United States

Department

of Agriculture

Forest Service

Rocky Mountain

Research Station

Proceedings 

RMRS-P-34

September 2004

Silviculture in Special Places:

Proceedings of the

2003 National Silviculture Workshop

September 8-11, 2003

Granby, Colorado 
Shepperd, Wayne D.; Eskew, Lane G., compilers. 2004. Silviculture in special 

places: Proceedings of the National Silviculture Workshop; 2003 September 8-11; 

Granby, CO. Proceedings RMRS-P-34. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 255 p.

Abstract

This proceedings presents a compilation of 20 manuscripts and five posters summarizing results of research studies and management projects conducted throughout 

the United States in areas with special natural resource values. Topics include the 

restoration of various fire dependent forest ecosystems, studies of historical ecology, 

use of genetics in silviculture, development of old growth and late-successional 

prescriptions, documenting natural regeneration in burned areas, comparisons 

of cutting methods, coping with advancing blister rust, delineation of rare aspen 

forests, two-aged management in Appalachian hardwoods, forest soil productivity, 

managing a recreation river, and forest structure/burn severity relationships.

Key words: silviculture, forest management, genetics, forest restoration, prescribed 

fire, fuels treatments, cutting methods, white pine blister rust

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Natural Resources Research Center

2150 Centre Avenue, Building A

Fort Collins, CO 80526

You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your 

mailing information in label form through one of the following media. 

Please specify the publication title and series number.

Fort Collins Service Center

Telephone (970) 498-1392

FAX (970) 498-1396

E-mail rschneider@fs.fed.us

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/rm

Mailing address Publications Distribution

 Rocky Mountain Research Station

 240 West Prospect Road

 Fort Collins, CO 80526
Silviculture in Special Places:

Proceedings of the 2003 National Silviculture Workshop

September 8-11, 2003

Granby, Colorado

Contents*

*Papers from workshop speakers are published here in the order in which presentations appeared on the 

workshop agenda.

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

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Past, Present, and Future Role of Silviculture in Forest Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Russell T. Graham and Theresa Benavidez Jain

A Collaborative Fire Hazard Reduction/Ecosystem Restoration Stewardship 

Project in a Montana Mixed Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-Fir/Western Larch 

Wildland Urban Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Steve Slaughter, Laura Ward, Michael Hillis, Jim Chew, Rebecca McFarlan

Silvicultural Activities in Pringle Falls Experimental Forest, Central Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Andrew Youngblood, Kim Johnson, Jim Schlaich, and Boyd Wickman

Enhancing Moist Forest Restoration Opportunities in Riparian Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Theresa Benavidez Jain and Russell T. Graham

Silvics and Silviculture in the Southwestern Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Gerald J. Gottfried

A Prescription for Old-Growth-Like Characteristics in Southern Pines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Don C. Bragg

Spatial Distribution of Ponderosa Pine Seedlings Along Environmental 

Gradients Within Burned Areas in the Black Hills, South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

V.H. Bonnet, A.W. Schoettle, and W.D. Shepperd

The Cutting Methods Demonstration Study at Fraser Experimental Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Wayne D. Shepperd, Lance A. Asherin, Stephen A. Mata, and Douglas L. McClain

Silviculture in Cooperation With Hunters: The Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative . . . . . . 110

Scott Reitz, Andrea Hille, and Susan Stout

Restoring the Longleaf Pine Ecosystem: The Role of Container Seedling Technology . . . . . 127

James P. Barnett

Restoration and Management of Eastern White Pine Within High Blister Rust 

Hazard Zones in the Lake States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

S. A. Katovich, J. G. O’Brien, M. E. Mielke, and M. E. Ostry
Developing Proactive Management Options to Sustain Bristlecone and Limber 

Pine Ecosystems in the Presence of a Non-Native Pathogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

A. W. Schoettle

Long-Term Sustainability in Davis Late Successional Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

Jim Stone and Joan Kittrell

Development of a Protocol for the Ecological Assessment of a Special Species . . . . . . . . . 164

David Burton

Composition and Development of Reproduction in Two-Age Appalachian 

Hardwood Stands: 20-Year Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

Gary W. Miller, James N. Kochenderfer, and Desta Fekedulegn

Shortleaf Pine-Bluestem Habitat Restoration in the Interior Highlands: Implications 

for Stand Growth and Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182

James M. Guldin, John Strom, Warren Montague, and Larry D. Hedrick

The North American Long-Term Soil Productivity Experiment: Coast-to-Coast 

Findings From the First Decade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

Robert F. Powers, Felipe G. Sanchez, D. Andrew Scott, and Deborah Page-Dumroese

Caring for a Wild and Scenic River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

Kris Hazelbaker

Is Forest Structure Related To Fire Severity? Yes, No, and Maybe: Methods 

and Insights in Quantifying the Answer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

Theresa Benavidez Jain and Russell T. Graham

Lessons Learned in 84-Year-Old Plots at Looking-Glass Rock, North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . 235

David L. Loftis, W. Henry McNab, Erik C. Berg, and Ted M. Oprean

Poster Abstracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242

Attendees of the 2003 National Silviculture Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
vi USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Preface

As our agency enters the 21st century, we increasingly find ourselves engaged in the 

protection and management of forest ecosystems in “special” places for a complex 

mixture of resource values. Some of these areas are special because of where 

they are or what they contain, while others are special because of their history or 

because they are suitable for special uses. However, the one common feature of 

the special areas addressed in this document is that they are in forest ecosystems. 

