut, seed-tree, 

and shelterwood. Uneven-aged methods include singletree and group selection (Meadows and Stanturf, 1997). 

In practice, there are many variations of these practices 

with some overlap and hybridization. A general guide 

to the types of regeneration expected under different 

silvicultural systems applied to important bottomland 

hardwood associations is given in table 14.1.

Management Versus Regeneration

The silviculturist must initially decide whether the degraded stand has the potential to attain the future desired 

condition through judicious manipulation, or whether 

the stand is so lacking in vigor, stocking, or acceptable 

species that the only alternative is to regenerate. Manuel 

and others (1993) developed a model to help make this 

decision. Their model is based on expert judgement and 

is constrained to consider only clearcutting for regeneration. It has been calibrated for a limited set of timber 

management objectives, but the approach is valid for any 

management objective. Each tree in a sample from the 

stand is evaluated for its contribution to future stocking, 

based on species, size (dbh), crown class, merchantable 

height, butt log grade, and vigor. This approach can be 

extended to include other management objectives and 

additional regeneration techniques.

Is Oak An Objective?

If maintaining oak in the stand is necessary to meet 

objectives, extra attention to regeneration potential is 

needed and extraordinary steps may be necessary. Clatterbuck and Meadows (1993) summarized the complexity of attempting to regenerate oaks in bottomland 

hardwood forests. Although no blanket prescription can 

account for all the factors which impact oak regeneration 

potential, their generalized prescription offers the best 

approach present knowledge can provide (table 14.3).

A regeneration evaluation is necessary at the outset. A 

modified system such as that of Belli and others (1999), 

where points are assigned based on species and size 

of advance regeneration can be used. For example, if a 

regeneration plot has at least 20 points from oak advance 

reproduction or stump sprouting potential, the probability of obtaining at least one free-to-grow oak stem 

at age three is 83% or more. If most of the regeneration 

plots in a stand meet this criterion, the regenerated stand 

has a high probability of oak dominance at maturity. We 

recommend that 80% of the plots in the entire stand meet 

this level of oak stocking. This is a judgement, however, 

and should be adjusted depending upon site conditions 

and landowner objectives. For example, if most of the 

points come from large seedlings (greater than 1 m or 3 

ft tall), a lower probability level may be justified. On the 

other hand, sites prone to growing season flooding may 

require a more stringent criterion.

When the prospects for oak regeneration are good, 

the stand should be harvested while trees are dormant to 

maximize stump sprouting. All residual stems 2 inches 

dbh and larger should be felled to create the proper light 

environment for the oak regeneration and to minimize 

competition from other species. Retaining some stems 

in a clearcut (depending on the purpose of these residual 

trees, this may be called a deferment cut, clearcut with 

residuals, or an irregular shelterwood) may be necessary 

to meet wildlife or aesthetic objectives.

A follow-up examination to determine regeneration 

stocking at age three is needed to guide future management. Experience has shown that as few as 150 free-togrow oaks per acre (370 per ha) at age three will result in 

an oak dominated stand.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 91

Table 14.2. S 

LA = leaf gall aphids; BU = buds; IB = inner bark; BA = bark.

Species Deer Turkey Squirrel Waterfowl Quail Songbirds Raccoon Beaver Other

Ash, green FO S S S1

Ash, pumpkin S S1

Ash, white FO S S S1

Birch, river FO S S1

Buckthorn bumelia FR

Buttonbush FO S FO

Cottonwood, eastern FO LA

Cypress, bald S1

(baldcypress)

Dogwood, swamp FO FR FR FR FR FR2, FO3

Elm, American FR

Elm, cedar FR

Elm, water FR

Elm, winged FR

Blackgum FO,FR FR FR FR FR1,2

Sweetgum S, BU S S IB S1

Hawthorn FR FR FR FR FR FR1

Pecan, sweet FR FR FR

Hickory, water FR FR FR1

Holly, American FO FR FR FR

Holly, deciduous FO FR FR FR FR1

Hornbeam, American FR FR

Locust, black6 FR FR FR FO3, FR1,3

Locust, honey6 FO S S

Locust, water FR FR FR3

Boxelder FO S S1

Maple, red FO S, BU S S1

Mulberry, red FO FR FR FR FR FR1 , BA3

Oak, cherrybark FO,FR FR FR FR FR FR1

Oak, Delta post FR FR FR FR FR1

Oak, Nuttall FO,FR FR FR FR FR1

Oak, overcup FR FR FR1

Oak, Shumard FO,FR FR FR FR FR1

Oak, swamp chestnut FR,FO FR FR1

Oak, swamp white FR FR FR FR FR FR1

Oak, water FO,FR FR FR FR FR FR1

Oak, white FR,FO FR FR FR FR1

Oak, willow FO,FR FR FR FR FR FR1

Pawpaw FR FR2

Persimmon, common FO,FR FR FR FR FR FR1,2,4

Privet, swamp FR FR FR1

Sassafras FO FR FR FR FR FR FR5

Sugarberry FO FR FR FR1

Sycamore, American S

Tupelo, water6 FO,FR FR FR FR FR

Willow, black 

IB 1

 Small mammals

2 Opossum

3

 Rabbit

4

 Skunk and fox

5

 Black bear

6

 Flowers furnish nectar for honey bees
92 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Table 14.3. Decision key for choosing a regeneration procedure for 

bottomland oaks (Clatterbuck and Meadows, 1993; Belli and others, 

1999)

 Go to

1. Regeneration Evaluation 

a. 20 points or more, average of all plots; 2

oak prospects good 

b. Less than 20 points, oak prospects poor 6

2. Treat and harvest during dormant season; 3

control residual stems prior to next growing season 

3. Evaluate at age 3

a. More than 150 free-to-grow oaks per acre 4

b. Less than 150 free-to-grow oaks per acre 5

4. Leave alone or clean, weed, or thin if needed

5. Oak stocking is less than adequate

a. Accept

b. Convert to plantation

6. Promote oak advance reproduction and evaluate again

a. Increase light to forest floor (understory removal and/or 1

overstory reduction, shelterwood) 

b. Shelterwood with understory removal and supplemental 1

planting of oak seedlings 

c. Convert to plantation

If oak regeneration is inadequate in the current 

stand (table 14.3), the challenge is to create the proper 

light conditions on the forest floor to promote seedling 

growth. Reducing the overstory and removing the understory through a shelterwood treatment can be successful if small oak seedlings are already present. It may 

even be possible to time the shelterwood treatment (see 

shelterwood section, this chapter) with a good mast year; 

otherwise underplanting oak seedlings before the final 

overstory removal can augment the shelterwood. This 

may require releasing the oak seedlings from competition by using herbicides. There are no guidelines on how 

to accomplish this successfully. Another approach is to 

supplement a clearcut by planting or direct seeding of 

oak but again, no guidelines are available.

Managing the Existing Stand

In a stand with trees of commercial value, a logical 

sequence of management actions would be (1) initial intermediate management, consisting of an “improvement 

cut” to favor a desirable species composition and to 

increase the quality and value of the stand; (2) advanced 

intermediate management, where thinning is used mostly 

to favor growth on residual trees but also to improve 

stand value; and (3) regeneration cutting. Intermediate stand management in most bottomland hardwood 

situations is a combination of improvement cutting and 

thinning. The relative emphasis changes with the degree 

of stand management (initial versus advanced). 

In the short term, the silviculturist will be most 

concerned with improvement cutting because thinning 

and regeneration cuts may not be needed for 10 or more 

years. In the case of extremely degraded stands with 

inadequate advance regeneration, however, it may be 

necessary to bypass the first two management steps and 

go straight to a regeneration cut. A general guideline 

used by some foresters to decide whether to proceed 

straight to a regeneration cut is shown in figure 14.2. 

If the average basal area per acre for a stand of a given 

age is below the line, then the stand is promptly cut. For 

most stands older than 40 years, basal areas below 60 ft2

per acre indicate the need to regenerate. More precise 

guidance is available in stand density diagrams that take 

into account average stem size and age.

Timber Stand Improvement

By definition, degraded stands have a history of high 

grading, liquidation cuts, fire, and other destructive 

influences that have resulted in a high proportion of trees 

that are undesirable as future growing stock. Low-grade, 

overcrowded, damaged, diseased, and cull trees, as well 

as exotic or otherwise undesirable species, may be occupying space and competing for light, water, and nutrients 

that ideally could be supporting more valuable trees. 

Therefore the first stand manipulation is usually a judicious improvement cut designed to “clean up” the forest.

In ideal cases, the stand will be accessible and there 

will be enough timber to interest potential buyers. In 

such a situation, timber stand improvement can be done 

at no cost (or possibly even at a profit) to the landowner. 

Some desirable growing stock may need to be cut to 

make openings for regeneration or to have enough 

timber to interest a buyer. The goal, however, should 

be to cut the over-mature, damaged, or dying trees of 

marketable size and quality. One should not remove a 

large component of desirable growing stock just to make 

80

Harvest

B.A. (ft2/acre)

60

40

20

20 30 40 50 60

Age (years)

Figure 14.2. A generalized guide for regenerating southern 

hardwoods based on basal area (measured in ft2

 per acre) of 

desirable trees and stand age (redrawn from Kellison and others, 

1988).

70
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 93

a sale, as such trees are often growing at a high rate and 

will be much more valuable to the landowner in the 

future.

Landowners unfamiliar with contracting with buyers 

for removal of timber are well advised to consult with 

a professional forester. A properly designed and supervised timber sale should lead to the improvement of the 

forest. Under the wrong conditions, however, a buyer 

may end up removing trees that should remain, damaging remaining trees in felling or skidding of harvested 

trees, creating inordinate amounts of soil disturbance, or 

degrading water quality of adjacent streams (fig. 14.3).

After marketable trees are cut and removed, cull and 

otherwise undesirable trees that remain should be killed 

to enlarge or clear openings for regeneration. Injection 

is the usual method of killing unwanted trees. Generally, 

injection just after full leaf-out in the spring gives good 

results, but satisfactory results have also been obtained 

with applications in other seasons. Girdling is another 

method that is occasionally used to kill unwanted trees, 

but this is often unsuccessful when used alone because 

trees can heal over incomplete wounds and girdled trees 

may sprout.

It should be kept in mind, of course, that a “clean” 

forest from a strictly timber management perspective 

may not be the goal of the silviculturist. Mature cane 

breaks (fig. 14.4) will not bring any financial return to 

the landowner but they provide habitat for numerous 

wildlife species (including swamp rabbits and several 

species of rare warblers). Leaving some large, poorly 

formed trees and snags may be beneficial to several species of wildlife or may meet other objectives (fig. 14.5). 

As with other silvicultural techniques, timber stand 

improvement should be viewed as a flexible tool that can 

accomplish a variety of objectives.

Thinning

Once timber stand improvement has produced a stand 

consisting of good quality trees at desirable spacing, 

growth rates of the remaining “leave” trees should 

increase. Eventually, the leave trees will fully occupy 

the space opened up by the removal of undesired trees 

and begin to compete intensely with each other. Thinning at this point allows for the use of trees that would 

otherwise die and allows for distribution of growth over 

fewer, larger trees. Thinning has the additional advantages of increasing mast production in the overstory 

and allowing more light to reach the forest floor. This 

stimulates understory and midstory plant growth, which 

increases vertical structure important to some Neotropical migratory birds.

Thinning has not been widely practiced in southern 

bottomland hardwood stands, especially in stands with 

Figure 14.3. Example of damage caused by poor logging practices.
94 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Figure 14.4. Mature cane brakes provide habitat for numerous wildlife species.

only pulpwood or smaller sized trees (i.e., less than 

about 25-30 cm [10-12 inches] dbh). As markets develop 

for pulpwood and firewood, thinning is becoming more 

common. The first commercial thinning typically occurs 

when trees reach small sawtimber size, about 35 cm 

(14 inches) dbh. A second thinning may be conducted 

when trees reach 50-56 cm (20-22 inches) dbh. Earlier 

thinning (precommercial) is practical from an economic 

standpoint if one of the major goals of management is 

production of sawtimber.

Because of inherent growth differences among species, it would be hard to give an average age for the first 

thinning. Cottonwood may reach merchantable size by 

age 5 to 10 years, whereas it may take green ash 20 to 30 

years to reach pulpwood or small sawtimber size. Findings thus far in natural and planted stands offer some 

guidelines for thinning (Meadows, 1996). Thinning 

should begin early, and larger trees with well-developed 

crowns should be favored. For good diameter growth, 

most species require a minimum live crown to total 

height ratio of 40%. Trees with less crown are usually in 

a subordinate position, so thinning is from below (i.e., 

the trees removed in the thinning are usually partially or 

completely overtopped by other trees).

Frequent light thinnings are better than infrequent 

heavy thinnings. Light thinnings allow fuller use of the 

site and less chance for epicormic branches to develop 

on the leave trees. One disadvantage of frequent thinnings, though, is the greater chance of logging damage 

to the leave trees. As a stand matures, thinning should be 

used to develop advance reproduction of desirable species so that the need for corrective measures at the time 

of regeneration will be less.

Regeneration

Bottomland hardwoods reproduce naturally and prolifically through seedlings established in the understory, 

through sprouts that emerge from stumps or roots of cut 

trees, or through seedlings that start in new openings. 

As long as there are no fundamental changes to the site, 

management of the natural regeneration can generally be 

relied upon to yield the desired forest composition.

As a rule, silviculturists should rely on natural 

regeneration. Artificial regeneration, however, will be 

needed for rehabilitation when none of the natural means 

of reproduction can be counted on to provide adequate 

numbers of desirable species. This situation arises where 

there is inadequate advance regeneration of desirable 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 95

Figure 14.5. Snags left in a clearcut on Scott Paper land near Mobile, Alabama.

species and there are no mature trees of desired species in the overstory or adjacent to the site to provide 

a seed source. In such cases, the silviculturist has two 

main alternatives. First he or she must try to increase 

the component of desirable species by planting before 

(enrichment underplanting) or after a regeneration cut 

(supplemental planting). Second, the silviculturist can 

take the more drastic measure of converting the stand to 

another vegetation type by clearcutting the site, shearing all remaining trees and saplings, and preparing the 

soil to plant seedlings of one or more species (fig. 14.6). 

Generally, this will only be warranted if the site has been 

captured by invasive exotic species such as Chinese tallow, Japanese privet, or melaleuca.

Regeneration Cuts

A landowner may wish to manage a stand as an oldgrowth forest without any human intervention. Over 

time, natural mortality and gap phase regeneration will 

convert the forest to shade tolerant species. Otherwise, 

all stands will eventually reach a stage when it is appropriate to harvest some or all of the large trees. This 

not only allows for an economic return from the stand, 

but also gives the landowner the ability to control the 

future composition of the stand to meet any of a variety 

of management goals. By proper choice and application 

of a regeneration system, the landowner can help ensure 

that the desired type of forest will occur on the site for 

many years to come.

Bottomland hardwoods can be managed as even-aged 

or uneven-aged forests. Silvicultural systems used for 

even-aged management are clearcuts, shelterwood cuts, 

and seed tree cuts. The primary silvicultural system for 

uneven-aged management is single-tree selection. Group 

selection is technically an uneven-aged management 

system, but as practiced in bottomland hardwood forests, 

it should be viewed as a compromise between even- and 

uneven-aged management. All of these systems can be 

used effectively in bottomland hardwood forests. The 

choice of silvicultural system will depend primarily 

on the management goals for the forest, as constrained 

by the initial condition of the stand. Even-aged management, in particular clearcutting, is the most common 

form of management when timber is the primary goal 

or when rehabilitating a high-graded stand. Shelterwood 

and group selection are more commonly used when 

wildlife management is an important goal, when
96 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Figure 14.6. Natural forest site that has been clearcut, sheared, root-raked, and disked.

aesthetics are important, and when adequate advance 

regeneration is not present. Group selection can be 

used for timber production in fully stocked stands, and 

variations on shelterwood can be used especially when 

attempting to regenerate oak.

Clearcuts

Clearcutting involves the cutting and removal of all 

merchantable trees in an area of about 4 ha (10 acres) or 

more. Typically, the residual trees, which are comprised 

of undesirable species or are of poor quality and may interfere with regeneration of desirable trees, are either cut 

down and left in place or killed by injection or girdling. 

The site usually will be left to regenerate naturally, although site preparation, supplemental planting, and other 

measures may be applied to control species composition. 

A clearcut site will go through a jungle-like stage for 

about 10 years before individual stems begin to restore a 

forest-like appearance to the area (fig. 14.7).

Clearcutting is designed to favor the reproduction of 

shade-intolerant species, which also tend to be the more 

economically valuable species. While often criticized as 

a destructive and unsightly form of forest management, 

clearcutting with natural regeneration repeatedly has 

been demonstrated to be effective for regenerating nearly 

every major forest type found on bottomland hardwood 

sites in the Southeast. The aesthetic impacts and risk of 

erosion associated with clearcutting are real but are less 

in relatively flat bottomland settings as compared to 

steep mountainsides.

As a general rule, clearcutting with natural regeneration will tend to favor shade-intolerant, light-seeded 

species that are easily transported by wind or water (see 

table 4.1). Species that regenerate from coppice such 

as the oaks must be present prior to cutting as large 

seedlings or small trees. Conversely, seedlings of more 

shade-tolerant species such as hickories, elms, ashes, 

ironwood, and some oaks tend to become established in 

small openings. 

To the silviculturist, it will be appropriate to employ 

clearcutting as the first step in rehabilitating a stand 

that is so completely degraded that there is very little 

advance regeneration of desirable species. In such 

cases, there is little point in attempting to manipulate 

the stand by timber stand improvement and thinning. 

Essentially starting over by clearcutting with natural 

regeneration and possibly some planting, or totally by 

artificial regeneration, will be the most efficient means 

of rehabilitation.

Shelterwood Cutting

The goal of shelterwood cutting is the same as 

clearcutting—to favor species that require high light levels to regenerate. With a shelterwood cut, however, the 

overstory is harvested in at least two stages. In the first 

stage, a large portion of the existing overstory (perhaps 

about 50%) is harvested. Trees that are left are generally 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 97

Figure 14.7. Five to ten-year-old regenerating clearcut.

of good quality and expected to be good seed producers (fig. 14.8). After about 5-8 years, either all or about 

half of the remaining overstory trees are removed. In the 

latter case, the remaining trees are generally harvested 

in a third cut after another 5-8 years. Shelterwood may 

be combined with the underplanting of oaks before final 

overstory removal. Usually midstory removal is necessary in bottomland hardwoods to gain the full benefits of 

the shelterwood system.

The main purpose of the shelterwood system is to 

favor regeneration of species with limited seed dispersal 

and those that regenerate best in partial shade. Oaks, for 

example, are believed to respond well to shelterwood 

regeneration when there are sufficient individuals in 

the existing overstory. The shelterwood system is also 

a good alternative to clearcutting when aesthetics are 

important and complete overstory removal in one cut is 

not an option.

Seed Tree System

The purpose of the seed tree system is to provide a 

seed source after a complete overstory removal. Theoretically, heavy-seeded species such as oaks can be 

regenerated by this method, but in reality this method 

regenerates light-seeded species in bottomland hardwoods.

Approximately 25 per ha (10 per acre) are usually 

retained after the first cut, so the area will resemble a 

clearcut with just a few, large scattered trees remaining. In appearance, this is the same as a deferment cut 

for aesthetics or leaving potential den trees for wildlife. 

What separates these variants on even-aged management 

is the purpose for leaving residual trees.

As a regeneration method, seed tree cuts are more 

effective for light seeded species such as sweetgum. 

When coupled with intensive site scarification, it is the 

recommended method to naturally regenerate Eastern 

cottonwood and black willow. Experience suggests 

that bottomland hardwood stands dominated by oaks 

respond to a seed tree cut as if they were clearcut (i.e., 

by advance regeneration, by sprouts, and by germination 

of existing seeds or seeds brought in by wind, water, or 

animals). Furthermore, the remaining trees often become 

degraded by epicormic branching, lightning strikes, and 

wind damage, and therefore lose much of their economic 

value.

Single-Tree Selection

This system involves the selective removal of individual mature trees at regular intervals. It may also be 

accompanied by deadening (i.e., injection, girdling) or 
98 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Figure 14.8. Shelterwood cut.

removal of unmerchantable trees. Because single-tree 

selection opens relatively small holes in the canopy, it 

tends to favor regeneration of species that are shade tolerant. Repeated application of single-tree selection in a 

stand will shift species composition to the less valuable, 

more shade-tolerant sugarberry, boxelder, elms, maples, 

and hickories (table 14.1).

Properly practiced, this method can be very effective for maintaining a relatively dense uneven-aged 

forest over a large area. It can, however, result in the 

degradation of the forest. In fact, many of the degraded 

bottomland hardwood forests that are the subject of this 

chapter were created by what might be considered a very 

poor form of single-tree selection. Too often, only the 

best trees were selected for harvest. If this cycle is repeated, then over time the stand will become dominated 

by a mix of damaged, diseased, and poorly formed trees 

and trees of undesirable species. This form of management is known as high-grading.

Single-tree selection is not generally viewed as 

economically feasible because it leaves species which 

are generally less valuable and also because it requires 

frequent small harvests, thereby sacrificing the economy 

of scale of larger harvests. Frequent entry into the stand 

with heavy logging equipment also poses the risk of 

damage to the remaining trees and the introduction of 

diseases. Such stresses may predispose a stand to insect 

outbreaks.

Group Selection

The goal of group selection is to develop a patchy 

environment made up of numerous very small evenaged groups. This is accomplished by making numerous 

scattered large openings (small patch clearcuts) ranging 

in size from 1 to several acres (fig. 14.9). The distinction in opening size between group selection and patch 

clearcut is a blurry one. A 10-acre cut can be viewed as a 

very large group selection or a small clearcut, depending 

on one’s perspective. The real difference is whether the 

resultant stand will be managed as an uneven-aged stand 

or several even-aged stands.

The group selection system has several advantages. 

By creating sufficiently large openings, it favors the 

more economically valuable shade-intolerant species 

such as oaks. In addition, by creating a patchy environment of several different age classes, it favors numerous species of wildlife. As the openings are small and 

scattered, group selection is more aesthetically pleasing 
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 99

Figure 14.9. Aerial photo of several group selection cuts.

than larger clearcuts. Although group selection may not 

be desirable for maximizing income from timber production, it has become widely used on wildlife refuges 

and other areas where wildlife management is a primary 

goal. Disadvantages include the necessity of more 

entries into a stand and higher risk of logging damage 

to residual trees, higher incidence of disease from the 

logging damage, and the need for more demanding 

management in terms of expertise, inventory, and record 

keeping.

Bringing Back the Bush

The preceding sections have covered traditional 

silvicultural approaches to rehabilitating degraded 

forests. These are the most appropriate techniques for 

rehabilitating relatively large tracts and those tracts 

where timber harvests are feasible. In some situations, 

especially on very small tracts and in urban settings 

where exotic vegetation is a primary concern, a smaller 

scale but more labor-intensive approach might be more 

acceptable.

An interesting approach to this type of rehabilitation 

has developed in Australia under the catchphrase 

“bringing back the bush” (Bradley, 1988). This approach was developed to restore small areas of Australian bush in urban settings that have been overrun by 

exotic plants.

The Bradley method is based on the gradual weeding 

out of the exotics by working through the tract in small 

increments. Landowners and managers are advised to 

follow three principles that guide this approach: (1) 

work from areas of native plants towards weed-infested 

areas, (2) make minimal disturbance, and (3) let native 

plant regeneration dictate the rate of weed removal. 

From the third principle, it should be clear that this is a 

slow approach to rehabilitation. It also requires a fairly 

high degree of knowledge about the growth habits and 

ecology of plant species and is very labor intensive.

The best way to apply this approach may be to work 

with knowledgeable volunteers to rehabilitate a small 

tract of forest in or near an urban area. The most valuable aspect of this approach may be as a tool for promoting environmental awareness and education. 

Selected References

Baker, J.B., and Broadfoot, W.M., 1979, Site evaluation 

for commercially important southern hardwoods: 

New Orleans, La., U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, 

General Technical Report SO-26.

Beattie, C.T., and Levine, L., 1983, Working with your 

woodland: A landowner’s guide: Hanover and London, University Press of New England, 310 p.

Belli, K.L., Hart, C.P., Hodges, J.D., and Stanturf, J.A., 

1999, Assessment of the regeneration potential of 

red oaks and ash on minor-bottoms of Mississippi: 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, v. 23, no. 3, p. 

133-138.

Burns, R.M., and Honkala, B.H., 1990, Silvics of North 

America, v. 2, hardwoods: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Agricultural Handbook 654, 877 p.

Bradley, L., 1988, Bringing back the bush: the Bradley 

method of bush regeneration: Chicago, Landsowne 

Press, 111 p.

Clatterbuck, W.K., and Meadows, J.S., 1993, Regenerating oaks in the bottomlands, in Loftis, D.L., 

and McGee, C.E., eds., Oak regeneration: serious 

problems, practical recommendations: Asheville, 

N.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, General 

Technical Report SE-84, p. 184-195.

Hodges, J.D., 1997, Development and ecology of bottomland hardwood sites: Forest Ecology and Management, v. 90, p. 117-126.

Hodges, J.D., 1998, Minor alluvial floodplains, in Messina, M.G., and Conner, W.H., Southern forest wetlands, ecology and management: Boca Raton, Fla., 

Lewis Publishers, p. 325-341.

Johnson, R.L., 1980, New ideas about regeneration of 

hardwoods, in Proceedings of Hardwood Committee’s Symposium on Oak Regeneration: Atlanta, Ga., 

Southeastern Lumber Manufacturing Association, p. 

17-19.

Johnson, R.L., 1981, Wetland silvicultural systems, in

Jackson, B.D., and Chambers, J.L., eds., Timber
100 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

Harvesting In Wetlands: 30th Annual Forestry Symposium: Baton Rouge, La., Louisiana State University, Division of Continuing Education, p. 63-79.

Kellison, R.C., Martin, I.P., Hansen, G.D., and Lea, R., 

1988, Regenerating and managing natural stands of 

bottomland hardwoods: Washington, D.C, American 

Pulpwood Association, APA 88-A-6, 26 p.

Kellison, R.C., Young, M.J., Braham, R.R., and Jones, 

E.J., 1998, Major alluvial floodplains, in Messina, 

M.G., and Conner, W.H., Southern forest wetlands, 

ecology and management: Boca Raton, Fla., Lewis 

Publishers, p. 291-323.

Kennedy, H.E., Jr., and Johnson, R.L., 1984, Silvicultural alternatives in bottomland hardwoods and 

their impact on stand quality, in Guldin, R.W., ed., 

Proceedings of the 14th Annual Southern Forest 

Economics Workshop, March 13-15, 1984, Memphis, 

Tenn., p. 6-18.

Manuel, T.M., Belli, K.L., Hodges, J.D., and Johnson, 

R.L., 1993, A decision-making model to manage or 

regenerate southern bottomland hardwood stands: 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, v. 17, no. 2, p. 

75-79.

McGee, C.E., 1986, The first decision: to rehabilitate 

or to regenerate immature low-quality hardwoods, 

in Smith, H.C., and Eye, M.C., eds., Proceedings: 

Guidelines for Managing Immature Appalachian 

Hardwood Stands: Morgantown, W.Va., West Virginia 

Books, p. 134-139.

McKevlin, M.R., 1992, Guide to regeneration of bottomland hardwoods: Asheville, N.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern 

Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report 

SE-76, 35p. 

Meadows, J.S., 1996, Thinning guidelines for southern bottomland hardwood forests, in Flynn, K.M., 

ed., Proceedings of the Southern Forested Wetlands 

Ecology and Management Conference, March 25-27, 

1996, Clemson, S.C.: Clemson, S.C., Consortium for 

Research on Southern Forested Wetlands, Clemson 

University, p. 98-101.

Meadows, J.S., and Stanturf, J.A., 1997, Silvicultural 

systems for southern bottomland hardwood forests: 

Forest Ecology and Management, v. 90, p. 127-140.

Putnam, J.A., Furnival, G.M., and McKnight, J.S., 1960, 

Management and inventory of southern hardwoods: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook No. 181, 

102 p.

Smith, D.M., 1986, The practice of silviculture (8th ed.): 

New York, John Wiley and Sons, 527 p.

Stanturf, J.A., and Schoenholtz, S.H., 1998, Soils and 

landforms, in Messina, M.G., and Conner, W.H., 

Southern forest wetlands, ecology and management: 

Boca Raton, Fla., Lewis Publishers, p. 123-147.

Acknowledgments

This guide is based on the knowledge and experience 

built over the years by many researchers, field foresters, 

wildlife managers, and wetland restoration professionals. 

In particular, we have drawn heavily on the research of 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service’s 

Southern Forest Experiment Station, especially the work 

of James Baker, Frank Bonner, Walter Broadfoot, Bob 

Johnson, Harvey Kennedy, and Roger Krinard. Several 

practitioners of bottomland hardwood reforestation 

provided especially valuable assistance, including Tim 

Wilkins and Jon Wessman of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Larry Moore of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and Larry Savage and Kenny 

Ribbeck of the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and 

Fisheries. Other people who provided assistance include 

Judy Buys, Kelia Fontenot, DeMarion McKinney, and 

John McCoy.

Frank Bonner, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; Ronnie Haynes, David Smith, Bob Strader, 

and Larry Threet, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Larry 

Savage, Kenny Ribbeck, and Jimmy Anthony, Louisiana 

State Department of Wildlife and Fisheries; Jim Chambers, Louisiana State University; and Wylie Barrow, 

Lee Foote, and Sammy King, U.S. Geological Survey, 

reviewed drafts of all or part of this manuscript and provided valuable comments and suggestions. Except where 

noted, all photos were provided by the authors.

Glossary

Advance regeneration - Advance growth seedlings or 

saplings that develop and are present in the understory. 

Adventive plants - Nonnative plants that have been introduced to an area but have not become permanently 

established.

Basal area - The cross-sectional area of a stand of trees 

measured at breast height (140 cm or about 4 ft 6 

inches aboveground). The area is expressed in square 

meters per hectare (ft per acre) and is a measure of 

stocking density.

Broad-leaved - Characterizing plants that have leaves 

that are broad and flat rather than needle-shaped. 

Clustering - With respect to the planting of seed or seedlings, clustering refers to planting in groups within 

close proximity of each other so that cross-fertilization within species can occur with some level of 

certainty.
A GUIDE TO BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD RESTORATION 101

DBH (diameter at breast height) - The diameter of a 

standing tree measured 140 cm (4.5 ft) from the 

ground. 

Deciduous - Pertaining to perennial plants that lose their 

leaves part of the year, that is, hardwood trees such as 

oak, hickory, and maple.

Epicormic branching - The development of small 

branches along the bole, or trunk, of a tree. This 

often develops in response to thinning operations 

where substantially greater sunlight penetrates to the 

tree stems.

Even-aged management - Silvicultural system in which 

the individual trees originate at about the same time 

and are removed in one or more harvest cuts, after 

which a new stand is established. 

Exotic species - Species that are not native to an area and 

have become naturalized. 

Gap phase regeneration - Progressive changes in community structure, composition, and diversity resulting 

from the canopy gap created by the death of individual trees (as a result of events such as old age, wind, 

lightning strikes, insect attacks, etc.) being filled by 

young individuals of the same or other species.

Green manure - Refers to herbaceous plants that are 

plowed under while still green to add large quantities 

of organic matter to the soil, improving soil structure. 

Green-tree reservoir - Any impoundment created with 

the intention of flooding a forested area for a portion 

of the year, yet retaining the forest cover. Green-tree 

reservoirs are usually flooded during a portion of the 

fall and winter to provide waterfowl habitat. Quite often, however, the tree species desirable for waterfowl 

habitat are gradually killed by the repeated flooding.

Hard mast-producing - Species such as oaks, pecans, or 

hickories that produce a large nut (acorn) that in turn 

provide food for a variety of wildlife such as deer, 

turkey, hogs, and some waterfowl (see heavy-seeded 

species).

Heavy-seeded species - Species such as oaks, pecans, 

or hickories that have heavier seeds. These species 

are generally believed to provide the greatest overall 

value to wildlife such as deer, turkey, squirrel, and 

waterfowl.

Herbaceous - Soft and green vegetation which dies back 

to the ground each year, generally containing little 

woody tissue.

High grading - Forest harvesting where only the most 

commercially valuable trees are cut. This method of 

harvest usually results in a forest dominated by undesirable or weedy tree species. 

Hydric - Characterized by or requiring an abundance of 

moisture. 

Hydrologic regime - The pattern of water level dynamics, generally referring to the timing, frequency, 

depth, and duration of aboveground flooding, but 

hydrologic regime also refers to belowground water 

level fluctuations.

Hydroperiod - Generally synonymous with hydrologic 

regime, but hydroperiod is often considered to refer to 

aboveground flooding only. 

Improvement cutting - A cutting made in a stand past 

the sapling stage primarily to improve composition 

and quality by removing less desirable trees of any 

species. 

Initial management - The first management action being 

performed as part of a long-term multiphase management plan for a given forest stand.

Invader - Any species that disseminates to and becomes 

established on a site without human intervention can 

be considered an invader. Invading seedlings can 

be either desirable or undesirable. The term invader 

does not refer only to exotic species.

Light-seeded species - Species such as ash, elm, sweetgum, and sycamore that have light weight seeds 

that can be easily dispersed by wind or water. Many 

of these seeds, however, can also be dispersed by 

animals.

Mesic - Characterized by intermediate moisture conditions that are neither excessively wet nor dry.

Nonpoint source pollution - Pollution that is not from 

a single, well-defined site such as a factory. Runoff 

from agricultural fields is generally considered nonpoint source.

Palustrine system - A classification by Cowardin and 

others, 1979, that includes all nontidal wetlands 

dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, 

emergent mosses or lichens, and all such wetlands 

that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to oceanderived salts is below 0.5 ppt.

Provenance - The original region in which an individual 

of any plant or animal species was found. Provenance 

tests take individuals of any selected species from 

several regions and grow them in a common area 
102 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY REPORT USGS/BRD–2000-0011

(plantation) to search for maximum growth or productivity for that species.

Regeneration - The natural or artificial replacement of 

old trees with new tree growth.

Self-incompatible species- Plant species for which one 

flower on an individual cannot fertilize another flower 

on the same individual.

Sere - Collectively, all temporary plant communities in a 

chronosequence of change, as different species invade 

and later dominate or are competitively excluded 

from a given local area.

Shelterwood cut - A cut in which the mature stand is 

generally removed in a series of two or more cuts, the 

last of which is when the new even-aged stand is well 

developed.

Silviculture - The science and art of regenerating and 

managing a forest to meet specific objectives.

Soil horizon - A distinct layer of soil parallel to the 

surface that has definitive physical, chemical, and 

hydrologic characteristics.

Stand - A contiguous group of trees sufficiently uniform 

in age class distribution, composition, and structure, 

and growing on a site of sufficiently uniform quality 

to be a distinguishable unit. 

Stocking - An indication of growing-space occupancy 

relative to a preestablished standard. 

Thinning - Intermediate cuttings aimed primarily at 

controlling growth of timber stands by adjusting stand 

density.

Tiling - The placement of drain tiles below the ground to 

eliminate excess flooding or soil saturation.

Understory - Any plants growing under the canopy 

formed by other plants, particularly herbaceous and 

shrub vegetation under a brushwood or tree canopy.

Uneven-aged management - Silvicultural system in 

which individual trees originate at different times and 

result in a forest with trees of various ages and sizes. 

Harvest cuts are often on an individual-tree selection 

basis.

Selected References 

Burns, R.M., and Honkala, B.H., 1990, Silvics of North 

America, v. 2, hardwoods: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook 654.

Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, 

E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and deepwater 

habitats: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological 

Services Program FWS/OBS-79/31. 103 pp.

Stokes, B.J., Ashmore, C., Rawlins, C.L., and Sirois, 

D.L., 1989, Glossary of terms used in timber harvesting and forest engineering: New Orleans, La., 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report SO-73, 33 pp.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1995, 

Final environmental impact statement for the management of red-cockaded woodpecker and its habitat 

on national forests in the southern region: Washington 

D.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Region.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1996, 

Final environmental impact statement (FEIS) for the 

revised land and resource management plan for national forests and grasslands in Texas: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Region.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1997, 

Draft environmental impact statement: draft revised 

land and resource management plan for Kisatchie National Forest: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southern Region.
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

!PPENDIX!