Maintaining these special values within these forest ecosystems requires a 

non-standard approach to the practice of silviculture. A thorough knowledge of 

how these ecosystems function and skilled application of a variety of vegetation 

manipulation techniques are required to achieve and maintain the special attributes 

that we have or desire for these places. Whether these special places are recreation 

areas, critical wildlife habitat, urban-wildland interfaces, scenic vistas, or multi-use 

forests, they all may require some form of management intervention to retain their 

unique values. The reader is invited to enjoy the experiences shared by a special 

group of people who attended the 2003 U.S. Forest Service National Silviculture 

Workshop held in a “special place” in the beautiful Colorado Rockies and to share 

our experiences and the knowledge we gained about the practice of silviculture in 

special places everywhere.

Wayne D. Shepperd

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Fort Collins, CO

Acknowledgments

The organizing committee members of the 2003 National Silviculture Workshop 

deserves special recognition for their efforts in making the meeting and this publication a success:

Frank Burch, WO

Monty Montanoldo, WO

Clark Baldwin, WO

Bruce Short, R2

Jan Burke, R2

Wayne Shepperd, RMRS

Lance Asherin, RMRS

Rick Caissie, R2

Thank you to the Region 2 silviculturists who served as moderators and timekeepers:

Blaine Cook

Jim Allen

Christie Schneider

Philip Kemp

Robert Vermillion

A special thanks to District Ranger Craig McGuire and Project Leader Todd Mowrer 

and their staffs for hosting the event and associated field trips.

And finally, thanks to the Washington Office and the Rocky Mountain Research 

Station for their generous financial support of the workshop and this publication.

iii
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 1

Silviculture

In general, silviculture can be defi ned as the art and science of controlling 

the establishment, growth, competition, health, and quality of forests and 

woodlands to meet the diverse needs and values of landowners and society 

on a sustainable basis (Helms 1998). This defi nition or variations of it 

have existed since the late 1800s. Gifford (1902), an Assistant Professor of 

Forestry at Cornell University in New York, used the term arboriculture 

to describe the growing of trees for any purpose and in any way whatever 

– singly, in groups, or in the form of forests. He went on to defi ne silviculture as a part of the broader art of arboriculture. Schlich (1904), Professor 

of Forestry at the Royal Indian Engineering College, Coopers Hill, India, 

stated that “the culture of forests with the objective for which a particular 

forest is maintained depends on the will and pleasure of the owner, in so 

far as his freedom of action is not limited by rights of third persons or legal 

enactments.” He went on to say “silviculture, in its narrowest sense, is 

understanding the formation, regeneration and tending of forests until they 

become ripe for the axe.” Therefore, the beginning of silviculture in the 

United States was closely aligned with forest management, and the general 

theme of most silvicultural practices was to produce forest crops.

Silviculture and Timber Management 

Relations

As the foundations of silviculture were being developed in the late 

1800s, the concept that forests should be reserved and managed for the 

good of society was also developing. Laws such as the Timber Culture 

Act of 1873 and the Timber and Stone Act of 1878 were passed allowing 

settlers on homesteads to switch from growing grain crops to trees as part 

of the residency requirements (Steen 1976). The acts authorized the sale of 

non-tillable public timberlands for personal use. By 1873 the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), through the leadership of 

Franklin Hough, a physician, began lobbying Congress to pass a resolution 

promoting the cultivation of timber and the preservation of forests. Hough 

continued his efforts to get a bill through Congress in 1874 and 1875 but 

was unsuccessful. He supported these efforts by studying and writing papers 

on forestry and distributing them through the AAAS. Congressman Dunnell from Minnesota championed the cause but all attempts to get the bill 

1 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Moscow, ID.

Past, Present, and Future Role of 

Silviculture in Forest Management

Russell T. Graham1 and Theresa Benavidez Jain1
2 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

through the Public Lands Committee failed. In August of 1876, Dunnell 

made a motion to transfer the substance of the bill to the general appropria-

tions bill authorizing the Department of Agriculture to appoint a man of “approved attainment” to report on forest supplies and conditions. With 

the passing of this law and through this parliamentary tactic began the long 

tradition of having the forestry agency in the Department of Agriculture 

with Hough becoming its first chief (Steen 1976). This was called the 

Department of Forestry with close ties to the American Forestry Association.