3OCIETYOF!MERICAN&ORESTERS

#OVER4YPE$ESCRIPTIONS

4HECOVERTYPEDESCRIPTIONSLISTEDINTHISMANUALFORBOTTOMLANDHARDWOODSAREFROM3OCIETYOF!MERICAN&OREST


ERS3!&	PUBLICATIONh&OREST#OVER4YPESOFTHE5NITED3TATESAND#ANADAvREPRINTEDVERBATIMWITHPERMISSION

FROM%YRE.UMBERSLISTEDBELOWTHECOVERTYPESREFERTOTHECLASSIlCATIONSYSTEMUSEDBYTHE3!&&ORA

MORECOMPLETELISTOFFORESTCOVERTYPESORFORSCIENTIlCNAMESOFTHECOMMONNAMESUSEDINTHECOVERTYPEDESCRIP


TIONSPLEASESEE%YRE

2IVER"IRCHn3YCAMORE



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION 2IVERBIRCHANDSYCA


MORECOMMONLYFOUNDALONGRIVERSANDSTREAMSINEAST


ERN.ORTH!MERICAMAYBERECOGNIZEDASATYPEWHEN

OCCURRINGTOGETHERASDOMINANTSINmOODPLAINORBOT


TOMLANDFORESTS 2IVERBIRCHUSUALLYHASTHEGREATERDEN


SITYOFSTEMSBUTSYCAMOREMAYBEMORECONSPICUOUS

BECAUSEOFITSGENERALLYGREATERSIZEANDMANYSTEM

SPROUTS&OWELLS	4HETYPEISOFMINORIMPORTANCE

INITSCONTRIBUTIONTOFORESTCOVEREXCEPTINRELATIVELYNAR


ROWBANDSOFABOUTMFT	ONFREQUENTLYmOODED

MOISTALLUVIALSOILS

!SSOCIATEDTREESPECIESMAYINCLUDEBLACKWILLOWAT

THEEDGEOFTHERIVERANDFARTHERBACKOTHERmOOD
TOLER


ANTSPECIESSUCHASSWEETGUMCOTTONWOODREDMAPLE

SILVERMAPLEBOXELDERHACKBERRY!MERICANELMSLIP


PERYELMWALNUTANDBUTTERNUT-ESOPHYTICSPECIES

SUCHASSUGARMAPLEYELLOW
POPLARWHITEOAKOVERCUP

OAKLOBLOLLYPINEAND6IRGINIAPINEFROMADJACENTTER


RACESANDUPLANDSMAYAPPEARINTHECOMMUNITY

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEOCCURSSPORADI


CALLYWHERETHERANGESOFTHETWOSPECIESOVERLAP

'ENERALLYTHISISAREGIONTHATEXTENDSFROMNORTHEASTERN

&LORIDAWESTTOEASTERN4EXASNORTHTOSOUTHERN)LLINOIS

EASTTHROUGHSOUTHERN/HIOANDTHENNORTHEASTINTOPARTS

OFSOUTHERN.EW%NGLAND,ITTLE	)NCOMBINATION

WITHOTHERBOTTOMLANDTYPESRIVERBIRCH
SYCAMOREOCCURS

PRIMARILYALONGRIVERSANDSTREAMSANDOCCASIONALLYON

WETLAKEMARGINS4HETYPEHASBEENREPORTEDATANEL


EVATIONOFMFT	INTHESOUTHERN!PPALACHIAN

-OUNTAINS!LLEN2"ATESONPERSONALCOMMUNI


CATION	ANDMAYOCCURASHIGHASMFT	

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HEPOSITIONOFTHETYPEAD


JACENTTORIVERSANDSTREAMSSUGGESTSTHATITAPPEARSEARLY

INTHEESTABLISHMENTOFmOODPLAINVEGETATIONANDFOLLOWS

PIONEERSPECIESSUCHASBLACKWILLOW(OWEVEREITHER

ORBOTHSPECIESMAYOCCURINTHEABSENCEOFAWILLOW

BORDER7ISTENDAHL	3EEDLINGESTABLISHMENTAND

SURVIVALAREMORECLOSELYASSOCIATEDWITHmOODINGPAT


TERNSANDWITHTHEABSENCEOFCOMPETITIONFORLIGHTFROM

OTHERBOTTOMLANDANDmOODPLAINSPECIESTHANWITHARIGID

SUCCESSIONALSEQUENCE !LTHOUGHTOLERANTOFPERIODSOF

SOILSATURATIONBOTHSPECIESGROWBESTINTHEGENERALLY

MOISTBUTPERIODICALLYDRAINEDSANDYALLUVIUMOFNATURAL

LEVEESWHERELITTERACCUMULATIONISSPARSEANDTHEREIS

DIRECTLIGHT

2IVERBIRCHMAYFORMALMOSTPURESTANDSALONG

STREAMSmOODEDBYACIDICWATERWHEREACONSEQUENTIAL

INCREASEINDISSOLVEDALUMINUMISTOXICTOASSOCIATED

SPECIESBUTNOTTORIVERBIRCH#RIBBENAND5NGAR	

4HEOCCURRENCEOFRIVERBIRCHANDSYCAMORETOGETHER

INNUMBERSSUFlCIENTTOBERECOGNIZEDASATYPEISPROB


ABLYFORTUITOUSANDDEPENDENTONSEEDDISPERSALATA

TIMEWHENBARESOILDEPOSITEDBYmOODSOREXPOSEDBY

EROSION	ISAVAILABLEFORSEEDLINGESTABLISHMENT&LOOD


INGKILLSMANYSEEDLINGS2IVERBIRCHSEEDGERMINATEIN

LARGENUMBERSSOONAFTERDISPERSALINLATESPRINGOREARLY

SUMMERWHEREASSYCAMORESEEDAREDISPERSEDINTHE

FALLBUTGERMINATETHEFOLLOWINGSPRING&OREST3ERVICE

53$!	&LOODINGSUBSEQUENTTOTHESETIMES

REDUCESSEEDLINGDENSITYOFONEORTHEOTHERORBOTHSPE


CIES

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 4HERELATIVE

PROPORTIONOFEACHSPECIESINAGIVENSTANDVARIESGREATLY

)NAREASAFFECTEDBYACIDMINEWATERDRAINAGETHETYPE

MAYBECOMPOSEDOFBUTSIXORFEWERSPECIESOFTREES

WITHRIVERBIRCHCOMPRISINGPERCENTORMOREOFTHE

STEMDENSITY%LSEWHEREAGREATERMIXOFSPECIES

ORMORE	MAYBEFOUNDWITHRIVERBIRCHHAVINGAPPROXI


MATELYHALFOFTHETOTALSTEMDENSITY)NSUCHSTANDS

THEDENSITYOFSYCAMORESTEMSISGENERALLYLESSTHAN

PERCENT#RIBBENAND5NGAR	

,OCALLYWITHINANYSTANDRIVER
BANKGRAPEORWINTER

GRAPEMAYBEABUNDANT0OISON
IVYOCCURSONDISTURBED

OPENSITES &EWSHRUBSAREPRESENTBUTSMALLTREES

SUCHASCOMMONHAZEL	ALDER!MERICANBLADDERNUT
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


AND!MERICANHORNBEAMMAYFORMADENSEUNDERSTORY

(ERBACEOUSPLANTSAREHIGHLYDIVERSEANDAREABUNDANT

SEASONALLYESPECIALLYSPOTTEDTOUCH
ME
NOTANDWOOD


NETTLE

7ARREN!7ISTENDAHL

/HIO5NIVERSITY

3ILVER-APLEn!MERICAN%LM



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION 3ILVERMAPLEAND!MER


ICANELMARETHEMAJORITYSPECIESINTHISTYPEALTHOUGH

THEPROPORTIONOFEITHERDEPENDSONTHEHISTORYOFTHE

STAND-AJORASSOCIATESMAYINCLUDESWEETGUMPINOAK

SWAMPWHITEOAKEASTERNCOTTONWOODSYCAMOREGREEN

ASHANDOTHERMOIST
SITEHARDWOODSACCORDINGTOTHE

REGION

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEISCOMMON

THROUGHOUTTHECENTRALFORESTREGIONOFTHE5NITED3TATES

ANDINTHEDECIDUOUSSOUTHERNPORTIONOFTHE'REAT

,AKES
3T,AWRENCEFORESTREGIONOF#ANADA)TOCCURS

PRIMARILYONWELL
DRAINEDMOISTSITESALONGRIVERBOTTOMS

ANDmOODPLAINSANDBESIDELAKESANDLARGERSTREAMS4HIS

TYPEISONLYSPARINGLYREPRESENTEDALONGTHE%AST#OAST

ANDISABSENTATTHEHIGHELEVATIONSINTHE!PPALACHIANS

)TISMOSTCOMMONINTHE/HIO7ABASHUPPER-ISSIS


SIPPIAND-ISSOURIRIVERVALLEYSOFTHE5NITED3TATESAND

INTHEmOODPLAINSOFSOUTHERN/NTARIO

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 3ILVERMAPLEn!MERICANELM

ISGENERALLYREGARDEDASASUBCLIMAXTYPEINTHEPORTION

OFITSRANGEINTHE5NITED3TATESFOLLOWINGCOTTONWOOD

ANDWILLOWANDASACLIMAXTYPEINTHEPORTIONOFITS

RANGEINSOUTHERN/NTARIOWHEREITREGENERATESINWIL


LOWANDRED
OSIERDOGWOODTHICKETS3MALLPOCKETSMAY

SOMETIMESDEVELOPASPIONEERSUCCESSIONONABANDONED

AGRICULTURALLANDSONmOODPLAINS4HETYPEISMORECOM


MONONORGANICSOILSTHANONMEDIUM
TOlNE
TEXTURED

MINERALSOILSRARELYDOESITOCCURONCLAYSANDGRAVELS

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION !VARIANTSILVER

MAPLEn!MERICANELMnPINOAKnSWEETGUMISFOUNDIN

SLOUGHSANDWELL
DRAINEDBENCHESALONGMAJORSTREAMS

INSOUTHERN)LLINOISANDSOUTHERN)NDIANA4ELFORD	

)NSOUTHERN/NTARIOTHETYPEGENERALLYCONSISTSOFA

MIXTUREOFSILVERMAPLE!MERICANELMGREENASHAND

EASTERNCOTTONWOODINVARYINGPROPORTIONS(OWEVERIN

THEWASHBOARDSWAMPSWHEREHIGHANDLOWGROUNDIS

INTERMINGLEDTHETYPEOFTENINCLUDESSUCHSPECIESASRED

MAPLEBASSWOODBLACKWALNUTBLACKCHERRYBLACKGUM

HACKBERRYANDBOXELDER4HEUNDERSTORYMAYINCLUDE

WILLOWREDBERRYELDERRED
OSIERDOGWOODANDGREEN


BRIAR4HEGROUNDCOVERMAINLYCONSISTSOFWOOD
NETTLE

JEWELWEEDPOISON
IVYFERNSSEDGESCARDINAL
mOWER

*OE
PYE
WEEDSWAMPMILKWEEDANDBONESET

2OBERT%0HARES

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

.ORTHEASTERN&OREST%XPERIMENT3TATION

(#EDRIC,ARSSON

/NTARIO-INISTRYOF.ATURAL2ESOURCES

#OTTONWOOD



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION #OTTONWOODISPUREOR

COMPRISESAMAJORITYOFTHESTOCKINGBUTITISASSOCIATED

WITHOTHERBOTTOMLANDHARDWOODS%ASTERNPLAINSAND

SWAMPCOTTONWOODAREINCLUDEDUNDERTHETYPENAME

4HECHIEFASSOCIATESINTHEYOUNGERSTAGESAREBLACK

ANDSANDBARWILLOW3WEETGUMISRARE7HITEORGREEN

ASHSILVERMAPLEAND!MERICANELMMAYOCCURINTHE

NORTHERNEXTREMITIESOFTHETYPEANDPECANSYCAMORE

ANDSUGARBERRYINTHESOUTHERN

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEISCHARACTERISTIC

OFTHEFRONTSORBANKSOFALLMAJORSTREAMSINTHECENTRAL

ANDSOUTHERNFORESTS)TISFOUNDALONGMAJORSTREAMSOF

THE'REAT0LAINSBUTPARTICULARLYWITHINTHE-ISSISSIPPI

/HIOAND-ISSOURIRIVERSYSTEMS!LONGTHE%AST#OAST

COTTONWOODASATYPEOCCURSONLYINSMALLGROUPSALONG

RIVERANDSTREAMBOTTOMS

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS #OTTONWOODISATEMPORARY

PIONEERTYPECAPABLEOFPHENOMENALGROWTH!LONGWITH

THEWILLOWSITESTABLISHESITSELFWHEREVERMOISTBARESOIL

ISAVAILABLEONNEWLYMADESANDBARSFRONTLANDRIDGES

ANDWELL
DRAINEDmATSANDOCCASIONALLYONABANDONED

lELDSONWELLDRAINEDRIDGESINTHElRSTBOTTOMS7HERE

COTTONWOODANDWILLOWOCCURTOGETHERCOTTONWOOD

OUTGROWSWILLOWANDEVENTUALLYBECOMESDOMINANTUN


LESSFREQUENTANDEXTENDEDmOODINGDURINGTHEGROWING

SEASONCOVERSTHETREESANDONLYWILLOWSURVIVES3ITES

COMMONLYSILTINDURINGTHELIFEOFTHESTANDWITHPOS


SIBLEELEVATIONCHANGESASGREATASMFT	THOUGH

THEINCREMENTFROMANYONEmOODMAYRANGEFROMONLY

CMIN	TOTOMTOFT	#OTTONWOODS

ANDWILLOWARERELATIVELYSHORTLIVEDANDCANNOTREGENER


ATEUNDERSHADE)NVADERSINTHENEXTSUCCESSIONALSTAGE

ARESYCAMOREPECANSUGARBERRYHACKBERRYRIVERBIRCH

GREENASH!MERICANELMSILVERMAPLEREDMAPLEAND

BOXELDER!SSOILSBUILDUPANDWILLOWSANDCOTTONWOODS

DROPOUTSUCCESSIONINTHECENTRALFORESTUSUALLYPASSES

TOTHESILVERMAPLEn!MERICANELMTYPEORTOBOXELDER

ANDINTHESOUTHERNFORESTTOSYCAMOREnSWEETGUMn

!MERICANELMSUGARBERRYn!MERICANELMnGREENASHOR

BOXELDER4HECOTTONWOODTYPEMERGESWITHTHECOTTON


WOODnWILLOWTYPEINTHE'REAT0LAINSAREA

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION #OMMONUNDER


STORYTREESPECIESAREBOXELDERSUGARBERRYREDMAPLE

SILVERMAPLE!MERICANELMREDMULBERRYROUGHLEAF
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

DOGWOODANDSWAMP
PRIVET5NDERGROWTHMAYCONSIST

OFSTINGINGNETTLEPOKEWEEDPOISON
IVYGREENBRIER

TRUMPETCREEPERPEPPERVINEDEWBERRYANDGRAPE(ERBS

MAYORMAYNOTBEPRESENTDEPENDINGONHOWDENSETHE

OVERSTORYISANDHOWLONGmOODWATERSCOVERTHEGROUND

DURINGTHEGROWINGSEASON

,EVEESYSTEMSANDSTREAMCHANNELIZATIONHAVE

RESTRICTEDTHEAREAAVAILABLEFORFORMATIONOFTHECOT


TONWOODTYPE

2-+2).!2$

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

3OUTHERN&OREST%XPERIMENT3TATION

0IN/AKn3WEETGUM



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION 0INOAKANDSWEETGUM

FORMTHEMAJORITYOFTREESINTHEOVERSTORYALTHOUGH

THEPROPORTIONOFEACHVARIESACCORDINGTOGEOGRAPHIC

LOCATIONANDEDAPHICFACTORS!SSOCIATESMAYINCLUDE

REDMAPLE!MERICANELMBLACKGUMSWAMPWHITEOAK

WILLOWOAKOVERCUPOAKBUROAKGREENASH.UTTALL

OAKSWAMPCHESTNUTOAKWHITEOAKANDSHELLBARKAND

SHAGBARKHICKORIES

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HISFORESTCOVERTYPEOC


CURSINTHE/HIO2IVER6ALLEYANDTRIBUTARIESFROM7EST

6IRGINIATHROUGHSOUTHWESTERN/HIOSOUTHERN)NDIANA

SOUTHERN)LLINOIS+ENTUCKYEXCEPTTHEEASTERNMOUN


TAINS	ANDINTHEWESTERNTWO
THIRDSOF4ENNESSEE)T

EXTENDSSOUTHWARDINTHECENTRAL-ISSISSIPPI2IVER6AL


LEYFROMSOUTHEASTERN-ISSOURITOCENTRAL!RKANSASAND

WESTERN4ENNESSEEANDTHROUGHCENTRAL!RKANSASINTHE

!RKANSAS2IVER6ALLEY4ELFORD#HAPMAN	

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS )NBROADERSTREAMVAL


LEYSTHETYPEOCCURSONCLAYmATSANDINDEPRESSIONS

WHERESHALLOWWATERACCUMULATESDURINGTHEWINTER

ANDONCLAYRIDGESOFlRSTBOTTOMS0UTNAMAND"ULL

"RAUN+ILKUS	4HETYPEISRARE

HOWEVERONTHEMOSTPOORLYDRAINEDSITESANDDOESNOT

OCCURWHEREINUNDATIONISPERMANENT)TALSOOCCURSIN

OLDlELDSONPOORLYDRAINEDIMPERVIOUSWETUPLANDS

OFTHE)LLINOIANTILLPLAINBUTPUREPINOAKSTANDSMUCH

MORECOMMONLYOCCUPYTHESESITESWHICHCOMPRISETHE

hPINOAKmATSv

4HEPINOAKnSWEETGUMTYPEISANEARLYSUCCESSIONAL

STAGEINTHEREGROWTHOFBOTTOMLANDFORESTSALTHOUGHIT

WASCOMMONINTHEORIGINALFORESTSANDMAYPERSISTFOR

PROLONGEDPERIODSONPOORLYDRAINEDSITES"RAUN	

7HEREDRAINAGEISBETTERSWEETGUMWILLREMAINASA

COMPONENTOFLATERSUCCESSIONALPHASESWHEREASPINOAK

ISTHElRSTTODISAPPEARWITHFURTHERSUCCESSIONALDEVEL


OPMENT)NSOUTHWESTERN/HIOWHERESWEETGUMANDRED

MAPLEAREABUNDANTINTHEINITIALREGROWTHPHASEBEECH

FOLLOWSINTHEINTERMEDIATEPHASEWHEREPINOAKISMORE

ABUNDANTINTHEINITIALPHASEWHITEOAKFOLLOWS"RAUN

	3IMILARPATTERNSPROBABLYDONOTDEVELOPINTHE

WESTERNANDSOUTHERNPORTIONSOFTHERANGEOFTHISTYPE

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 4HEPROPORTION

OFSWEETGUMTOPINOAKINCREASESFROMNORTHTOSOUTH

ANDFROMWETTERSITESTODRIERANDNEARLYPURESTANDSOF

EACHSPECIESMAYOCCURACCORDINGLY)NCENTRAL!RKANSAS

THISTYPEMAYGRADEINTOSWEETGUMnWILLOWOAKASTHE

SOUTHERNRANGELIMITOFPINOAKISREACHED )NTHENORTH

VARIANTSINCLUDEWHITEOAKnPINOAKnSWEETGUMANINTER


MEDIATESUCCESSIONALSTAGE	PINOAKn!MERICANELMPIN

OAKnREDMAPLEREDMAPLEn!MERICANELMnSWEETGUM

ANDPUREPINOAK)NTHELOWER/HIOANDCENTRAL-IS


SISSIPPIVALLEYSPUREPINOAKSTANDSAREMOREABUNDANT

THANMIXEDPINOAKSANDSWEETGUM,3-INCKLER

PERSONALCOMMUNICATION	 3HRUBSANDSMALLTREESIF

PRESENTMAYINCLUDEBLUEBEECH!MERICANHORNBEAM	

DECIDUOUSHOLLYPOSSUMHAW	POISON
IVYANDTRUMPET

CREEPER4HEHERBACEOUSSTRATUMISWELLDEVELOPEDONLY

INMOREOPENSTANDSANDINCLUDESNUMEROUSSEDGESAND

GRASSES"RAUN6OIGTAND-OHLENBROCK	

'%/2'%47%!6%2

3OUTHERN)LLINOIS5NIVERSITY

7ILLOW/AKn7ATER/AKn$IAMONDLEAF,AUREL	/AK



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION 4HETHREESPECIES

TOGETHERCOMPRISEAMAJORITYOFTHESTOCKINGBUTTHEPRO


PORTIONOFEACHMAYVARYWIDELYDEPENDINGONSITEAND

LOCATION4HEASSOCIATEDTREESPECIESMAYINCLUDE.UTTALL

OAKREDMAPLEGREENASHSWEETGUMSWAMPHICKORY

HONEYLOCUSTANDONTHEWETTERSITESWATERHICKORY

WATERLOCUSTANDOVERCUPOAK/NBETTER
DRAINEDAREAS

SPRUCEPINELOBLOLLYPINESWAMPCHESTNUTOAKANDCHER


RYBARKOAKMAYBEFOUNDINTHEASSOCIATION

)NHISCHECKLIST,ITTLE	DOESNOTRECOGNIZEA

DIFFERENCEBETWEENDIAMONDLEAFOAKANDLAURELOAK

BUTINTHEPASTDIAMONDLEAFHASBEENGIVENTHESTATUSOF

BOTHAVARIETYANDASEPARATESPECIES1OBTUSATA!SHE	

3ARGENT	4HOSEWHOFAVORSEPARATESPECIESSTATUS

POINTOUTTHATTHEREARENOTONLYRECOGNIZABLEANATOMI


CALDIFFERENCESBUTALSOVASTDIFFERENCESINSITEPREFER


ENCE3PECIMENSlRSTRECOGNIZEDAS1LAURIFOLIAOCCUR

ONDEEPWELLDRAINEDSOILSSUCHASTHESANDYBANKSOF

STREAMSWHEREASDIAMONDLEAFOAKOCCURSONPOORLY

DRAINEDmATSITES

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEISFOUNDINTHE

#OASTAL0LAINFROMSOUTHEASTERN6IRGINIATOWESTERN

&LORIDAANDTHROUGHTHE'ULF3TATESINTOTHEPINEREGION

OFEASTERN4EXAS)TALSOEXTENDSINTOSOUTHEASTERN/KLA


HOMAANDSOUTHERN!RKANSAS4HETYPEISMOSTABUNDANT

IN,OUISIANASOUTHERN-ISSISSIPPIANDSOUTHCENTRAL

!LABAMA
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEISMOSTCOMMON

ONALLUVIALmOODPLAINS)TOCCUPIESRELATIVELYPOORLY

DRAINEDmATSITES7HEREDRAINAGEISUNUSUALLYPOOR

DIAMONDLEAFOAKMAKESUPMOSTOFTHESTANDSOMETIMES

FORMINGALMOSTPURESTANDS!SELEVATIONINCREASESAND

DRAINAGEIMPROVESTHEWILLOWANDWATEROAKCOMPONENT

INCREASES/FTHETWOWATEROAKUSUALLYOCCUPIESTHE

SOMEWHATBETTERDRAINEDAREAS4OPOGRAPHICALLYTHETYPE

ISUSUALLYLOCATEDBETWEENTHESWAMPCHESTNUTOAKn

CHERRYBARKOAKTYPEONTHEBETTER
DRAINEDSITESANDTHE

OVERCUPOAKnWATERHICKORYTYPEONTHEPOORER
DRAINED

SITES4HETYPEMAYALSOOCCURONTERRACEmATSAND

POORLYDRAINEDmATWOODSSITESANDISOFTENREFERREDTOAS

hOAKGLADESvORhPINOAKmATSv)TPROBABLYREPRESENTSA

TOPOGRAPHICEDAPHICCLIMAXBUTWHENITISHEAVILYCUT

SPECIESSUCHASSUGARBERRYGREENASH!MERICANELM

ANDREDMAPLEMAYCAPTURETHESITEATLEASTTEMPORARILY

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION )NTHE-ISSISSIPPI

2IVERDRAINAGEESPECIALLYNORTHOF6ICKSBURGTHETYPE

ISREPLACEDBYSWEETGUMn.UTTALLOAKnWILLOWOAKWHICH

OCCUPIESSITESSIMILARTOTHOSEOF4YPEINOTHERDRAIN


AGES)NAREASELSEWHERETHANTHE$ELTAOFTHE-ISSIS


SIPPIDIAMONDLEAFMAYGRADUALLYBEREPLACEDBY.UTTALL

OAKASTHENORTHERNRANGEOFTHETYPEISAPPROACHED

3OMECOMMONUNDERSTORYCOMPONENTSAREPOISON
IVY

GRAPE!LABAMASUPPLEJACKRATTAN	ANDGREENBRIERS

&2!.+73(2/03()2%

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

3OUTHEASTERN!REA3TATEAND0RIVATE&ORESTRY

,IVE/AK



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION ,IVEOAKTYPICALLYCOM


PRISESAMAJORITYOFTHESTOCKINGANDONCOASTALRIDGES

ITMAYBEPURE#OMMONASSOCIATESAREWATEROAKAND

SOUTHERNMAGNOLIA/NSITESLESSWELLDRAINEDSUGARBER


RY!MERICANELMANDGREENASHACCOMPANYLIVEOAK

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HELIVEOAKTYPEOCCURS

INSOUTHERN,OUISIANAANDSOUTHWESTERN-ISSISSIPPI

ONNATURALLEVEESORhFRONTLANDSvANDONISLANDSWITHIN

MARSHESANDSWAMPS

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS %LEVATIONOFTHEFRONTLANDS

WHERELIVEOAKISPRESENTHASBEENDETERMINEDBYTHE

mOODHEIGHTOFTHERIVERTHATDEPOSITEDTHESILT7IDTH

OFALIVEOAKFORESTBELTVARIESATAMINIMUMITMAYBE

ONLYMAFEWHUNDREDFEET	WIDEOREVENLESSAND

ATAMAXIMUMUSUALLYUNDERKMLESSTHANAMILE	

)NMANYPLACESTHEBELTBECOMESNARROWERWITHTIMEAS

THELANDSUBSIDESANDMAN
MADELEVEESPREVENTFURTHER

mOODINGANDSILTING

4HESILTSOILSTHATSUPPORTLIVEOAKFORESTSREPRESENT

SOMEOFTHEBESTAGRICULTURALLANDINTHEREGIONAND

MUCHHASBEENCLEAREDFORTHATPURPOSE.ONETHELESS

THEREAREABANDONEDlELDSINTHE.EW/RLEANSAREATHAT

HAVEREGROWNTOFORESTSNOWABOUTYEARSOLD"ONCK

AND0ENFOUND0ENFOUNDAND(OWARD	4HE

SEQUENCEISASFOLLOWSANNUALANDPERENNIALWEEDSOC


CUPYTHElELDSFORABOUTlVEYEARSAFTERWHICHSHRUBS

ESPECIALLYSOUTHERNBAYBERRYWAXMYRTLE	ANDROUGHLEAF

DOGWOODBEGINTOTAKEOVER"YYEARSTHESHRUB

COMMUNITYAPPROXIMATESAYOUNGFORESTBUTLIVEOAK

SEEDLINGSBEGINTOAPPEARANDSEEMDESTINEDTOGROWINTO

ATYPICALLIVEOAKFORESTINANOTHERYEARS

,IVEOAKGROWSONUPLANDSBUTNOTASAMAJORITYSPE


CIES3EVERALSALTDOMESTHATRISETOMTO

FT	ABOVEMARSHESINSOUTHWESTERN,OUISIANAHAVEGOOD

SOILANDACLIMATECOMPARABLETOTHATWHERELIVEOAK

FORESTSGROW(OWEVERTHEDOMESSUPPORTAMIXEDAN


GIOSPERMFORESTWITHLIVEOAKINMIXTUREWITHSOUTHERN

MAGNOLIAWHITEBASSWOODAND!MERICANBEECH,IVE

OAKHEREISINTHEMAJORITYONLYWHEREPLANTED

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 6ARIATIONINTREE

COMPOSITIONISDUETODIFFERENCESINDRAINAGETHATRESULT

FROMANELEVATIONCHANGEOFONLYABOUTMAVERYFEW

FEET	3HRUBSINTHELIVEOAKFORESTUSUALLYINCLUDEDWARF

PALMETTOYAUPON!MERICANELDERVINESARE!LABAMA

SUPPLEJACKGRAPEPOISON
IVYAND6IRGINIACREEPERAND

HERBSAREOAKFORESTGRASSAND4RADESCANTIASPIDERWORT	

7),,)3!%'',%2

7ARREN7ILSON#OLLEGE

3WAMP#HESTNUT/AKn#HERRYBARK/AK



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION 3WAMPCHESTNUTOAK

ANDCHERRYBARKOAKTOGETHERUSUALLYCONSTITUTEAMA


JORITYOFTHESTOCKINGBUTWHENMANYSPECIESAREIN

MIXTURETHEYMAYCOMPRISEONLYAPLURALITY0ROMINENT

HARDWOODASSOCIATESARETHEASHESGREENANDWHITE	

ANDTHEHICKORIESSHAGBARKSHELLBARKMOCKERNUTAND

BITTERNUT	ASWELLASWHITEOAK$ELTAPOSTOAK3HUMARD

OAKANDBLACKGUM3WEETGUMMAYOCCASIONALLYBEOF

HIGHIMPORTANCEONlRSTBOTTOMRIDGES-INORASSOCIATES

INCLUDEWILLOWOAKWATEROAKSOUTHERNREDOAKPOST

OAK!MERICANELMWINGEDELMWATERHICKORYSOUTH


ERNMAGNOLIAYELLOW
POPLARBEECHANDOCCASIONALLY

LOBLOLLYANDSPRUCEPINES

'EOGRAPHIC$ISTRIBUTION 3MALLAREASOFTHETYPEARE

SCATTEREDOVERALARGEPARTOFTHE3OUTHWITHINTHEmOOD


PLAINSOFTHEMAJORRIVERSEXCEPTTHATOFTHE-ISSISSIPPI

WHERETHETYPEISRARE

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEOCCURSONTHE

HIGHESTlRST
BOTTOMRIDGESINTHETERRACESONTHEBEST
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

MOSTMATURElNESANDYLOAMSOILSANDALSOONlRST
BOT


TOMRIDGESONAFEWWELLDRAINEDSOILSOTHERTHANSANDY

LOAM4HESITEISSELDOMCOVEREDWITHSTANDINGWATER

ANDRARELYIFEVEROVERmOWSTHOUGHITMAYBEHUM


MOCKYANDWETBETWEENHUMMOCKS3WAMPCHESTNUT

OAKnCHERRYBARKOAKSUCCEEDSSYCAMOREnSWEETGUMn

!MERICANELMONTHERIDGESINTHETERRACES4YPICALLYIT

ISCLIMAXONOLDERALLUVIUM0UTNAMETAL	3ITE

INDEXESATYEARSRANGEFROMTOFORSWAMP

CHESTNUTOAKANDFROMTOFORCHERRYBARKOAK

"ROADFOOT	

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 4HETYPEMOST

COMMONLYOCCURSADJACENTTOTHESYCAMOREnSWEETGUMn

!MERICANELMTYPEANDTOBEECHnSOUTHERNMAGNOLIA

STANDSFORMERLYRECOGNIZEDASTYPE.O	!MONGTHE

SUBORDINATETEESANDUNDERGROWTHAREPAINTEDBUCKEYE

PAWPAW!MERICANHORNBEAMmOWERINGDOGWOOD

DWARFPALMETTO#OASTAL0LAINWILLOW!MERICANSNOW


BELLSOUTHERNARROWWOODPOSSUMHAWDEVILSWALKING


STICKEASTERNREDBUDAND!MERICANHOLLY

&2!.+73(2/03()2%

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

3OUTHEASTERN!REA3TATEAND0RIVATE&ORESTRY

3WEETGUMn7ILLOW/AK



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION 3WEETGUMANDWILLOW

OAKCOMPRISEAPLURALITYOFTHESTOCKINGWITHSWEETGUM

ESSENTIALLYTHEKEYSPECIES7ILLOWOAKMAYBESUPER


SEDEDBYWATEROAKINTHESOUTHERNMOSTRANGEOFTHE

TYPE3UGARBERRYGREENASH!MERICANELMAND.UTTALL

OAKAREMAJORASSOCIATESESPECIALLYONSLIGHTLYLOWER

ELEVATIONS-INORASSOCIATESAREOVERCUPOAKWATER

HICKORYCEDARELMEASTERNCOTTONWOODLAURELOAKRED

MAPLEHONEYLOCUSTPERSIMMONANDRARELYBALDCY


PRESS4HETYPEWASFORMERLYNAMEDSWEETGUMn.UTTALL

OAKnWILLOWOAK3!&	

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEISWIDESPREAD

INTHEALLUVIALmOODPLAINSOFMAJORRIVERSIN!RKANSAS

,OUISIANA-ISSISSIPPI!LABAMAEASTERN-ISSOURIAND

EASTERN4EXAS-OSTEXTENSIVESTANDSAREINTHE-ISSIS


SIPPI2IVERDELTA

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEPERPETUATESITSELF

ONlRST
BOTTOMRIDGESANDTERRACEmATSEXCEPTINDEEP

SLOUGHSSWAMPSANDTHELOWESTmATS5SUALLYITIS

INTERSPERSEDWITHTHESUGARBERRYn!MERICANELMnGREEN

ASHTYPEANDTHEOVERCUPOAKnWATERHICKORYTYPE%LSE


WHEREHEAVYCUTTINGUSUALLYINCREASESTHESWEETGUM

COMPONENTBECAUSEOFTHATSPECIESSPROUTINGCHARACTERI


STICS4HESPROUTSGROWRAPIDLYEARLYANDCONTINUEGROW


INGWELLONSITESWHERETHISTYPEOCCURS/NTRANSITIONAL

SITESTHESWEETGUMnWILLOWOAKTYPEISUSUALLYSUPER


SEDEDBYTHESUGARBERRYn!MERICANELMnGREENASHTYPE

-AJORREASONSARETHEOAKSINSUFlCIENTACORNCROPS

POORSEEDLINGESTABLISHMENTANDVERYSLOWEARLYGROWTH

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 4HETYPE

BECOMESPREDOMINANTLYSWEETGUMONWELL
DRAINEDlRST


BOTTOMRIDGESANDPERVIOUSSILTYCLAYSONTERRACEmATS)T

ISPREDOMINANTLYWILLOWOAKCOMBINEDWITHWATEROAK

ONCLAYSOILSONlRST
BOTTOMRIDGESANDBETTERDRAINED

mATSANDONPOORLYDRAINEDTERRACEmATS.UTTALLOAK

DOMINATESONWELL
DRAINEDlRST
BOTTOMmATS7ILLOW

OAKPREVAILSONlRSTBOTTOMRIDGESANDPOORLYDRAINED

TERRACEmATS.EARTHE'ULF#OASTLAURELOAKDOMINATES

!CEDARELMnWATEROAKnWILLOWOAKVARIANTOCCURSON

POORLYDRAINEDIMPERVIOUSSOILSONLOWINDISTINCTOR

mATTENEDlRST
BOTTOMRIDGESTHISVARIANTISALSOOFMINOR

IMPORTANCEONCERTAINIMPERVIOUSTERRACESITESAMOUNT


INGTOHIGHSHALLOWmATS

5NDERSTORYSPECIESARESUGARBERRYGREENASHOAKS

REDMAPLEANDREDMULBERRY5NDERGROWTHINCLUDES

GREENBRIERDWARFPALMETTOANDSEVERALVINESREDVINE

PEPPERVINETRUMPET
CREEPERANDPOISON
IVY

2,*/(.3/.

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

3OUTHERN&OREST%XPERIMENT3TATION

3UGARBERRYn!MERICAN%LMn'REEN!SH



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION 4HETYPESPECIESSUGAR


BERRY!MERICANELMANDGREENASHTOGETHERCONSTITUTEA

PLURALITYOFTHESTOCKING(ACKBERRYREPLACESSUGARBERRY

INTHENORTHERNPARTOFTHERANGE-AJORASSOCIATESIN


CLUDEWATERHICKORY.UTTALLWILLOWWATERANDOVERCUP

OAKSSWEETGUMANDBOXELDER/THERASSOCIATEDSPECIES

ARECEDARANDWINGEDELMBLACKGUMPERSIMMONHON


EYLOCUSTWATERLOCUSTREDANDSILVERMAPLE!MERICAN

SYCAMOREANDEASTERNCOTTONWOOD

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEISFOUNDTHROUGH


OUTTHESOUTHERNFORESTSFROMEAST4EXASTOTHE!TLANTIC

FROMTHE'ULF#OASTTOSOUTHERN)LLINOIS )TISFOUND

WITHINTHEmOODPLAINSOFTHEMAJORRIVERS

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEISUSUALLYLOCATED

INTRANSITIONALAREASBETWEENTHESWEETGUMnWILLOWOAK

TYPEWHICHOCCUPIESHIGHERELEVATIONSANDTHEOVER


CUPOAKnWATERHICKORYTYPEWHICHOCCURSATTHELOWER

ELEVATIONSLTOCCUPIESLOWRIDGESmATANDSLOUGHSIN

lRSTBOTTOMSTERRACEmATSANDSLOUGHSANDOCCASIONALLY

NEWLANDSORFRONTS2ARELYDOESITOCCURONMALTREATED

TERRACERIDGES)TMAYBEFOUNDONCLAYORSILTLOAMSOILS

ANDITTENDSTOBELONGTERMINTHESUCCESSIONALSCALE

4HETYPESPECIESAREALLSHADETOLERANTWHENSMALLAND

REPRODUCEREADILY!LLTHREEBUTESPECIALLYGREENASH

SPROUTPROLIlCALLY
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION /CCASIONALSMALL

STANDSOFPUREGREENASHMAYOCCURALMOSTANYWHERE

WITHINTHETYPEBUTMOSTNOTABLYONMOISTmATSORIN

SHALLOWSLOUGHS3TANDSCOMPOSEDPREDOMINANTLYOF

SUGARBERRYOCCURONNEWLANDORFRONTSITES

4HEUNDERSTORYCOMMONLYINCLUDESSUGARBERRYASH

ELMWATERHICKORY.UTTALLOAKOVERCUPOAKREDMAPLE

ROUGHLEAFDOGWOODHAWTHORNPOSSUMHAWANDRED

MULBERRY5NDERGROWTHINCLUDESSEVERALVINESTRUM


PET
CREEPERPEPPERVINEREDVINERATTAN!LABAMASUP


PLEJACK	#AROLINAMOONSEED6IRGINIACREEPERGRAPE

ANDPOISON
IVY(ERBACEOUSPLANTSINCLUDEBEDSTRAW

VIOLETWILDCARROTWILDLETTUCEAMSONIAMINTLEGUMES

SEDGESMARTWEEDANDFALSEINDIGO7HENOPENINGSARE

CREATEDINTHESTANDSAHEAVYGROWTHOFANNUALGRASSES

ANDCOCKLEBURMAYOCCUR

2,*/(.3/.

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

3OUTHERN&OREST%XPERIMENT3TATION

3YCAMOREn3WEETGUMn!MERICAN%LM



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION !MERICANSYCAMORE

SWEETGUMAND!MERICANELMTOGETHERCOMPRISEA

PLURALITYOFTHESTOCKINGBUTCOMPOSITIONVARIESWIDELY

FROMMIXEDSTANDSTONEARLYPURESTANDSOFONEOFTHE

TYPESPECIES4HETYPEINCLUDESTHERIVERFRONTSPE


CIES
SITETYPEDESCRIBEDBY0UTNAMETAL	WHICH

OCCURSONTHEBANKSORFRONTLANDOFMAJORRIVERSINTHE

SOUTHERNFOREST4HEMOSTCOMMONASSOCIATEDSPECIES

AREGREENASHSUGARBERRYANDHACKBERRYINTHENORTHERN

-ISSISSIPPI2IVER6ALLEY	BOXELDERSILVERMAPLECOT


TONWOODBLACKWILLOWWATEROAKANDPECAN4HISTYPE

WASFORMERLYDESIGNATEDSYCAMOREnPECANn!MERICAN

ELM3!&	

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 3YCAMOREnSWEETGUMn

!MERICANELMOCCURSASSCATTEREDSTANDSTHROUGHOUTTHE

SOUTHERNFORESTREGIONEXCLUSIVEOF&LORIDA	4HISAREA

INCLUDESTHESOUTHEASTERN#OASTAL0LAIN$ELAWARETO

'EORGIA	THE'ULF#OASTAL0LAIN!LABAMATO4EXASAND

NORTHTOSOUTHERN!RKANSASANDSOUTHEASTERN/KLAHOMA	

ANDTHE-ISSISSIPPI2IVERmOODPLAIN,OUISIANATOSOUTH


ERN-ISSOURI	4HETYPEISALSOPRESENTINTHELOWER/HIO

2IVER6ALLEYANDITSLOWERTRIBUTARIESANDINTHE0IED


MONTAND#UMBERLANDPLATEAUSANDADJACENTAREAS

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEOCCUPIESRIVER

FRONTSINTHElRSTBOTTOMSOFMAJORRIVERSTHEBANKS

OFSMALLERRIVERSANDLARGECREEKSTHATmOODANDOC


CASIONALLYBRANCHHEADSANDCOVESOFSMALLCREEKS

3LIGHTLYELEVATEDSITESWITHSOMEWHATPOORLYDRAINEDTO

WELL
DRAINEDSILTYSOILSOFALLUVIALORIGINCHARACTERIZETHE

RIVERFRONTS"ROADFOOT	)NSMALLCREEKBOTTOMSTHE

TYPEOCCURSONNONALLUVIALSOILSTHATAREUSUALLYCOARSER

TEXTURED4HESOILSOFBOTHKINDSOFSITESTYPICALLYARE

RICHWITHMODERATELYGOODDRAINAGEANDHAVEADEQUATE

MOISTURETHROUGHOUTTHEGROWINGSEASON3ITEINDEXESAT

YEARSRANGEFROMTOFORSYCAMOREANDTO

FORSWEETGUM"ROADFOOT	

4HETYPESUCCEEDSTHECOTTONWOODTYPEONRIVERFRONT

SITESBUTMAYPIONEERONHEAVILYCUTOVERSITESOROLD

lELDSINEITHERRIVERBOTTOMSORSMALLCREEKBOTTOMS

7HEREREPEATEDDISTURBANCESSUCHASmOODSOCCUR

THETYPEMAYREPRESENTAPERSISTENTSUBCLIMAXBUTTHE

CLIMAXONTHESESITESWILLBESWAMPCHESTNUTOAKnCHER


RYBARKOAKORSWEETGUMnWILLOWOAK

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 3YCAMOREnPE


CANn!MERICANELMVARIANTISFOUNDONRIVERFRONTSINTHE

-ISSISSIPPI2IVER6ALLEY/NWETTERSITESWITHHEAVIER

SOILSINALLUVIALBOTTOMSOFRIVERSTHETYPEBECOMESTRAN


SITIONALWITHSWEETGUMnWILLOWOAK/NBRANCHHEADS

ANDCOVESOFSMALLCREEKSINTHEUPLANDSTHETYPEINTER


GRADESWITHSWEETGUMnYELLOW
POPLAR4HECOMPANION

TYPESINTHECENTRALFORESTREGIONARERIVERBIRCHnSYCA


MOREANDSILVERMAPLEn!MERICANELM

3OMECOMMONUNDERSTORYCOMPONENTSOFTHETYPE

INCLUDEPAWPAWGIANTCANEANDPOKEWEED-C+


NIGHT	6INESOFTENPRESENTAREPOISON
IVYGRAPE

!LABAMASUPPLEJACKRATTAN	GREENBRIERSAND*APANESE

HONEYSUCKLE7OOD
NETTLEISSOMETIMESPRESENTINMOIST

COVESANDBOTTOMS

3",!.$

-ISSISSIPPI3TATE5NIVERSITY

"LACK7ILLOW



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION "LACKWILLOWANDOTHER

SPECIESOF3ALIXTOGETHERCOMPRISEAMAJORITYOFTHE

STOCKING#OTTONWOODISTHECHIEFASSOCIATEPARTICULARLY

INTHEEARLYSTAGESBUTGREENASHSYCAMOREPECAN

PERSIMMONWATERLOCUST!MERICANELMBALDCYPRESS

REDMAPLESUGARBERRYBOXELDERANDINSOMEAREAS

SILVERMAPLEAREINVADERSPRECEDINGTHENEXTSUCCESSIONAL

STAGE

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEISCHARACTERISTIC

OFTHEFRONTSANDBANKSOFMOSTMAJORSTREAMSTHROUGH

THECENTRALANDSOUTHERNFORESTSBUTEXTENDSALSOINTOTHE

NORTHERNFOREST!LONGTHE%AST#OASTTHEBLACKWILLOW

TYPEHASONLYMINORDISTRIBUTIONANDTHENGENERALLYIN

SWAMPSRATHERTHANINRIVERBOTTOMS

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS "LACKWILLOWISATEM


PORARYPIONEERTYPEOFVERYRAPIDGROWTH!LONGWITH

COTTONWOODITISTHElRSTTOAPPEARONNEWLYFORMED

SANDBARSANDRIVERMARGINSALMOSTTOTHEEXCLUSIONOF

OTHERSPECIES)TISALSOFREQUENTLYFOUNDINFRONTLAND

SLOUGHSANDLOWmATSANDOCCASIONALLYINSHALLOW

SWAMPSANDDEEPSLOUGHSTHROUGHOUTTHElRSTBOTTOM

7HEREWILLOWANDCOTTONWOODOCCURTOGETHERCOT


TONWOODOUTGROWSWILLOWANDBECOMESDOMINANTEXCEPT
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

WHEREFREQUENTANDEXTENDEDGROWING
SEASONmOODING

COVERSTHETREESANDKILLSTHECOTTONWOOD3ITESMAYSILT

INMFT	DURINGTHELIFEOFTHESTANDANDANYONE

mOODMAYINCREASETHEELEVATIONFROMCMIN	TO

MFT	

"LACKWILLOWISRELATIVELYSHORTLIVEDANDCANNOT

REGENERATEUNDERSHADE!STHESOILSBUILDUPANDTHE

WILLOWANDCOTTONWOODSDROPOUTTHETYPEISUSUALLY

REPLACEDINTHECENTRALFORESTBYTHESILVERMAPLEn!MERI


CANELMTYPEANDBYBOXELDERANDINTHESOUTHERNFOREST

BYTHESYCAMOREnSWEETGUMn!MERICANELMTYPEANDBY

BOXELDERANDONTHELOWERSITESBYSWAMP
PRIVET4HE

TYPEMERGESWITHTHECOTTONWOODnWILLOWTYPEINTHE

PRAIRIE
PLAINSAREA

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION #OMMONUNDER


STORYTREESPECIESAREBOXELDERREDMAPLEREDMULBERRY

SWAMP
PRIVETANDPLANERTREEWATERELM	5NDERGROWTH

MAYCONSISTOFBUTTONBUSHPOSSUMHAWPOISON
IVY

TRUMPET
CREEPERREDVINEANDPEPPERVINE(ERBSMAY

ORMAYNOTBEPRESENTDEPENDINGONLENGTHOFGROWING

SEASONOVERmOWANDDENSITYOFOVERSTORY

,EVEESYSTEMSANDSTREAMCHANNELIZATIONSHAVERE


STRICTEDTHEAREAAVAILABLEFORFORMATIONOFTHISTYPE

2-+2).!2$

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

3OUTHERN&OREST%XPERIMENT3TATION

/VERCUP/AKn7ATER(ICKORY



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION /VERCUPOAKANDWATER

HICKORYTOGETHERMAKEUPAMAJORITYOFTHESTOCKING

-AJORASSOCIATESAREGREENASHSUGARBERRY!MERICAN

ELMWATERLOCUSTREDMAPLEAND.UTTALLOAK7ILLOW

OAKPERSIMMONANDCEDARELMAREMINORASSOCIATES

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEOCCURSINTHE

mOODPLAINFORESTSOFTHE'ULFANDSOUTH!TLANTICSTATES

ANDALSOIN4ENNESSEEANDSOUTHERN)LLINOIS4HEMOST

EXTENSIVEAREASOCCUPIEDAREBACKWATERBASINSOFTHE

PRINCIPALRIVERS

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEUSUALLYOCCURSIN

AREASWHEREWATERSTANDSINTOTHEGROWINGSEASONnLOW


LYINGPOORLYDRAINEDmATSWITHCLAYORSILTYCLAYSOILS

)TALSOOCCURSINSLOUGHSINTHELOWESTBACKWATERBASINS

ANDONLOWRIDGESWITHCLAYSOILSTHATARESUBJECTTOLATE

SPRINGINUNDATION3ITEQUALITYISUSUALLYQUITEPOOR

ANDMOSTSPECIESCANNOTSURVIVEWHERETHISTYPEEXISTS

7HEREDRAINAGEISIMPROVEDTHETYPEMAYREVERTTOSUG


ARBERRYn!MERICANELMnGREENASH/VERCUPOAKREPRO


DUCESMORECONSISTENTLYTHANOTHEROAKSITSGOODSEED

CROPSAREFREQUENTANDITSACORNSWHICHSEEMTOBELESS

DESIRABLETOWILDLIFETHANMOSTRECEIVESOMEPROTECTION

FROMTHEWATER7ATERHICKORYISAPROLIlCSPROUTERAND

REPRODUCESINTHISFASHIONWHENTHESTANDISCUT"OTH

OVERCUPOAKANDWATERHICKORYAREAMONGTHELASTTREE

SPECIESTOLEAFOUTINTHEGROWINGSEASONANDTHUSARE

LESSSUBJECTTOTHEMORTALITYTHATOCCURSWHENSEEDLINGS

ORSPROUTSINLEAFARECOVEREDBYSTANDINGWATER

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION .EARLYPURE

WATERHICKORYSTANDSORPUREOVERCUPOAKSTANDSCANBE

FOUNDREPRESENTINGTHETYPE3OMETIMESTHEREISCLEAR

DEMARCATIONBETWEENTHEOVERCUPOAKnWATERHICKORYAND

THESUGARBERRYn!MERICANELMnGREENASHTYPEBUTUSU


ALLYTHETWOTYPESMIXINATRANSITIONALZONE

5NDERSTORYINCLUDESTHEWATERHICKORYOVERCUPOAK

ANDOCCASIONALLY.UTTALLOAKGREENASHSUGARBERRY

ROUGHLEAFDOGWOODSWAMP
PRIVETANDPLANERTREE

WATER
ELM	5NDERGROWTHINCLUDESBUTTONBUSHAND

NUMEROUSVINESREDVINEPEPPERVINETRUMPETCREEPER

ANDPOISON
IVY"ECAUSEOFTHEDEPTHANDDURATIONOF

STANDINGWATERINTHISTYPEASSOCIATEDHERBACEOUSPLANTS

AREFEW&OLLOWINGCUTTINGORPARTIALOPENINGOFTHE

STANDSHEAVYGROWTHOFANNUALGRASSESANDCOCKLEBUR

MAYOCCUR

2,*/(.3/.

53$!&OREST3ERVICE

3OUTHERN&OREST%XPERIMENT3TATION

"ALDCYPRESS



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION "ALDCYPRESSISPUREOR

COMPRISESAMAJORITYOFTHESTOCKING)TSMAINASSOCIATES

AREWATERTUPELOINTHEALLUVIALmOODPLAINSORSWAMP

TUPELOINTHESWAMPSANDESTUARIESOFTHE#OASTAL0LAIN

/THERASSOCIATESAREPONDCYPRESSBLACKWILLOWAND

OCCASIONALLYSWAMPCOTTONWOODREDMAPLE!TLANTIC

WHITE
CEDAR!MERICANELMGREENASHPUMPKINASH

#AROLINAASHWATERLOCUSTREDBAYCOMMONPERSIMMON

OVERCUPOAKANDWATERHICKORY

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEOCCURSINTERMIT


TENTLYTHROUGHTHE#OASTAL0LAINFROMSOUTHERN$ELAWARE

TOSOUTH&LORIDAANDWESTTOSOUTHEASTERN4EXASALMOST

TOTHE-EXICANBORDER)NLANDITOCCURSALONGTHEMANY

STREAMSOFTHECOASTALPLAINSANDNORTHWARDTHROUGHTHE

-ISSISSIPPI6ALLEYTOSOUTHEASTERN/KLAHOMASOUTH


EASTERN-ISSOURISOUTHERN)LLINOISANDSOUTHWESTERN

)NDIANA&OWELLS	

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HEBALDCYPRESSSPECIES

ISUNUSUALINFORMSHAPEANDHABITATREQUIREMENTS

3ITESAREUSUALLYCHARACTERIZEDBYFREQUENTPROLONGED

mOODING&LOODWATERSMAYBEMFT	DEEPORMORE

ANDMAYBESTAGNANTORMAYmOWATRATESUPTOKM

MI	PERHOUR#YPRESSKNEESARECOMMONONTREESON

MOSTSITESBUTAREUSUALLYABSENTWHERETHEmOODWATER

REMAINSATACONSTANTLEVELORWHERETHEREISNOmOODING

)TISNOTCLEARWHATROLECYPRESSKNEESPLAYINAERATIONOF
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


THEROOTSYSTEMBUTITISKNOWNTHATTHEYEXCHANGEOXY


GENANDCARBONDIOXIDEWITHTHEIRSURROUNDINGSUNDER

NORMALATMOSPHERICCONDITIONS4HUSITAPPEARSTHATTHEY

MAYBEBENElCIALASANAERATIONORGANBUTNOTCRITICALTO

TREESURVIVAL

"ALDCYPRESSSHOWSADAPTATIONSTOmOODINGSIMILARTO

THOSEOFWATERANDSWAMPTUPELOSTHEMAINASSOCIATES

INTHETYPE5NDERPROLONGEDmOODINGNEWLYADAPTED

ROOTSDEVELOPNEARTHEBASEOFTHETREE4HENEWROOTS

AREMORESUCCULENTLARGERINDIAMETERANDLESSBRANCHED

THANROOTSOFCYPRESSGROWNINMOISTWELL
AERATEDSOILS

.EWLYADAPTEDROOTSOFTUPELOSHAVEBEENOBSERVEDTO

OXIDIZETHEIRRHIZOSPHEREINmOODWATERS(OOKETAL

	#YPRESSROOTSALSOSHOWEVIDENCEOFOXIDATION

ATDEPTHSUPTOMFT	THUSPROVIDINGOXYGENTO

ACTIVEROOTTIPSANDFACILITATINGNUTRIENTUPTAKEFROM

OTHERWISEHIGHLYREDUCEDSOILENVIRONMENT"ALDCYPRESS

GROWSALONGTHEESTUARIESNEARTHECOASTBUTAPPARENTLY

CANNOTTOLERATESALINITIESABOVEPERCENTSALT-ONTZ

AND#HERUBINI	

#YPRESSHIGHLYPRIZEDFORITSLUMBERWASSOHEAV


ILYEXPLOITEDDURINGTHElRSTHALFOFTHETHCENTURY

THATTHEREWASMUCHCONCERNFORITSFUTURE!LLRECENT

EVIDENCEHOWEVERSUGGESTSAGENERALREPLACEMENTBY

SECONDGROWTH3TERNITZKE	

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 4HETYPEHAS

ONEMAJORVARIANTBALDCYPRESSnPONDCYPRESS,ANGDON

	7HERETHETWOSPECIESOCCURTOGETHERITISDIF


lCULTANDSOMETIMESIMPOSSIBLETOTELLTHEMAPART4HESE

TWOINTERMINGLEINVARYINGPROPORTIONSINTHELOWER

COASTALPLAINSFROMSOUTHEASTERN6IRGINIATOEASTERN

,OUISIANA4HEBALDCYPRESSTYPEHASONLYAFEWSHRUB

ASSOCIATESANDTHESEVARYWIDELY4HEMOSTPROMINENTIN

SOUTH&LORIDAARECOMMONBUTTONBUSHSWAMPSTIFF


CORNEL	DOGWOODAND7ALTERVIBURNUM)NCONTRAST

THEMOSTCOMMONASSOCIATESIN.ORTH#AROLINAARETHE

COASTLEUCOTHOE#AROLINAROSEPOISON
SUMACSWAMP

DOGWOODANDPOSSUMHAWVIBURNUM)NADDITIONFERNS

VINESEPIPHYTESALLIGATOR
WEEDANDDUCKWEEDSARE

PRESENT

$/.!,$(//+

#LEMSON5NIVERSITY

"ALDCYPRESSn4UPELO



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION "ALDCYPRESSTOGETHER

WITHWATERTUPELOORSWAMPTUPELOCOMPRISESTHEMAJOR


ITYOFTHESTOCKING/NDEEPALLUVIALSWAMPSTHECOM


MONASSOCIATESAREREDMAPLEBLACKWILLOW#AROLINA

ASHPUMPKINASHSWAMPCOTTONWOODPLANERTREEWATER


ELM	ANDWATERLOCUST)NTHESHALLOWERMARGINSOVERCUP

OAKWATERHICKORY!MERICANELMGREENASH.UTTALL

OAKLAURELOAKSWEETGUMPERSIMMONANDSWEETBAYARE

ALSOPRESENTLN#OASTAL0LAINSWAMPSREDMAPLEBLACK

WILLOWREDBAYSWEETBAYPONDCYPRESSSLASHPINEAND

LOBLOLLYPINEAREFOUND/GEECHEETUPELOISANASSOCIATE

INSOUTHWESTERN'EORGIAANDNORTHERN&LORIDA!TLANTIC

WHITE
CEDARANDPONDPINEAREALSOPRESENTINSOMEACID

PEATYSWAMPSOFTHE!TLANTIC#OASTAL0LAIN

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEOCCURSINTHE

SOUTHERN#OASTAL0LAINPARTICULARLYONTHESEAWARDMAR


GINSFROMSOUTHEASTERN4EXASTO-ARYLANDEXCLUDING

THELOWERTHIRDOFTHE&LORIDAPENINSULA)TISALSOPRESENT

INTHE-ISSISSIPPI2IVERBOTTOMANDALONGTHELOWER

REACHESOFITSTRIBUTARIESNORTHTOSOUTHERN)LLINOIS

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEISALWAYSFOUNDON

VERYWETSITESWHEREINYEARSOFNORMALRAINFALLSURFACE

WATERSTANDSWELLINTOORTHROUGHOUTTHEGROWINGSEASON

4HESEINCLUDESWAMPSDEEPSLOUGHSVERYLOWPOORLY

DRAINEDmATSOFTHEMAJORRIVERmOODPLAINSSWAMPS

OFTIDALESTUARIESMARGINSOFCOASTALMARSHESANDTHE

DEEPERMOREEXTENSIVELANDLOCKEDDEPRESSIONSOFTHE

#OASTAL0LAIN0ENFOUND	

3OILSOFTHEALLUVIALBOTTOMSAREMINERALSOILSAND

USUALLYRANGEINTEXTUREFROMSILTLOAMTOALMOSTPURE

CLAYSURFACESOILP(VARIESFROMMODERATELYACIDTO

SLIGHTLYALKALINE#OASTALSWAMPSANDDEPRESSIONSOFTHE

#OASTAL0LAINUSUALLYHAVEASURFACEOFMUCKORSHALLOW

PEAT4HEMINERALFRACTIONOFTHESOILMAYRANGEFROM

lNESANDTOCLAYANDSOILP(RANGESFROMMODERATELYTO

STRONGLYACID

3TANDMAKEUPISSTRONGLYINmUENCEDBYSITEASWELL

ASBYCUTTING7ATERTUPELOCANNOTSURVIVEWHERESOIL

ACIDITYISHIGHORSURFACEWATERBRACKISH#ONSEQUENTLY

ITISALMOSTCOMPLETELYRESTRICTEDTOALLUVIALmOODPLAINS

ANDISREPLACEDBYSWAMPTUPELOONCOLLUVIALSOILSOF

THE#OASTAL0LAINANDINCOASTALSWAMPS3WAMPTUPELO

ALSOOCCURSINMIXTUREWITHBALDCYPRESSANDWATERTUPELO

AROUNDTHEEDGESOFALLUVIALSWAMPSWHEREMAXIMUM

WATERDEPTHISLESSTHANMABOUTFT	"ALDCYPRESS

ANDWATERTUPELOAREMOSTTOLERANTOFCOMPLETEINUN


DATIONANDADVANCEINTOTHEDEEPESTSITESWHENWATER

DEPTHISREDUCEDDURINGPERIODICDROUGHTSPARTICULARLY

AROUNDQUIETPONDSANDLAKES)NSHALLOWSWAMPSWATER

ANDSWAMPTUPELOREGENERATEMORESUCCESSFULLYTHAN

BALDCYPRESSBECAUSEOFGREATERSEEDPRODUCTIONAND

SOMEWHATFASTEREARLYGROWTH(EREFOLLOWINGHEAVY

CUTTINGTHETYPEUSUALLYREVERTSTOWATERORSWAMP

TUPELO0UTNAMETAL	2EGENERATIONOFSWAMPTU


PELOANDWATERTUPELOBYSTUMPSPROUTSISALSOOFMAJOR

IMPORTANCEINCUTOVERSTANDSSPROUTINGOFBALDCYPRESS

ISMINOR

.OCLEARSUCCESSIONHASBEENOBSERVEDINTHISTYPE

ANDBARRINGAGGRADATIONITISCONSIDEREDPERMANENT

ANDISHELDINTHISSTAGEBYPROLONGEDPERIODSOFDEEP

mOODING7ELLS	4HERELATIVESHADETOLERANCE

OFBALDCYPRESSANDWATERTUPELOHASNOTBEENCLEARLY
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

ESTABLISHEDBOTHARERATEDINTOLERANTANDBOTHENDURE

HEAVYSTOCKINGINEVEN
AGEDSTANDS7HENINASSOCIATION

WITHBALDCYPRESSWATERTUPELOISUSUALLYTHEYOUNGER

COMPONENTSUGGESTINGTHEGREATERTOLERANCEOFTHELATTER

ANDAPOSSIBLETRENDTOWARDSPURESTANDSOFTHATSPECIES

WITHOUTPERIODICDISTURBANCE

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 3MALLPURE

STANDSOFBALDCYPRESSARESCATTEREDTHROUGHOUTTHETYPE

2EGENERATIONOFBALDCYPRESSISVERYUNCERTAINHOWEVER

ANDSTANDSUSUALLYREVERTTOTUPELOFOLLOWINGHEAVYCUT


TING

)NTHEDEEPSWAMPSANDUNDERDENSESTANDSUN


DERGROWTHSPARSEBECAUSEOFLOWLIGHTINTENSITYAND

LONGHYDROPERIODSISLIMITEDTOAFEWSHRUBSANDSOME

AQUATICHERBS-OSSESANDLICHENSARECOMMONONTHE

LOWEREXPOSEDPORTIONSOFTHETREETRUNKS3PANISHMOSS

OFTENDRAPESTHECROWNSLNSHALLOWSWAMPSANDALONG

THEFRINGESOFTHEDEEPSWAMPSAWIDEVARIETYOFWET


SITESHRUBSMAYCOMMONLYOCCURBUTTONBUSHSWAMP


PRIVET6IRGINIASWEETSPIRE6IRGINIA
WILLOW	SWAMP

CYRILLABUCKWHEAT
TREESTIFFCORNELSWAMP	DOGWOOD

FETTERBUSHLYONIALEUCOTHOEDAHOONYAUPONSOUTHERN

BAYBERRYPOSSUMHAWSWAMPROSEANDPOISON
SUMAC

7OODYVINESTHATMAYBECOMMONINCLUDEGREENBRIERS

!LABAMASUPPLEJACKSOUTHEASTDECUMARIACROSSVINE

PEPPERVINEANDPOISON
IVY

(!2293,!23%.

!UBURN5NIVERSITY

7ATER4UPELOn3WAMP4UPELO



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION 7HERETHETYPEISMOST

EXTENSIVEWATERTUPELOISPUREORPROVIDESAMAJORITYOF

THEBASALAREASTOCKING/NCERTAINMORELIMITEDSITES

HOWEVERSWAMPTUPELOTENDSTOTAKETHEPLACEOFWATER

TUPELO/NSOMESITESTHETWOTYPESPECIESMIX#OM


MONASSOCIATESOFWATERTUPELOWHEREmOODINGISDEEP

AREBALDCYPRESSREDMAPLEBLACKWILLOW#AROLINAASH

PUMPKINASHSWAMPCOTTONWOODPLANERTREEWATER


ELM	ANDWATERLOCUSTLNSHALLOWWATERSWAMPTUPELO

OVERCUPOAKWATERHICKORY!MERICANELMGREENASH

.UTTALLOAKLAURELOAKSWEETGUMPERSIMMONAND

SWEETBAYAREALSOPRESENT#OMMONASSOCIATESOFSWAMP

TUPELOINADDITIONMAYINCLUDEPONDCYPRESSREDBAY

SWEETBAYSLASHPINEANDLOBLOLLYPINE/GEECHEETUPELO

ISANASSOCIATEINSOUTHEASTERN'EORGIAANDNORTHERN

&LORIDA!TLANTICWHITE
CEDARANDPONDPINEAREALSO

ASSOCIATESINSOMEACIDPEATYSWAMPSOFTHE!TLANTIC

#OASTAL0LAIN4HETYPEFORMERLYWASNAMEDWATER

TUPELO

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEOCCURSINTHE

SOUTHERN#OASTAL0LAINFROMSOUTHEASTERN4EXASTO

SOUTHERN&LORIDAANDNORTHWARDTOSOUTHEASTERN6IRGINIA

LTALSOOCCURSINTHE-ISSISSIPPI2IVERBOTTOMANDTHE

LOWERREACHESOFITSTRIBUTARIESANDINBOTTOMLANDSOFTHE

4ENNESSEE2IVERIN!LABAMA4HEWATERTUPELOCOMPO


NENTISNEARLYABSENTFROMMOSTOFTHE&LORIDAPENINSULA

ANDTHESOUTHEASTERNCORNEROF'EORGIA

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEISALWAYSFOUND

ONVERYWETSITESWHEREINYEARSOFNORMALRAINFALL

SURFACEWATERSTANDSWELLINTOORTHROUGHOUTTHEGROW


INGSEASON3TANDSOFWATERTUPELOARERESTRICTEDTODEEP

SWAMPSSLOUGHSANDLOWmATSOFTHEALLUVIALmOOD


PLAINSWHEREASTHOSEOFSWAMPTUPELOOCCURINUPLAND

SWAMPSANDPONDSOFTHE#OASTAL0LAINANDINSLIGHTLY

BRACKISHSWAMPSOFCOASTALESTUARIESANDMARSHBORDERS

0ENFOUNDAND(ATHAWAY	-IXTURESOCCURALONG

THESHALLOWBORDERSOFALLUVIALSWAMPSANDmATSAND

WHERESUCHSITESGRADEINTOUPLANDSWAMPS7ATERTUPELO

SITESARECHARACTERIZEDBYDEEPERANDLONGERPERIODSOF

mOODINGTHANSWAMPTUPELOSITESANDBYHIGHERP(AND

SILT
PLUS
CLAYCONTENTBUTLOWERORGANICMATTERCONTENTOF

THESURFACESOIL+LAWITTER	

4HETYPEISPERMANENTONMOSTSITESBECAUSEOFANNUAL

mOODING2ELATIVELYRAPIDSOILAGGRADATIONOVERLIMITED

AREASINALLUVIALBOTTOMSUNDOUBTEDLYDOESOCCUR4HE

RESULTINGIMPROVEMENTINSOILAERATIONSHOULDFAVOR

CHANGESINCOMPOSITIONFOLLOWINGTHESEQUENCEOBSERVED

INSOUTHERNBOTTOMSONSITESWITHINCREASINGDRAINAGE

0UTNAMETAL	

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 4HEREARENO

COMMONVARIATIONSOFTHISTYPE5NCUTSTANDSOFWATER

ORSWAMPTUPELOARETYPICALLYVERYDENSELYSTOCKED

)NWATERTUPELOSTANDSWITHNORMALLYDEEPmOODING

UNDERGROWTHISOFTENLIMITEDTOSCATTEREDSHRUBSWITH

SOMEAQUATICHERBS%PIPHYTICMOSSESANDLICHENSARE

COMMONONTHEEXPOSEDTREETRUNKSPARTICULARLYTHE

LOWERANDNORTH
FACINGPORTIONSANDTHECROWNSMAYBE

DRAPEDWITH3PANISHMOSS7ET
SITESHRUBSBECOMEMORE

ABUNDANTALONGSHALLOWMARGINSOFTHESWAMPSORIN

STANDOPENINGSSPECIESOCCURRINGWIDELYANDFREQUENTLY

INCLUDEBUTTONBUSHSWAMP
PRIVET6IRGINIASWEETSPIRE

6IRGINIA
WILLOW	SWAMPDOGWOODSWAMPCYRILLA

LEUCOTHOEPOSSUMHAWSWAMPROSEANDPOISON
SUMAC

7OODYVINESFREQUENTLYOCCURRINGALONGTHESHALLOW

SWAMPMARGINSAREGREENBRIERS!LABAMASUPPLEJACK

SOUTHEASTDECUMARIACROSSVINEPEPPERVINEANDPOISON


IVY

)NTHEUSUALLYSHALLOWERUPLANDSWAMPSWHERESWAMP

TUPELOISDOMINANTTHEREAREADDITIONALWOODYPLANTS

NOTCOMMONTOTHEALLUVIALSWAMPS4HESEINCLUDESUCH

SPECIESASBUCKWHEAT
TREEDAHOONYAUPONSOUTHERN

BAYBERRYFETTERBUSHLYONIASUMMERSWEETCLETHRASWEET

PEPPERBUSH	ANDSEVERALHAWTHORNS

(!2293,!23%.

!UBURN5NIVERSITY
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


3WEETBAYn3WAMP4UPELOn2EDBAY



$ElNITIONANDCOMPOSITION #OMBINATIONSOF

SWEETBAYWITHSWAMPTUPELOREDBAYORBOTHPROVIDE

AMAJORITYOFTHESTOCKINGANDLOCALLYANYONEOFTHE

THREEMAYPOSSESSAPLURALITY!GREATMANYSPECIESTHAT

GROWONMOISTTOWETSITESMAYBEASSOCIATEDWITHTHIS

TYPEDEPENDINGUPONGEOGRAPHICLOCATIONSITEANDSTAND

HISTORY#OMMONHARDWOODSINCLUDEREDMAPLEBLACK

TUPELOLOBLOLLY
BAYSWEETGUMWATEROAKLAURELOAK

YELLOW
POPLAR!MERICANHOLLY#AROLINAASHSOUTHERN

MAGNOLIAANDmOWERINGDOGWOOD!SSOCIATEDCONIFERS

INCLUDEBALDCYPRESSPONDCYPRESSSLASHPINELONGLEAF

PINELOBLOLLYPINEPONDPINEAND!TLANTICWHITE
CEDAR

'EOGRAPHICDISTRIBUTION 4HETYPEISFOUNDTHROUGH


OUTTHESOUTHERN#OASTAL0LAINFROM-ARYLANDAND

SOUTHEASTERN6IRGINIATOSOUTHEASTERN4EXAS)TISMOST

EXTENSIVEINTHELOWER#OASTAL0LAIN)NDIVIDUALSTANDSOF

THISTYPEARECOMMONLYLIMITEDINAREAALTHOUGHLOCALLY

THEYMAYPREDOMINATE

%COLOGICALRELATIONSHIPS 4HETYPEOCCURSONSITES

WHERETHESOILISNORMALLYSATURATEDORATLEASTMOIST

THROUGHOUTTHEGROWINGSEASON3URFACEmOODINGALSO

OCCURSONSOMESITESBUTITDOESNOTPERSISTTHROUGHTHE

GROWINGSEASON3ITESINCLUDEBRANCHHEADSTHENARROW

BOTTOMSOFSMALLPERENNIALORINTERMITTENTSTREAMSOR

BRANCHESPOCOSINSANDPOORLYDRAINEDUPLANDDEPRES


SIONSINTHE#OASTAL0LAINSUCHASSMALLPONDSPEAT

BOGSANDTHEBORDERSOFSWAMPS

3OILSARESANDYINTEXTUREANDPREDOMINANTLYCOLLUVIAL

INORIGINALTHOUGHNARROWALLUVIALmOODPLAINSOCCURIN

STREAMBOTTOMS4HEWETTERSITESARECONSISTENTLYVERY

ACIDP(
ANDRELATIVELYSTERILEWHEREASSITES

WITHBETTERDRAINAGEAREFREQUENTLYVERYPRODUCTIVE

3TANDSONMOREACIDSTERILESITESGENERALLYCONTAINA

HIGHPROPORTIONOFHARDWOODEVERGREENSSUCHASREDBAY

SWEETBAYANDLOBLOLLY
BAYASWELLASTHECONIFERSPOND

PINEAND!TLANTICWHITE
CEDAR-ONK	

$EEPmOODINGINPONDSANDAROUNDSWAMPBORDERS

FAVORSSWAMPTUPELOPONDCYPRESSBALDCYPRESSANDRED

MAPLE)MPROVEDDRAINAGEINCREASESREPRESENTATIONOF

SUCHSPECIESASBLACKTUPELOYELLOW
POPLARSWEETGUM

!MERICANHOLLYANDSOUTHERNMAGNOLIA#HANGESINSOIL

DRAINAGEANDRELATEDPROPERTIESAREOFTENABRUPTAND

OVERSHORTDISTANCESSTANDSMAYCONTAINSPECIESREPRE


SENTATIVEOFBOTHTHEMOREDEEPLYmOODEDSWAMPSAND

THESURROUNDINGUPLANDS4HETYPEISPERMANENTBECAUSE

OFPERSISTENTSOILSATURATION

$ESPITETHEUSUALWETNESSOFTHESITESlRESFREQUENTLY

SPREADINTOSTANDSFROMTHESURROUNDINGUPLANDS&IRE

DURINGDROUGHTCANBEVERYDESTRUCTIVEBECAUSEOFTHE

mAMMABLENATUREOFTHEPEATACCUMULATIONSANDTHEEV


ERGREENFOLIAGEOFMANYSPECIES)NPEATYBOGSANDSHAL


LOWSWAMPS!TLANTICWHITE
CEDARMAYDOMINATEIFTHE

PEATISTOOWETTOBURN3HALLOWBURNSFAVORPONDPINE

BUTSTANDSMAYREVERTTOPONDCYPRESSnSWAMPTUPELO

AFTERDEEPBURNS7ELLS	&IRESONBETTER
DRAINED

SITESWITHMINERALSOILSINCREASETHEREPRESENTATIONOF

SHADE
INTOLERANTSPECIESSUCHASSLASHANDLONGLEAFPINE

YELLOW
POPLARANDSWEETGUMBUTSELECTIVECUTTINGOF

THESESPECIESHASKEPTTHEIRNUMBERSLOW'EMBORYSAND

(ODGKINS	2ECURRENTlRESONANYSITETENDTODE


VELOPEVERGREENSHRUBORGRASS
SEDGE
RUSHCOMMUNITIES

6ARIANTSANDASSOCIATEDVEGETATION 4HETYPEITSELF

EXHIBITSSUCHWIDEVARIATIONTHATTHEREISNOSINGLE

COMMONVARIANT5NDERGROWTHISBOTHABUNDANTAND

DIVERSE%VERGREENSHRUBSANDSMALLTREESAREPREVALENT

PARTICULARLYONTHEPOORLYDRAINEDACIDSITES#OMMON

SPECIESINCLUDEBUCKWHEATTREESWAMPCYRILLASOUTHERN

BAYBERRYODORLESSBAYBERRYDAHOONYAUPONLARGEGALL


BERRYINKBERRYCOASTLEUCOTHOEFETTERBUSHANDSTAGGER


BUSHLYONIASUMMERSWEETCLETHRASWEETPEPPERBUSH	

ANDSWITCHCANE#OMMONDECIDUOUSSHRUBSARE6IRGINIA

SWEETSPIRE6IRGINIA
WILLOW	HAZELALDERSWAMPDOG


WOODREDCHOKEBERRYPOISON
SUMAC!MERICANSNOW


BELLPOSSUMHAWVIBURNUMANDNUMEROUSERICACEOUS

SPECIES

'REENBRIERSMUSCADINEGRAPEPOISON
IVY*APANESE

HONEYSUCKLE6IRGINIACREEPERSOUTHEASTDECUMARIAAND

CLIMBINGHEMPWEEDARECOMMONPERENNIALVINES(ER


BACEOUSSPECIESOCCURRINGWITHINTHISTYPEAREINCOM


PLETELYCATALOGUEDANDARETOONUMEROUSANDVARIABLETO

LIST3OMERELATIVELYCOMMONANDCHARACTERISTICREPRE


SENTATIVESHOWEVERAREFERNSMOSSESPITCHERPLANTS

PIPEWORTSYELLOW
EYEDGRASSESANDSEDGES

(!2293,!23%.

!UBURN5NIVERSITY

2EFERENCES#ITED

"ONCK*AND740ENFOUND0LANTSUCCESSIONON

ABANDONEDFARMLANDINTHEVICINITYOF.EW/RLEANS

,OUISIANA!MERICAN-IDLAND.ATURALIST


"RAUN%,&ORESTSOFTHE)LLINOIANTILLPLAINOF

SOUTHWESTERN/HIO%COLOGICAL-ONOGRAPHS




"ROADFOOT7-(ARDWOODSUITABILITYFORAND

PROPERTIESOFIMPORTANT-IDSOUTHSOILS 53$E


PARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE&OREST3ERVICE2ESEARCH

!GRICULTURAL(ANDBOOKP

#HAPMAN!'&ORESTSOFTHE)LLINOIANTILLPLAINOF

SOUTHEASTERN)NDIANA%COLOGY


#RIBBEN,$AND)!5NGAR2IVERBIRCH"ETULA

NIGRA,	COMMUNITIESOFSOUTHEASTERN/HIO/HIO

"IOLOGICAL3URVEY.OTES/HIO3TATE5NIVERSITY

#OLUMBUSP

&OREST3ERVICE53$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE

7OODY
PLANT SEED MANUAL 53 $EPARTMENT OF
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

!GRICULTURE-ISCELLANEOUS0UBLICATIONP

&OWELLS(!COMPILER	3ILVICSOFFORESTTREES

OFTHE5NITED3TATES53$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE

&OREST3ERVICE!GRICULTURE(ANDBOOKP

'EMBORYS32AND%*(ODGKINS&ORESTSOF

SMALLSTREAMBOTTOMSINTHE#OASTAL0LAINOFSOUTH


WESTERN!LABAMA%COLOGY


(OOK$$#,"ROWNAND00+ORMANIK

)NDUCTIVEmOODTOLERANCEINSWAMPTUPELO.YSSA

SYLVATICAVARBImORA;7ALT=3ARG	*OURNALOF%XPERI


MENTAL"OTANY	


+ILKUS0!#OVERTYPINGAPROPOSEDRESEARCH

NATURALAREAFORSOUTHERN)LLINOISWITHANIN
DEPTHAP


PROACHTOMETHODEVALUATION-34HESIS3OUTHERN

)LLINOIS5NIVERSITY#ARBONDALEP

+LAWITTER2!3WEETGUMSWAMPTUPELOANDWA


TERTUPELOSITESINA3OUTH#AROLINABOTTOMLANDFOREST

0H$4HESIS$UKE5NIVERSITY$URHAM.#P

,ANGDON/'  3ILVICALCHARACTERISTICSOF

BALDCYPRESS53$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE&OREST

3ERVICE3OUTHEASTERN&OREST%XPERIMENT3TATION

0APERP

,ITTLE%,*R!TLASOF5NITED3TATESTREESVOL

&LORIDA53$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE&OREST

3ERVICE-ISCELLANEOUS0UBLICATION

,ITTLE%,*R#HECKLISTOF5NITED3TATESTREES

NATIVEANDNATURALIZED	53$EPARTMENTOF!GRI


CULTURE&OREST3ERVICE!GRICULTURAL(ANDBOOK

P

-C+NIGHT*3%COLOGYOFFOURHARDWOODSPE


CIES0ROCEEDINGSOFTHE,OUISIANA3TATE5NIVERSITY

&ORESTRY3YMPOSIUM


-ONK#$!NECOLOGICALSTUDYOFHARDWOOD

SWAMPSINNORTHCENTRAL&LORIDA%COLOGY


-ONTZ'.AND!#HERUBINI!NECOLOGICAL

STUDYOFABALDCYPRESSSWAMPIN3T#HARLES0ARISH

,OUISIANA#ASTANEA


0ENFOUND743OUTHERNSWAMPSANDMARSHES

"OTANICAL2EVIEW


0ENFOUND74AND%3(ATHAWAY0LANTCOM


MUNITIESINTHEMARSHLANDSOFSOUTHEASTERN,OUISIANA

%COLOGICAL-ONOGRAPHS


0ENFOUND74AND*!(OWARD!PHYTOSOCIO


LOGICALSTUDYOFANEVERGREENOAKFORESTINTHEVICINITY

OF.EW/RLEANS,OUISIANA!MERICAN-IDLAND.ATU


RALIST


0UTNAM*!AND("ULL4HETREESOFTHEBOT


TOMLANDSOFTHE-ISSISSIPPI2IVERDELTAREGION53

$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE&OREST3ERVICE3OUTHERN

&OREST%XPERIMENT3TATION/CCASIONAL0APER

P

0UTNAM*!'-&URNIVALAND*3-C+NIGHT

-ANAGEMENTANDINVENTORYOFSOUTHERNHARDWOODS

53$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE&OREST3ERVICE!GRI


CULTURE(ANDBOOKP

3ARGENT#3-ANUALOFTHETREESOF.ORTH!MERI


CA$OVER0UBLICATIONS)NC.EW9ORKP

3OCIETYOF!MERICAN&ORESTERS3!&	&OREST

COVERTYPESOF.ORTH!MERICAEXCLUSIVEOF-EXICO	

3OCIETYOF!MERICAN&ORESTERS7ASHINGTON$#

PP

3TERNITZKE(ERBERT3"ALDCYPRESSENDANGEREDOR

EXPANDINGSPECIES%CONOMIC"OTANY


4ELFORD#*4HIRDREPORTONAFORESTSURVEYOF

)LLINOIS)LLINOIS.ATURAL(ISTORY3URVEY"ULLETIN




6OIGT*7AND2(-OHLENBROCK0LANTCOMMU


NITIESOFSOUTHERN)LLINOIS3OUTHERN)LLINOIS5NIVERSITY

0RESS#ARBONDALEP

7ELLS"70LANTCOMMUNITIESOFTHE#OASTAL

0LAINOF.ORTH#AROLINAANDTHEIRSUCCESSIONALRELA


TIONS%COLOGY


7ELLS"7%COLOGICALPROBLEMSOFTHESOUTH


EASTERN5NITED3TATES#OASTAL0LAIN"OTANICAL2EVIEW




7ISTENDAHL7!4HEmOODPLAINOFTHE2ARITAN

2IVER.EW*ERSEY%COLOGICAL-ONOGRAPHS



 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


!PPENDIX"

#OMMONAND3CIENTIlC.AMESOF0LANTAND4REE3PECIES

#OMMONNAME 3CIENTIlCNAME

0LANTS

!MERICAPOKEWEEDSEEPOKEBERRY	 0HYTOLACCAAMERICANA

!MERICANWORMSEEDSEE-EXICANTEA	 #HENOPODIUMAMBROSIOIDES

!NNUALRAGWEEDSEERAGWEED	 !MBROSIAARTEMISIFOLIA

!QUATICMILKWEEDSEEMILKWEED	 !SCLEPIASPERENNIS

!UTUMNOLIVE %LAEAGNUSUMBELLATA

"AHIAGRASS 0ASPALUMNOTATUM

"EAKRUSHSEEMILLETBEAKRUSH	 2HYNCHOSPORAMILIACEA

"EGGARTICKSEESMALL
FRUITBEGGARTICK	 "IDENSMITIS

"ERMUDAGRASS #YNODONDACTYLON

"LACKBERRY 2UBUSARGUTUS

"ONESET %UPATORIUMPERFOLIATUM

"RAZILIANPEPPERTREE 3CHINUSTEREBINTHIFOLIUS

"ROOMSEDGE !NDROPOGONVIRGINICUS

"UGLEWEED ,YCOPUSSPP

"URNWEED %RECHTITESHIERACIFOLIA

"UR
REEDBURREED	 3PARGANIUMSPP

"USHYBEARDGRASSBUSHYBLUESTEM	 !NDROPOGONGLOMERATUS

#ANE !RUNDINARIAGIGANTEA

#ATTAIL 4YPHALATIFOLIA

#HAIN
FERN 7OODWARDIASPP

#HINESEBUSHCLOVER ,ESPEDEZA CUNEATA

#HINESETALLOW 4RIADICASEBIFERUM

#OCKLEBUR 8ANTHIUMSPP

#OFFEEWEED 3ESBANIAMACROCARPA

#OGONGRASS )MPERATACYLINDRICA

#OMMONCARPETGRASSSEE3OUTHERNCARPETGRASS	 !XONOPUSlSSIFOLIUS

#ORALHONEYSUCKLE ,ONICERASEMPERVIRENS

#RABGRASS $IGITARIASPP

$EWBERRY 2UBUSHISPIDUS

$OGFENNELSEESMALLDOGFENNEL	 %UPATORIUMCAPILLIFOLIUM

&ALSENETTLESEESMALL
SPIKEFALSENETTLE	 "OEHMERIACYLINDRICA

&ERNVARIOUSSPECIES /SMUNDASPP4HELYPTERISSPP

&ESCUE &ESTUCASPP

&LORIDAPOKEWEED 0HYTOLACCAAMERICANAVARRIGIDA

'ERANIUMSEEPURPLECRANES
BILLGERANIUM	 'ERANIUMCAROLINIANUM

'OLDENCLUB /RONTIUMAQUATICUM

'OLDENROD 3OLIDAGOSPP

'OLDENWEEDSEEGROUNDSEL	 0ACKERAAUREUS

'ROUNDSELSEEGOLDENWEED	 0ACKERAAUREUS

(AIRLIKEMOCKBISHOP
WEEDSEEMOCKBISHOP
WEEDHERBWILLIAM	 0TILIMNIUMCAPILLACIUM

(ERBWILLIAMSEEHAIRLIKEMOCKBISHOP
WEEDMOCKBISHOP
WEED	 0TILIMNIUMCAPILLACIUM

(ONEYSUCKLE*APANESE	 ,ONICERAJAPONICA

(ORSEWEED #ONZYACANADENSIS

*APANESECLIMBINGFERN ,YGODIUMJAPONICUM

*APANESEPRIVET ,IGUSTRUMJAPONICUM

*OHNSONGRASS 3ORGHUMHALEPENSE
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

#OMMONNAME 3CIENTIlCNAME

+UDZU 0UERARIALOBATA

,ICORICE7EED 3COPARIADULCIS

,IZARDSTAIL 3AURURUSCERNUUS

-ELALEUCA -ELALEUCALEUCADENDRON

-EXICANTEASEE!MERICANWORMSEED	 #HENOPODIUMAMBROSIOIDES

-EXICANWATER
HEMLOCKSEEWATER
HEMLOCK	 #ICUTAMACULATA

-ILKWEEDSEEAQUATICMILKWEED	 !SCLEPIASPERENNIS

-ILLETBEAKRUSHSEEBEAKRUSH	 2HYNCHOSPORAMILIACEA

-OCKBISHOP
WEEDSEEHAIRLIKEMOCKBISHOP
WEEDHERBWILLIAM	 0TILIMNIUMCAPILLACIUM

-ORNINGGLORY )POMOEASPP

-ULTImORAROSE 2OSAMULTImORA

.UTSEDGE #YPERUSSPP

0ANICGRASS 0ANICUMSPP

0ERUVIANSEEDBOXSEEPRIMROSEWILLOW	 ,UDWIGIAPERUVIANA

0ICKERELWEEDSEEPICKERELWEED	 0ONTEDERIACORDATA

0ICKERELWEEDSEEPICKERELWEED	 0ONTEDERIACORDATA

0INELANDPIMPERNELSEEWATERPIMPERNIL	 3AMOLUSVALERANDIVARPARVImORUS

0OKEBERRYSEE!MERICANPOKEWEED	 0HYTOLACCAAMERICANA

0OORJOE $IODIATERES

0RIMROSEWILLOWSEE0ERUVIANSEEDBOX	 ,UDWIGIAPERUVIANA

0URPLECRANES
BILLGERANIUMSEEGERANIUM	 'ERANIUMCAROLINIANIUM

2AGWEED !MBROSIASPP

2OUGHBUTTON
WEED $IODIARADULA

3ERICEALESPEDEZA ,ESPEDEZACUNEATA

3HEATHEDmATSEDGE #YPERUSHASPAN

3HINYSPIKEGRASSSEESPIKEGRASSSHINYWOOD
OATS	 #HASMANTHIUMNITIDUM

3HINYWOOD
OATSSEESHINYSPIKEGRASSSPIKEGRASS	 #HASMANTHIUMNITIDUM

3ICKLEPOD #ASSIAOBTUSIFOLIA

3MALLDOGFENNELSEEDOGFENNEL	 %UPATORIUMCAPILLIFOLIUM

3MALL
FRUITBEGGARTICKSEEBEGGARTICK	 "IDENSMITIS

3MALL
SPIKEFALSENETTLESEEFALSENETTLE	 "OEHMERIACYLINDRICA

3MARTWEED 0OLYGONUMSPP

3OUTHERNCARPETGRASSSEECOMMONCARPETGRASS	 !XONOPUSAFlNIS

3OUTHERNCRABGRASS $IGITARIACILIARIS

3PIKEGRASSSEESHINYSPIKEGRASSSHINYWOOD
OATS	 #HASMANTHIUMNITIDUM

3UMACPOISON 4OXICODENDRONVERNIX

3UMACSMOOTH 2HUSGLABRA

3UMACWINGED 2HUSCOPALLINA

3UNmOWER (ELIANTHUSSPP

3WAMPLILY #RINIUMAMERICANUM

3WEETBROOM 3COPARIADULCIS

3WEETCLOVER -ELILOTUSSPP

4RUMPETCREEPER #AMPSISRADICANS

6ASEYGRASS 0ASPALUMURVILLEI

6ETCH 6ICIASPP

7ATER
HEMLOCKSEE-EXICANWATER
HEMLOCK	 #ICUTAMACULATA

7ATERPIMPERNILSEEPINELANDPIMPERNEL	 3AMOLUSVALERANDIVARPARVImORUS

7ILDGRAPE 6ITISSPP

7ILDONION !LLIUMSPP

7INTERVETCH 6ICIAVILLOSA

7OOLYCROTON #ROTONCAPITATUS
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


#OMMONNAME 3CIENTIlCNAME

4REES

!MERICANBEECH

!MERICANELM

!MERICANHOLLY

!MERICANHORNBEAM

"ALDCYPRESS

"ITTERPECANSEEWATERHICKORY	

"LACKCHERRY

"LACKGUM

"LACKWALNUT

"LACKWILLOW

"OXELDER

"UCKTHORNBUMELIABUCKTHORNBULLY	

"UROAK

"UTTONBUSH

#AROLINAASH

#EDARELM

#HERRYBARKOAK

#OMMONPERSIMMON

$AHOON

$ECIDUOUSHOLLY

$ELTAPOSTOAK

%ASTERNCOTTONWOOD

%ASTERNHOPHORNBEAM

&IR

&LORIDAMAPLE

&LOWERINGDOGWOOD

'REENASH

(ACKBERRY

(AWTHORN

(ONEYLOCUST

,AURELDIAMONDLEAF	OAK

,IVEOAK

,OBLOLLYBAY

.UTTALLOAK

/GEECHEETUPELO

/VERCUPOAK

0AWPAW

0INOAK

0ONDCYPRESS

0OSSUMHAW

0UMPKINASH

2EDBAY

2EDMULBERRY

2IVERBIRCH

2OUGH
LEAFEDDOGWOOD

3ANDBARWILLOW

3ASSAFRAS

3HAGBARKHICKORY

3HELLBARKHICKORY

3HUMARDOAK

3ILVER MAPLE

&AGUSGRANDIFOLIA

5LMUSAMERICANA

)LEXOPACA

#ARPINUSCAROLINIANA

4AXODIUMDISTICHUM

#ARYAAQUATICA

0RUNUSSEROTINA

.YSSASYLVATICA

*UGLANSNIGRA

3ALIXNIGRA

!CERNEGUNDO

3IDEROXYLONLYCIOIDES

1UERCUSMACROCARPA

#EPHALANTHUSOCCIDENTALIS

&RAXINUSCAROLINIANA

5LMUSCRASSIFOLIA

1UERCUSPAGODA

$IOSPYROSVIRGINIANA

)LEXCASSINE

)LEXDECIDUA

1UERCUSSTELLATAVARMISSISSIPPIENSIS

0OPULUSDELTOIDES

/STRYAVIRGINIANA

!BIESSP

!CERBARBATUM

#ORNUSmORIDA

&RAXINUSPENNSYLVANICA

#ELTISOCCIDENTALIS

#RATAEGUSSPP

'LEDITSIATRIACANTHOS

1UERCUSLAURIFOLIA

1UERCUSVIRGINIANA

'ORDONIALASIANTHUS

1UERCUSNUTTALLIICURRENTACCEPTEDNOMEN


CLATUREIS1TEXANA	

.YSSAOGECHE

1UERCUSLYRATA

!SIMINATRILOBA

1UERCUSPALUSTRIS

4AXODIUMDISTICHUMVARNUTANS

)LEXDECIDUA

&RAXINUSPROFUNDA

0ERSEABORBONIA

-ORUSRUBRA

"ETULANIGRA

#ORNUSDRUMMONDII

3ALIXEXIGUA

3ASSAFRASALBIDUM

#ARYAOVATA

#ARYALACINIOSA

1UERCUSSHUMARDII

!CERSACCHARINUM
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

#OMMONNAME 3CIENTIlCNAME

3LIPPERYELM 5LMUSRUBRA

3OUTHERNMAGNOLIA -AGNOLIAGRANDImORA

3PRUCE 0ICEASP

3UGARBERRY #ELTISLAEVIGATA

3WAMPBAY 0ERSEAPALUSTRIS

3WAMPBLACKGUMSEESWAMPTUPELO	 .YSSASYLVATICAVARBImORA

3WAMPCHESTNUTOAK 1UERCUSMICHAUXII

3WAMPCOTTONWOOD 0OPULUSHETEROPHYLLA

3WAMPDOGWOOD #ORNUSFOEMINA

3WAMPPRIVET &ORESTIERAACCUMINATA

3WAMPREDMAPLE !CERRUBRUM

3WAMPTUPELOSEESWAMPBLACKGUM	 .YSSASYLVATICAVARBImORA

3WAMPWHITEOAK 1UERCUSBICOLOR

3WEETBAY -AGNOLIAVIRGINIANA

3WEETGUM ,IQUIDAMBARSTYRACImUA

3WEETPECAN #ARYAILLINOENSIS

3YCAMORE 0LATANUSOCCIDENTALIS

7ATERELM 0LANERAAQUATICA

7ATERHICKORYSEEBITTERPECAN	 #ARYAAQUATICA

7ATERLOCUST 'LEDITSIAAQUATICA

7ATEROAK 1UERCUSNIGRA

7ATERTUPELO .YSSAAQUATICA

7HITEASH &RAXINUSAMERICANA

7HITEOAK 1UERCUSALBA

7ILLOWOAK 1UERCUSPHELLOS

7INGEDELM 5LMUSALATA

9ELLOWPOPLAR ,IRIODENDRONTULIPIFERA
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


!PPENDIX#

0ARTIAL,ISTOF3EEDAND3EEDLING3UPPLIERS

3%%$ -ISSOURI ,OVELACE3EEDS)NC

!LABAMA )NTERNATIONAL&OREST3EED#OMPANY

0/"OX

"ROWNSMILL2D

%LSBERRY-/

/DENVILLE!,

	
IN!LABAMA

	
OUTOFSTATE

&AX	


	


&AX	


7EBPAGEWWWINWEBNET^LOVELACE

%
MAIL LOVELACE INWEBNET

7EBPAGEHTTPISSCOLINNAEUSCOM .ORTH#AROLINA -OUNTAIN&ARMS)NC

!RKANSAS "ARRONS)NC 2OAD

/UACHITA &AIRVIEW.#

#AMDEN!2  	


&AX	


&LORIDA -ATT"UCHANAN

2OUTE"OX

-AYO&,

3OUTH#AROLINA 4HOMAS#AVERLY

0/"OX

/RANGEBURG3#

'EORGIA #0$ANIELS)NC

0/"OX 4ENNESSEE $ON-ARCUM

7AYNESBORO'!

	


2OUTE"OX

3PENCER4.

&AX	


7EBPAGEWWWBURKENETCPDANIEL

%
MAILCTDAN BURKENET

7EST4ENNESSEE&OREST3EED#O

*OYNERS(ILL2OAD

"ELLS4.

3OUTHERN3EED#OMPANY

0/"OX

	


-OBILEPHONE	


"ALDWIN'! &AX	


	
 3%%$,).'3

&AX	


34!4%&/2%3429.523%2)%3

+ENTUCKY ,ASSITER%NTERPRISES

3HADY,ANE !LABAMA %!(AUSS.URSERY

-IDWAY+9
 2OUTE"OX

!TMORE!,

,OUISIANA ,OUISIANA&OREST3EED#OMPANY

&ORESTRY2OAD

,E#OMPTE,!

	


&AX	


%
MAIL LFSCO POPALEXLINKNETNET

!RKANSAS !RKANSAS&ORESTRY#OMMISSION

"AUCUM.URSERY

(IGHWAY.ORTH

.ORTH,ITTLE2OCK!2

	


&AX	


-ISSISSIPPI 7ILLIAM("ROWN*R 'EORGIA &LINT2IVER.URSERY

&ORESTRY#ONSULTANT 2IVEROAD

7HISPERING0INES2OAD "YROMVILLE'!

.ATCHEZ-3 	


&AX	

!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

7ALKER.URSERY .ORTH#AROLINA #LARIDGE.URSERY

(#"OX #LARIDGE.URSERY2OAD

2EIDSVILLE'!
 'OLDSBORO.#

	
 	


&AX	


)LLINOIS -ASON.URSERY

.ORTH#OUNTY2OAD%AST %DWARDS.URSERY

4OPEKA), 3ANFORD$RIVE

	
 -ORGANTON.#

&AX	
 	


&AX	


5NION.URSERY

3TATE2D #OASTAL0LAIN#ONSERVATION.URSERY

*ONESBORO), #ONNERS$RIVE

	
 %DENTON.#

&AX	
 	


&AX	


+ENTUCKY -ORGAN#OUNTY.URSERY

4REE.URSERY2D /KLAHOMA &ORESTRY$IVISION.URSERY

7EST,IBERTY+9 .ORTHEASTTH!VENUE

	
 'OLDSBY/+

&AX	
 	


&AX	


*OHN22HODY.URSERY

0/"OX 3OUTH#AROLINA 3OUTH#AROLINA&ORESTRY#OMMISSION

'ILBERTSVILLE+9 0/"OX

	
 #OLUMBIA3#

&AX	
 	


,OUISIANA #OLUMBIA.URSERY 4ENNESSEE 0INSON.URSERY

0/"OX 0/"OX/ZIER2OAD

#OLUMBIA,! 0INSON4.

	
 	


&AX	
 &AX	


*EANE&ARMS 4EXAS )NDIAN-OUND.URSERY

(IGHWAY 0/"OX

#ASTOR,! !LTO48


	
 	


&AX	


-ISSISSIPPI -ISSISSIPPI&ORESTRY#OMMISSION %
MAILIMN INUNET

(IGHWAY

7INONA-3 6IRGINIA !UGUSTA&ORESTRY#ENTER

	
 0/"OX

&AX	
 #RIMORA6!

%
MAILHARDWOOD NETWORK
ONECOM 	


-ISSOURI 'EORGE/7HITE.URSERY .EW+ENT&ORESTRY#ENTER

3HAFER2OAD 0OCAHONTAS4RAIL

,ICKING-/ 0ROVIDENCE&ORGE6!

	
 	


&AX	
 &AX	

 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


!LABAMA

!RKANSAS

&LORIDA

3TATEOF6IRGINA&ORESTRY

7EBPAGEHTTPSTATEVIPNETORGDOF

02)6!4%.523%2)%3

"ECKS.URSERY

0/"OX

!UBURN!,

)NTERNATIONAL0APER

!LABAMA3UPERTREE.URSERY

#OUNTY2OAD

3ELMA!,

	
OR	


&AX	


)NTERNATIONAL0APER

&RED#'RAGG3UPERTREE.URSERY

2OUTE"OX

"LUFF#ITY!2

	


&AX	


7EYERHAUSER

-AGNOLIA2EGENERATION#ENTER

#OLUMBIA%AST

-AGNOLIA!2

	
OR	


&AX	


!PALACHEE.ATIVE.URSERY

2OUTE"OX

,LOYD&,

	


&AX	


!MERICAN.ATIVE0RODUCTS

0/"OX

3COTTSMOORE &,

	
OR	


&AX	


#ENTRAL&LORIDA,ANDSAND4IMBER

.URSERY$IVISION

2OUTE"OX

-AYO&,

	


&AX	


%
MAILCmAT ALLTELNET

#ENTRAL&LORIDA.ATIVE&LORA)NC

0/"OX

3AN!NTONIO&,


	


#OASTAL2EVEGETATION

3OUTH&EDERAL(IGHWAY

$ELRAY"EACH&,

	


#REATIVE.ATIVE

0/"OX

0ERRY&,

	


$ANS.ATIVE.URSERY

,AKE%ASY2OAD

"ABSON0ARK&,

%COSHORES)NC

3OUTH.OVA2OAD

0ORT/RANGE&,

	


&AX	


&LORIDA.ATIVES.URSERY)NC

%HRLICH2OAD3UITE!

4AMPA&,

	


'ONE.ATIVE.URSERY

0/"OX

*ENSEN"EACH&,


	
OR	


'REEN)MAGES

4AYLOR#REEK2OAD

#HRISTMAS&,

	


&AX	


%
MAILGREENIMAGE AOLCOM

4HE,INER&ARM

0/"OX

3AINT#LOUD&,


	


&AX	


0LANTSFOR4OMORROW

.ORRIS2OAD

,OXAHATCHEE&,


3ALTER4REE&ARM

2OUTE"OX

-ADISON&,

	

!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

3AVE
ON
0LANTS,INER.URSERY)NC

2OUTE"OX

!RCADIA&,

#YPRESS#REEK.URSERY

#LAY
!NSLEY(IGHWAY

2USTON,!

3UPERIOR4REES)NC

0/"OX

.ATIVES.URSERY

.ORTH4HEARD3T

53%AST

,EE&,

	


&AX	


#OVINGTON,!

	


&AX	


%
MAILNATIVES WILDNET

4HE.ATIVES .ORTHEAST$ELTA2#$

*"#ARTER2OAD &RONT3TREET

$AVENPORT&,

	


4HE0ALMETTO0ATCH

7INNSBORO,!

	


&AX	


%
MAILNEDRCD LINKNETNET

0ASCO2OAD

7ESLEY#HAPEL&,

	


2ICHARDS.URSERY

2OUTE"OX

&OREST(ILL,!

4HE7ETLANDS#OMPANY)NC

0/"OX

3ARASOTA&,

-ARYLAND %NVIRONMENTAL#ONCERN)NC

7EST#HEW!VENUE

0/"OX0

5RBAN&ORESTRY3ERVICES

2OUTE"OX

-ICANOPY&,

3T-ICHAELS-$ 

	


&AX	


'EORGIA /AK0OND&ARM

2OUTE"OX

-ISSISSIPPI "EAR#REEK.URSERY

0ATRICK2OAD

4WIN#ITY'!

	


3PANDLE.URSERY

2OUTE"OX

#ANTON-3

	


&AX	


%
MAILGH AOLCOM

)OWA

#LAXTON'! 

	


&AX	


%
MAILSPANDLAG NETNET

#ASCADE&ORESTY3ERVICE

3ILLMORE2D

#ASCADE)!

$ELTA6IEW.URSERY

2OUTE"OX

/LD(IGHWAY3OUTH

,ELAND-3

	


&AX	


7EB PAGEWWWTECINFOCOM^HARDWOODS

%
MAILHARDWOODS TECINFOCOM

,OUISIANA

	


&AX	


7EBPAGEWWWCASCADEFORESTRYCOM

%
MAIL#ASCADE NETINSNET

"OSCH.URSERY)NC

(WY

*ONESBORO,!

%ASTOF%DEN.URSERY

2OUTE"OX!

9AZOO#ITY-3

	


4HOMAS.URSERY

2OUTE"OX!

	


&AX	


(IGHWAY

%NTERPRISE-3
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


-ISSOURI

.ORTH#AROLINA

/KLAHOMA

4ENNESSEE

9AZOO(ARDWOOD.URSERY

2T"OX

0HILIPP-3

	


&AXSAMEASPHONENUMBER

%
MAILYHNURSERY MICROSPEDCOM

&ORREST+EELING.URSERY

(WY3OUTH

%LSBERRY-/

	


4OM,ETT.URSERY

2OUTE"OX#

#APE'IRARDEAU-/

	


7EYERHAUSER

'EORGE(UNT7ALKER.URSERY

$INAHS,ANGING2D

7ASHINGTON.#

	


&AX	


'REENLEAF.URSERY

2OUTE"OX

0ARK(ILL/+

	


"OYD.URSERY

0/"OX

-C-INNVILLE4.

	
OR	


&AX	


'REENWOOD.URSERY

-YERS#OVE2D

-C-INNVILLE4.

	
INSTATEOR

	


&AX	


(ILLIS.URSERY

'ARDNER2D

(IGHWAY3

-C-INNVILLE4.

	


&AX	


7EBPAGEWWWHILLISNURSURERCOM

%
MAILHILLISNSY BLOMANDNET

*OYNERS(ILLS.URSERY

*OYNERS(ILL2OAD

"ELLS4.

	


&AX	


4REESBY4OULIATOS

"ROOKS2OAD

-EMPHIS4.

	


&AX	


7ARREN#OUNTY.URSERY

"EERSHEBA(WY

-C-INNVILLE4.

	


&AX	


7EBPAGEWCNURSERY BLOMANDNET

4EXAS 'REENLEAF.URSERY

(#"OX

(IGHWAY3

%L#AMPA48

	


&AX	


6IRGINIA 5NION#AMP.URSERY

%PPES$RIVE

#APRON6!


	


!DDITIONAL3OURCESOF)NFORMATION

!SSOCIATIONOF&LORIDA.ATIVE.URSERIES


0LANTAND3ERVICE,OCATOR0/"OX3AN

!NTONIO&,	


0LANT)NDUSTRY$IVISION#ERTIlED.URSERIESAND

0LANT#OLLECTORSOF.ORTH#AROLINA2ALEIGH.#

.ORTH#AROLINA$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE;.OTE

/THERSTATESMAYHAVESIMILARDIRECTORIES=

3OIL#ONSERVATION3ERVICE3TAFF$IRECTORYOF

7ETLAND0LANT6ENDORS7ETLANDS2ESEARCH0ROGRAM

4ECHNICAL2EPORT720
3-
6ICKSBURG-ISS53

!RMY#ORPSOF%NGINEERS7ATERWAYS%XPERIMENT

3TATION
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

!PPENDIX$

3PECIES
3ITE2ELATIONSHIPSINTHE-IDSOUTH

7ALTER"ROADFOOT	IDENTIlEDANUMBEROFSOIL

TYPESINTHEMIDSOUTHTHATSUPPORTGOODGROWTHOFBOT


TOMLANDHARDWOODSPECIES4HESESOILTYPESARELOCATED

INlVESOILAREAS-ISSISSIPPI2IVERmOODPLAINCOM


MONLYCALLEDTHE$ELTA	,OESS#OASTAL0LAINmOOD


PLAINSOFTHE2EDAND!RKANSAS2IVERSANDTHE"LACK


LANDAREASlGS$
$	

4HEFOLLOWINGINFORMATIONANDTABLESONSOILTYPES

ISTAKENALMOSTVERBATIMFROM"ROADFOOTSPUBLICATION

h3OIL3UITABILITYFOR(ARDWOODSINTHE-IDSOUTHv!C


CORDINGTO"ROADFOOTh)NFORMATIONWASCOMPILEDFROM

DATAANDOBSERVATIONOFNATURALSTANDSANDMAYNOTAPPLY

WHEREPHYSICALCHEMICALANDMORPHOLOGICALCONDITIONS

OFTHESOILHAVEBEENWORSENEDORWHERETHEREAREUN


USUALSOILVARIATIONSSUCHASSANDRIDGESANDEXCEPTION


ALLYDRYPHASES3PECIES
SITERELATIONSHIPSINPLANTATIONS

MAYALSODIFFERFROMTHOSEINDICATEDv"ROADFOOT

P
	

4HEREADERSHOULDKEEPINMINDTHATTHEFOOTNOTESON

EACHTABLEREFERTOhWEEDSPECIESvANDSUGGESTWHICH

SPECIESTOFAVORORNOTINMANAGEMENTFROMATIMBER

PRODUCTIONPOINTOFVIEW)FTHEFORESTTOBERESTOREDWILL

BEUSEDFORPURPOSESOTHERTHANTIMBERPRODUCTIONTHE

TABLESYMBOLSANDFOOTNOTESMUSTBEINTERPRETEDCARE


FULLY-ANYSPECIESTHATARECONSIDEREDhWEEDSvFROMA

TIMBERPRODUCTIONPERSPECTIVEAREOFTENCONSIDEREDDESIR


ABLEFORWILDLIFESEETABLE	

$ELTA

4HE$ELTAAREASOILSLIEINTHEmOODPLAINSOFTHE-IS


SISSIPPI2IVER4HESOILSAREFORMEDFROMALLUVIALMATE


RIALWASHEDDOWNFROMNORTHERNPARTSOFTHEWATERSHED

4HEYAREFERTILEANDUNDERPROPERMANAGEMENTTHEYARE

SOMEOFTHEBESTPRODUCERSOFHARDWOODTIMBER&OUR

MAJORTYPESOFSOILSOCCURINTHE$ELTARECENTNATURAL

LEVEEOLDNATURALLEVEESLACKWATERANDDEPRESSIONAL

SOILSEACHOFWHICHISMORESUITABLEFORSOMESPECIES

THANOTHERSTABLE$	

6ARIATIONSINSOILSOFNATURALLEVEESCANBETRACED

TODIFFERENCESINDRAINAGEANDTEXTURE4HEALLUVIAL

SEDIMENTSAREINTHElRSTSTAGESOFDEVELOPMENTBECAUSE

THEYHAVEBEENINPLACESUCHASHORTTIME4HESOILSARE

USUALLYNEUTRALTOALKALINEBECAUSEOFLACKOFLEACHING

4HEYARELIGHTINCOLORBECAUSEORGANICMATTERHASNOT

HADTIMETOBUILDUP

4HEOLDNATURALLEVEESOILSAREACIDBECAUSETHEYHAVE

BEENLEACHED4HESESOILSINADDITIONTOSPECIESCOM


MONONTHEYOUNGERNATURALLEVEESSUPPORTOAKSAND

HICKORIESASWELLASSASSAFRAS

4HESLACK
WATERAREASARENEARLYLEVELORGENTLYSLOP


INGOCCUPYBROADAREASANDAREUSUALLYSOMEDISTANCE

FROMTHEPRESENTANDFORMERCHANNELSOFTHE-ISSISSIPPI

2IVER4HEIRCLAYCONTENTISHIGHANDHASDEVELOPED

UNDERCONDITIONSOFPOORDRAINAGE4HESESITESSUPPORTA

HIGHSPECIESDIVERSITY

$EPRESSIONALSOILSOCCURINOLDPARTLYlLLEDRIVER

CHANNELSTHROUGHOUTTHE-ISSISSIPPI2IVERmOODPLAIN

4HESECHANNELSPROVIDEMEANSFORTHESLOWRETURNOF

mOODWATERSTOTHEBAYOUSANDMAINRIVER4HEYARETHE

LOWESTLYINGSOILSOFTHEREGIONANDARESUBJECTTOPERI


ODICmOODINGBYLOCALRUNOFF(ARDWOODSPECIESONTHESE

SOILSARELIMITEDTOTHOSEMOSTTOLERANTOFPOORDRAINAGE

ANDAERATION

,OESS

4HISISTHENARROWBANDOFWIND
DEPOSITEDSOILS

LYINGIMMEDIATELYEASTANDWESTOFTHE$ELTA4HESE

AREMOSTLYUPLANDSOILSBUTSUPPORTMANYOFTHESAME

SPECIESFOUNDONHIGHERBOTTOMLANDSITES3OILTEXTURE

ISUNIFORMUSUALLYSILTLOAMTOSILTYCLAYLOAM4HESE

SOILSAREHIGHLYERODIBLEIFENOUGHEROSIONHASOCCURRED

SOTHATASITEHASLESSTHANSIXINCHESOFTOPSOILTHESITE

ISCONSIDEREDMORESUITABLEFORPINESTHANHARDWOODS

3OMESOILSHAVEPANSORAREUNDERLAIDWITHSTIFFCLAYS

0INESHOULDALSOBEFAVOREDONTHESESITESALONGWITH

SPECIESSUCHASCHERRYBARK3HUMARDANDWHITEOAKAND

SWEETGUM4HEGENERALSOILCLASSESINTHE,OESSAREAARE

UPLANDTERRACESACIDBOTTOMSANDNEUTRALTOALKALINE

BOTTOMSTABLE$	

4ERRACESOILSINTHE,OESSAREASHOWCONSIDERABLE

PROlLEDEVELOPMENT!NUMBEROFTHETERRACESOILSARE

POORLYDRAINEDANDHAVESTRONGPANSTHATSERIOUSLYLIMIT

ROOTDEVELOPMENTANDHEIGHTGROWTHOFHARDWOODS0RES


ENCEOFPANSSHOULDBEINVESTIGATEDBYUSEOFTHESOIL

SURVEYORlELDINSPECTION

!NUMBEROFRIVERmOODPLAINSINTHE,OESSAREABORDER

THE$ELTAONTHEEAST'ENERALLYTHESAMEVARIETYOFSPE


CIESFOUNDONTHETERRACESOFTHISSOILAREONTHEBOTTOMS

4HEMIDDLEANDLOWERSLOPESOFTHEUPLANDANDTHEACID

BOTTOMSAREPARTICULARLYPRODUCTIVE
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


4ABLE$3OILSUITABILITYFORSOUTHERNHARDWOODSINTHE$ELTAAREA4REENOMENCLATUREFOLLOWS,ITTLE	

0OSTANDSPECIALTYSPECIESBLACKLOCUSTCATALPAANDmOWERINGDOGWOODONMODERATELYTOWELL
DRAINEDACIDSOILS/SAGE
ORANGEONNEUTRALTOALKALINESOILSMULBERRYONALLSOILS

,IMITEDCOMMERCIALLYORINOCCURRENCEBOXELDERONNEUTRALTOALKALINESOILSBUROAK!MERICANHOLLYWINGEDELMONACIDSOILSPOSTOAKRIVERBIRCHHICKORIESEXCWATER	ANDWHITEOAKONWELL


CEDARELMBUCKEYEAND+ENTUCKYCOFFEETREEONALLSOILS

7EEDSPECIES!MERICANHORNBEAMAND

/CCURSFREQUENTLYFAVORINMANAGEMENT /CCURSFREQUENTLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR

/CCURSOCCASIONALLYFAVOR /CCURSOCCASIONALLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/.

4ABLE$3OILSUITABILITYFORSOUTHERNHARDWOODSINTHE,OESSAREA4REENOMENCLATUREFOLLOWS,ITTLE	

)NCLUDESALLSLOPESGREATERTHAN

0OSTANDSPECIALTYSPECIESBLACKLOCUSTmOWERINGDOGWOODANDCATALPAONWELL
DRAINEDACIDSOILSEASTERNREDCEDARANDMULBERRYONALLSOILS

,IMACWILLOWONALLPOORLYDRAINEDSOILSPECANCHINABERRYCEDARELMWINGEDELMANDBUCKEYEONALLSOILSSPRUCEPINEONACIDLOWERSLOPESTERRACESANDBOTTOMS7EEDSPECIES%ASTERNHOPHORNBEAMAND!MERICANHORNBEAMONACIDTERRACESANDBOTTOMSBLACKJACKOAKANDSMOOTHSUMAC /CCURSFREQUENTLYFAVORINMANAGEMENT /CCURSFREQUENTLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR /CCURSOCCASIONALLYFAVOR /CCURSOCCASIONALLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR
ZAGORA RUNO

 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


#OASTAL0LAIN "LACKLAND

-ANYSOILSSUPPORTINGHARDWOODSINTHEMIDSOUTH 4HE"LACKLANDSOILSOCCURIN!LABAMA-ISSISSIPPI

AREONTERRACESANDBOTTOMSWITHINTHE#OASTAL0LAIN ANDEASTERN4EXASWITHSMALLERAREASIN,OUISIANAAND

)NGENERALTHEYARESANDYACIDANDLACKINGINNATURAL !RKANSAS4HEYAREFOUNDWITHINTHE#OASTAL0LAINAREA

FERTILITYBUTSOMEHAVEADEQUATEMOISTUREANDDRAINAGE BUTDIFFERINTHEIRPRAIRIE
LIKENATUREANDCOLOR4HEPRIN


FORGOODBOTTOMLANDHARDWOODDEVELOPMENT4ABLE$ CIPALSOILCLASSESARESHOWNINTABLE$

LISTSTHEMAJOR#OASTAL0LAINSOILSANDSOMEOFTHEMAJOR -OSTSOILSARENEUTRALTOALKALINEBUTSOMEHAVE

HARDWOODSPECIESTHATNATURALLYOCCURONTHEM WEATHEREDENOUGHTOBECOMESLIGHTLYACID4EXTUREIS

4ABLE$3OILSUITABILITYFORSOUTHERNHARDWOODSINTHE#OASTAL0LAINAREA4REENOMENCLATUREFOLLOWS,ITTLE	

4ERRACES "OTTOMS FROM #OASTAL 0LAIN MATERIALS

)MPORTANT COMMERCIAL SPECIES #AHABA &LINT 3TOUGH /CHLOCK
 -ANTACHIE "IBB #HASTAIN *OHNSTON

+ALMIA 0RENTISS 7AHEE ONEE 5RBO

!MITE 4ILDEN -YATT )UKA #OARSE &INE

) ,EAF " SURFACE SURFACE

!SH GREEN AND WHITE

"ALDCYPRESS

"EECH !MERICAN

"IRCH RIVER

#HERRY BLACK

#OTTONWOOD EASTERN

%LMS SLIPPERYAND !MERICAN

(ACKBERRYAND SUGARBERRY

(ICKORIES EXC WATER	

-AGNOLIA SOUTHERN

-APLE RED

/AK CHERRYBARK

/AK LAUREL

/AK .UTTALL

/AK OVERCUP

/AK 3HUMARD

/AK SOUTHERN RED

/AK SWAMP CHESTNUT

/AK WATER

/AK WHITE

/AK WILLOW

0ERSIMMON COMMON

0INESEXC SPRUCE	

0INE SPRUCE

3WEETGUM

3YCAMORE !MERICAN

4UPELO BLACK

4UPELO WATER

7ALNUT BLACK

9ELLOW
POPLAR

0OSTANDSPECIALTYSPECIESBLACKLOCUSTANDmOWERINGDOGWOODONMOISTWELL
DRAINEDSOILSMULBERRYONALLSOILS

,IMITEDCOMMERCIALLYORINOCCURRENCEBASSWOODPECANPOSTOAKANDSILVERMAPLEONWELL
DRAINEDSOILSSHINGLEOAKSWEETBAYANDSWAMPTUPELOONPOORLYDRAINEDSOILSBOXELDERWINGEDELM

HONEYLOCUSTBLACKWILLOWSASSAFRAS!MERICANHOLLYBUCKEYECHINABERRYANDCOMMONSWEETLEAFONALLSOILS

7EEDSPECIESBLACKJACKOAKANDSMOOTHSUMACONWELL
DRAN

HORNBEAMDEVILS
WALKING
STICKHAWTHORNANDmATWOODSPLUMONALLSOILS

/CCURSFREQUENTLYFAVORINMANAGEMENT /CCURSFREQUENTLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR

/CCURSOCCASIONALLYFAVOR /CCURSOCCASIONALLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR
6ERONA

!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

4ABLE$3OILSUITABILITYFORHARDWOODSINTHE"LACKLANDAREA4REENOMENCLATUREFOLLOWS,ITTLE	

"OTTOM SOILS

)MPORTANTCOMMERCIAL SPECIES 4ERRACE 2ECENT

CA CAREOUS L

&INE
TEXTURED ACID &INE
TEXTURED

SOILS COARSE AND

+IPLING MEDIUM


'EIGER TEXTURED +AUFMAN (OULKA 5NA #ATALPA ,EEPER

-ARIETTA 7EST 0OINT 4USCUMBIA

!SH GREEN ANDWHITE

#OTTONWOOD EASTERN

%LMS SLIPPERY AND !MERICAN

(ACKBERRY ANDSUGARBERRY

(ICKORIES EXC WATER	

-APLE RED

-APLE SILVER

/AK CHERRYBARK

/AK $URAND

/AK .UTTALL

/AK OVERCUP

/AK POST

/AK 3HUMARD

/AK SWAMP CHESTNUT

/AK WATER

/AK WHITE

/AK WILLOW

0ERSIMMON COMMON

3WEETGUM

3YCAMORE !MERICAN

4UPELO BLACK

9ELLOW
POPLAR



.ONERODEDPHASESONLY

0OSTANDSPECIALTYSPECIESBLACKLOCUSTANDCATALPAONALLWEL

3PECIESLIMITEDCOMMERCIALLYORINOCCURRENCEBOXELDERWINGEDELMHONEYLOCUSTANDPECANONALLSOILS!MERICANBEECHSOUTHERNMAGNOLIASPRUCEPINE!MERICANHOLLYSHINGLEOAKSASSAFRAS

ANDCHINABERRYONALLACIDSOILSBLACKWALNUTANDBLACKCHERRYONA

POORLYDRAINEDSOILS

7EEDSPECIESHAWTHORNANDPRIVETONALLSOILS!MERICANHORNBEAMEASTERNHOPHORNBEAMROUGHLEAFDOGWOODANDmATWOODSPLUMONALLACIDSOILSSMOOTHSUMACONALLMOISTWELL
DRAINED

SOILSREDBUDAND(ERCULES
CLUBONTERRACESANDACIDSOILS

/CCURSFREQUENTLYFAVORINMANAGEMENT /CCURSFREQUENTLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR

/CCURSOCCASIONALLYFAVOR /CCURSOCCASIONALLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR

MOSTLYlNEORCLAY
SIZED4HEALLUVIALSOILSAREFERTILE

ENOUGHTOSUPPORTEXCELLENTGROWTHOFSOMEHARDWOODS

PROVIDEDMOISTUREANDDRAINAGEAREADEQUATE

2EDAND!RKANSAS2IVER&LOODPLAINS

2EDDISH
BROWNSOILSOCCUPYTHEmOODPLAINSOFTHE

!RKANSASAND2ED2IVERSANDINCLUDEACIDTOALKALINE

SANDSSILTSANDCLAYS4HEMOREALKALINESOILSOCCURIN

THE2ED2IVERmOODPLAINANDTHEMOREACIDSOILSOCCURIN

THE!RKANSAS2IVERmOODPLAIN4HETWOMAINSOILCLASSES

DESCRIBEDFORTHISAREAARETERRACEANDBOTTOMSOILSTABLE

$	

4ERRACESOILSRANGEFROMMODERATELYTOWELLDRAINED

ACIDSOILSTOSOMEWHATPOORLYDRAINEDTOPOORLYDRAINED

ACIDSOILS"OTTOMLANDSOILSRANGEFROMACIDTONEUTRALTO

ALKALINETOCALCAREOUSINP(4HEYAREGENERALLYMODER


ATELYTOWELLDRAINED
-ER 2OUGE 0LEDGER

 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


4ABLE$3OILSUITABILITYFORHARDWOODSINTHE2EDAREA4REENOMENCLATUREFOLLOWS,ITTLE	

4ERRACES "OTTOMS

)MPORTANT COMMERCIAL SPECIES -C+AMIE -ORSE 'ORE 0ULASKI 9AHOLA (EBERT -ILLER

(ORTMAN !SA !CADIA 'ALLION .ORWOOD 0ORTLAND "UXIN

%L I ICAN

(I I

L

ILLOW

0INES

I

I LLE

!SH GREEN AND WHITE

#OTTONWOOD EASTERN

MS SL PPERYAND!MER

(ACKBERRYAND SUGARBERRY

CKOR ES EXC WATER	

(ONEYLOCUST

/AK CHERRYBARK

/AK .UTTAL

/AK OVERCUP

/AK SWAMPCHESTNUT

/AK WATER

/AK WHITE

/AK W

0ECAN

3WEETGUM

3YCAMORE !MER CAN

4UPELO BLACK

-USKOGEE 7R GHTSVI ,ONOKE 0ERRY 2OEBUCK

0OSTANDSPECIALTYSPECIESBALDCYPRESSONALLPOORLYDRAINEDSOILS

ALLSOILS

3PECIESLIMITEDCOMMERCIALLY WINGEDELMSASSAFRASAND3HUMARD

OAKON PUMPKINASHWATERHICKORYANDPINOAKONALLPOORLYDRAINED

SOILSCEDARELMCHINABERRYANDREDMAPLEONALLSOILS

7EEDSPECIES!MERICANHORNBEAMANDEASTERNO

/CCURSFREQUENTLYFAVORINMANAGEMENT /CCURSFREQUENTLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR

/CCURSOCCASIONALLYFAVOR /CCURSOCCASIONALLYMANAGEBUTDONOTFAVOR

2EFERENCES#ITED

"ROADFOOT7-3OILSUITABILITYFORHARDWOODS

INTHE-IDSOUTH53&OREST3ERVICE2ESEARCH.OTE

3/
P

,ITTLE%,*R#HECKLISTOFNATIVEANDNATURALIST

TREESOFTHE5NITED3TATESINCLUDING!LASKA	53

$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE(ANDBOOKPP
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

!PPENDIX%

3PECIES
3ITE2ELATIONSHIPSINTHE3OUTHERN!TLANTIC#OASTAL

0LAIN

2ECOGNIZINGTHEINCREASINGDEMANDFORHARDWOODSFOR

BOTHPULPWOODANDSAWTIMBERTHE!MERICAN0ULPWOOD

!SSOCIATIONDEVELOPEDABOOKLETONSTANDSOFBOTTOMLAND

HARDWOODS+ELLISONANDOTHERS	)NTHISBOOKLET

THEAUTHORSDISCUSSSITETYPESSTANDASSESSMENTSAND

SILVICULTURALSYSTEMSANDREGENERATIONMETHODS+ELLISON

ANDOTHERS	DISCUSSIONONSITETYPESISREPRODUCED

HEREWITHPERMISSION

2ECOGNITIONOFSITETYPEISESSENTIALFORPROPERMAN


AGEMENTOFBOTTOMLANDHARDWOODS3ITETYPESARELAND

FORMATIONSWITHUNIQUESOILANDWATERCHARACTERISTICSAND

SPECIESCOMPOSITIONS"OTTOMLANDSITETYPESBESTSUITED

FORHARDWOODSINCLUDEMUCKSWAMPSREDRIVERBOTTOMS

BLACKRIVERBOTTOMSBRANCHBOTTOMSCYPRESSSTRANDS

CYPRESSDOMESAND0IEDMONTBOTTOMLANDS(YDROLOGIC

CHARACTERISTICSANDSPECIESCOMPOSITIONOFTHEBOTTOM


LANDTYPESARESHOWNINTABLE%

2EFERENCE#ITED

+ELLISON2#-ARTIN*0(ANSEN'$AND,EA2

2EGENERATINGANDMANAGINGNATURALSTANDSOF

BOTTOMLANDHARDWOODS7ASHINGTON$#!MERICAN

0ULPWOOD!SSOCIATION!0!
!
P

4ABLE%"OTTOMLANDHARDWOODSITETYPESBYSURFACEWATERCLASSIlCATIONANDINDICATORSPECIES

(ARDWOOD3ITE4YPE 3URFACE7ATER#LASSIlCATION )NDICATOR3PECIES

-UCKSWAMP &LOODEDTOMONTHS "ALDCYPRESSTUPELO

2EDRIVERBOTTOM &LOODEDWINTERSPRING 3YCAMORESWEETGUMCHERRYBARKOAK

"LACKRIVERBOTTOM &LOODEDWINTERSPRING 4UPELOSWAMPBLACKGUM

"RANCHBOTTOM "OGGYTHROUGHOUTYEAR 3WAMPBLACKGUM

#YPRESSSTRAND &LOODEDWINTERSPRINGSUMMER "ALDCYPRESS

#YPRESSDOME &LOODEDTHROUGHOUTYEAR 0ONDCYPRESSBALDCYPRESS

0IEDMONTBOTTOMLAND &LOODEDWINTER 9ELLOW
POPLARSWEETGUM

-5#+37!-0

6ERYPOORLYDRAINEDAREAUSUALLYWITHSTANDINGWATER

BROADEXPANSESBETWEENTIDEWATERANDUPSTREAMRUNS

ANDALONGBLACKRIVERSANDBRANCHBOTTOMSTANDSALSO

FOUNDINMINIATUREINSLOUGHSANDOLDOXBOWSOFRED

RIVERSANDBRANCHBOTTOMSCHARACTERIZEDBYACCUMULATION

OFORGANICMATTERAMORPHOUSLACKINGSTRUCTURE	3OILS

RANGEFROMSILTLOAMTHROUGHCLAY7ATERTUPELOAND

BALDCYPRESSARECOMMONINDEEPLYmOODEDAREASAND

SWAMPBLACKGUMPREDOMINATESTOWARDTHEFRINGES

'ROUNDLINE

7ATERTABLE
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


2%$2)6%2"/44/-

&LOODPLAINOFMAJORDRAINAGESYSTEMORIGINATINGIN

THE0IEDMONTOR-OUNTAINS)MMEDIATELYADJACENTTOTHE

DRAINAGESYSTEMSSLOUGHSANDOXBOWSARECOMMONLY

FOUNDIFOFSUFlCIENTSIZETHEYARECLASSIlEDASMUCK

SWAMPS3OMEORGANICMATTERMAYACCUMULATEONTHE

CLAYSOILS7ATERTUPELOPREDOMINATESOVERCYPRESSRED

MAPLESWAMPBLACKGUMSWAMPCOTTONWOODLAURELOAK

ANDOTHERS"EYONDTHESLOUGHSANDOXBOWSARElRSTBOT


TOMSLOWRIDGES	WHICHmOODPERIODICALLYTOCONSIDER


ABLEDEPTHS(OWEVERDRAINAGEISFAIRLYRAPIDBECAUSEOF

HIGHERELEVATION3OILSRANGEFROMSANDYLOAMSORCLAY

LOAMS3PECIESINCLUDESWEETGUMASHWATERHICKORY

SYCAMOREREDMAPLERIVERBIRCHELMHACKBERRYAND

WILLOWWATERLAURELANDOVERCUPOAKS!TSTILLHIGHER

ELEVATIONSSECONDBOTTOMSANDTERRACESAREFOUND&LOOD


INGISINFREQUENTORRAREANDMOREMESOPHYTICSPECIESOF

CHERRYBARKSWAMPCHESTNUTANDWHITEOAKSHICKORIES

BEECHANDOCCASIONALLYYELLOW
POPLAROCCUR%XAMPLES

OFREDRIVERBOTTOMARE2OANOKE
6IRGINIA.ORTH

#AROLINA3ANTEE
3OUTH#AROLINA/CONEE
'EORGIAAND

!LABAMA
!LABAMA

",!#+2)6%2"/44/-

&LOODPLAINOFMAJORWATERSYSTEMORIGINATINGINTHE

#OASTAL0LAIN#LASSIlCATIONOFMINORSITETYPESAND

SPECIESSIMILARTOREDRIVERBOTTOMWITHEXCEPTIONOF

MUCKSWAMPSBEINGMOREPREVALENTANDlRSTANDSECOND

BOTTOMSANDTERRACESBEINGONAMOREMODESTSCALE0RE


DOMINANTSPECIESARESWEETGUMTUPELOREDMAPLEAND

CUT
LEAFREDOAK%XAMPLESOFBLACKRIVERBOTTOMSARE

"LACKWATER
6IRGINIA7ACCAMAW
.ORTH#AROLINA3OUTH

#AROLINA"LACK
3OUTH#AROLINAAND3T-ARYS
'EORGIA

AND&LORIDA
!'5)$%4/"/44/-,!.$(!2$7//$2%34/2!4)/. 

"2!.#("/44/-

2ELATIVELYmATALLUVIALLANDALONGMINORDRAINAGE

SYSTEMWHICHISSUBJECTTOMINOROVERmOW/NWETTER

PORTIONSWITHHEAVIERSOILSTHEPREDOMINANTSPECIES

AREWILLOWWATERANDLAURELOAKSSWAMPBLACKGUM

SWEETGUMREDMAPLEANDASH4HELIGHTERSOILSOFSECOND

BOTTOMSANDTERRACESSUPPORTCHERRYBARK3HUMARD

SWAMPCHESTNUTANDWHITEOAKSSWEETGUMHICKORY

YELLOW
POPLARANDLOBLOLLYPINE3LOUGHSANDOXBOWSOF

LIMITEDEXTENTALONGTHEMAINCHANNELSUPPORTTUPELOAND

SWAMPBLACKGUM%XAMPLES"IG3WAMP
.ORTH#ARO


LINA7AMBAW
3OUTH#AROLINA

#902%33342!.$

,OWAREASINSOUTH'EORGIAANDNORTHERN&LORIDA

WHERESHALLOWWATERmOWSDURINGTHEWETSEASONABOVE

THEHARDPANWHICHISUSUALLYPRESENT3UCHSTRANDSOR

STRINGERSARECOMMONINTHELOWER!PALACHICOLA2IVER

REGIONINCLUDING4ATES(ELL3WAMP#YPRESSFORESTS

INTHESESTRANDSAREUSUALLYOPENWITHSEDGESBENEATH

3OMECYPRESSTREESEXTENDINTOADJACENTSAVANNAHS

ANDBOGGYmATWOODSOFSLASHPINEANDEVENLONGLEAF

PINE"LACKGUMISACOMMONASSOCIATEJUSTBENEATHTHE

CYPRESSCANOPY4HESOILSVARYINDEPTHOFTHESURFACEOR


GANICHORIZONANDINTHEPRESENCEORABSENCEOFASPODIC

ORANARGILLICHORIZON4HEVALUESFORP(ANDAVAILABLE

NUTRIENTSAREGENERALLYLOW
 ).&/2-!4)/.!.$4%#(./,/'92%0/2453'3"2$n


#902%33$/-%

)SOLATEDPEATYACIDDEPRESSIONDOME	USUALLYFOUND

IN&LORIDAWHICHISMOISTORINUNDATEDFORWEEKSOR

MONTHSATATIME0ONDCYPRESSPREDOMINATESBUTOTHER

SPECIESSUCHASBLACKGUMSLASHPINESWEETBAYAND

LOBLOLLYBAYAREFOUNDONSMALLHUMMOCKSWHERETHE

HYDROPERIODISLESSPROLONGED'ROUNDCOVERISUSUALLY

ABSENTEXCEPTONHUMMOCKS4HETALLESTTREESOCCURIN

THECENTEROFTHEDOMESWHEREPEATCANACCUMULATETO


FEETINDEPTHOTHERTREESAREPROGRESSIVELYSHORTERTO

THEPERIPHERY$OMESTYPICALLYHAVECLAYPANSORLENSES

BENEATHTHESANDYSURFACESOILSWHICHSERVETOLIMITSUB


SURFACEGROUNDWATERRECHARGE

0)%$-/.4"/44/-,!.$

)NLOWER0IEDMONTCONDITIONSIDENTICALTOREDRIVER

BOTTOMAREENCOUNTERED(OWEVERUPSTREAMSLOUGHS

OXBOWSANDlRSTBOTTOMSDECREASEINFREQUENCYANDAREA

UNTILONLYWELL
DRAINEDBOTTOMLANDSECONDBOTTOMAND

TERRACE	ISENCOUNTERED3PECIESINCLUDESYCAMOREBIRCH

YELLOW
POPLARSWEETGUMGREENASHCOTTONWOODWATER

ANDWILLOWOAKLOBLOLLYPINEANDOTHERS%XAMPLESOF

BOTTOMLANDSITE
TYPESARE-EHERRIN
6IRGINIA.EUSE


.ORTH#AROLINA3ALUDA
3OUTH#AROLINA/CONEE
'EORGIA

AND3IPSEY
!LABAMA
4HE53$!PROHIBITSDISCRIMINATIONINALLITSPROGRAMSANDACTIVITIESONTHEBASISOFRACECOLORNATIONALORIGINSEXRELIGION

AGEDISABILITYPOLITICALBELIEFSSEXUALORIENTATIONORMARITALORFAMILYSTATUS .OTALLPROHIBITEDBASESAPPLYTOALLPROGRAMS	

0ERSONSWITHDISABILITIESWHOREQUIREALTERNATIVEMEANSFORCOMMUNICATIONOFPROGRAMINFORMATION"RAILLELARGEPRINTAUDIOTAPE

ETC	SHOULDCONTACT53$!S4!2'%4#ENTERAT	
VOICEAND4$$	

4OlLEACOMPLAINTOFDISCRIMINATIONWRITE53$!$IRECTOR/FlCEOF#IVIL2IGHTS2OOM
77HITTEN"UILDING

)NDEPENDENCE!VENUE377ASHINGTON$# 
ORCALL	
VOICEAND4$$	 53$!ISANEQUALOPPORTUNITY

PROVIDERANDEMPLOYER

4HE&OREST3ERVICE5NITED3TATES$EPARTMENTOF!GRICULTURE53$!	ISDEDICATEDTOTHEPRINCIPLE

OFMULTIPLEUSEMANAGEMENTOFTHE.ATIONSFORESTRESOURCESFORSUSTAINEDYIELDSOFWOODWATERFORAGE

WILDLIFEANDRECREATION4HROUGHFORESTRYRESEARCHCOOPERATIONWITHTHE3TATESANDPRIVATEFORESTOWNERS

ANDMANAGEMENTOFTHE.ATIONAL&ORESTSAND.ATIONAL'RASSLANDSITSTRIVESASDIRECTEDBY#ONGRESSTO

PROVIDEINCREASINGLYGREATERSERVICETOAGROWING.ATION

53$EPARTMENTOFTHE)NTERIOR

53'EOLOGICAL3URVEY

!STHE.ATIONSPRINCIPALCONSERVATIONAGENCYTHE$EPARTMENT

OFTHE)NTERIORHASRESPONSIBILITYFORMOSTOFOURNATIONALLYOWNED

PUBLICLANDSANDNATURALRESOURCES4HISRESPONSIBILITYINCLUDESFOS


TERINGTHESOUNDUSEOFOURLANDSANDWATERRESOURCESPROTECTINGOUR

lSHWILDLIFEANDBIOLOGICALDIVERSITYPRESERVINGTHEENVIRONMENTAL

ANDCULTURALVALUESOFOURNATIONALPARKSANDHISTORICALPLACESAND

PROVIDINGFORTHEENJOYMENTOFLIFETHROUGHOUTDOORRECREATION 4HE

$EPARTMENTASSESSESOURENERGYANDMINERALRESOURCESANDWORKSTO

ENSURETHATTHEIRDEVELOPMENTISINTHEBESTINTERESTSOFALLOURPEOPLE

BY ENCOURAGING STEWARDSHIP AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THEIR CARE

4HE$EPARTMENTALSOHASAMAJORRESPONSIBILITYFOR!MERICAN)NDIAN

RESERVATIONCOMMUNITIES

2EVISED-AY

0RINTEDONRECYCLEDPAPER

!'UIDETO"OTTOMLAND(ARDWOOD2ESTORATION  53'3"2$)42
AND53$!&OREST3ERVICE'ENERAL4ECHNICAL2EPORT323