The majority of the information Hough used for his self-taught forestry 

education was based on European models of forestry, in particular forest 

management in Germany. This strong connection to German forestry was 

exemplified by the appointment of Bernhard Fernow as the third Chief of 

the Division of Forestry in 1886. (Nathaniel Egleston succeeded Hough 

as Chief in 1883 and served with uncertainty until replaced by Fernow.) 

Fernow started his forestry apprenticeship in the Prussian Forestry Depart-

ment and also received advanced training in Prussia. He immigrated to the 

United States in 1876 and brought with him the German penchant for 

“slick and clean” forests regularly divided into blocks (Miller 1992).

Through fraud, timber companies used the Timber and Stone Act to 

acquire and harvest large quantities of timber on lands in the western United 

States. Some of the most blatant fraud occurred in northern California. As 

the price of timber rose, fraudulent practices increased causing agents in the 

Department of Interior to investigate thousands of fraud and trespass cases 

every year. But the practice continued to escalate and became a way of life 

in the western United States. In 1889, the American Forestry Association, 

with Fernow chairing the law committee, lobbied both Congress and the 

Administration for legislation creating reserved parcels of land and providing 

a commission to administer them. No action by either branch of government 

towards reserving forests occurred until Fernow and his associates, in 1891, 

convinced Interior Secretary Noble that it was his responsibility to protect 

the public domain. During this period a bill, The Creative Act, was being 

prepared in Congress to revise a series of land laws including the Timber 

and Stone Act. Noble was able to convince the conference committee at 

the eleventh hour to add Section 24 to this bill. This section authorized the 

President to create forest reserves and was not referred back to the originat

-

ing committees for their consideration. Therefore, when the bill passed, 

section 24 became the law of the land by default. President Harrison wasted 

no time in using what became known as the Forest Reserve Act of 1891to 

create 15 forest reserves containing 13 million acres in the newly established 

western states. President Cleveland continued to add more acres but stopped 

until Congress provided a means to protect the reserves within the Depart

-

ment of Interior (Steen 1976).

Not only did Fernow and his associates influence forest legislation; they 

also framed the forestry education in the United States, controlled the early 

professional organizations (American Forestry Association), and produced 

most of the forestry publications (Forestry Quarterly). By 1897, 20 institu

-

tions, of which most were land grant colleges, offered some instruction in 

forestry with silviculture a part of the curriculum. In 1898, the New York 

State College of Forestry was organized and a year later the Pinchot family 

(a well-to-do upstate New York family, of which Gifford was a member and 

advocated conservation of Adirondack forests) endowed a forestry school at 

Yale (Ise 1920). Graduates of these schools formed the core of the Division of 

Forestry and later the Forest Service (Steen 1992).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 3

Era of Gifford Pinchot

Gifford Pinchot succeeded Fernow as Chief of the 

Division of Forestry in 1898. He had a tremendous 

impact on the forests of the United States both in their 

acquisition and their management (figure 1). He graduated from Yale in 1889, but he also studied formally in 

Europe and spent over a year touring and learning the 

forestry profession there. He returned to the United 

States and spurned Fernow’s offers to become his 

assistant; instead, he went to work on the Biltmore 

Estate in western North Carolina to develop a forested 

estate worthy of Vanderbilt’s wealth (Steen 1976). The 

Vanderbilt estate offered Pinchot the opportunity to 

put into practice the European systems he learned. This 

work allowed him to determine that forestry in North 

America could be a profitable venture, and helped 

solidify his views on forest management.

As the chief of the Division of Forestry, Pinchot, 

much like Fernow, mostly influenced forestry activities 

through publications and technical assistance to companies and private citizens. If Pinchot was to influence 

the management of the forest reserves, he had to work 

cooperatively with the Department of Interior because 

the forests were under its domain. By 1901 he was able 

to have the foresters in the Department of Agriculture 

make all technical decisions associated with the reserves 

and develop management plans while Interior personnel would patrol the reserves enforcing the land-use 

laws. In 1902 the Department of Interior issued the first manual on administration of the reserves outlining when grazing could occur in the reserves. 

But the bulk of the manual dealt with timber management. Even though 

other people were credited for drafting the text, most people credit Pinchot 

for the substance of the policies.

Theodore Roosevelt frequented upper New York State before he became 

Governor of New York and during this time he became acquainted with 

Pinchot. Roosevelt nominated Pinchot for membership in the Boone and 

Crockett Club, an elite hunter’s club that Roosevelt helped to found. The 

two became best friends, even having wrestling and boxing matches and, 

after Roosevelt became President in 1901, they were frequent companions 

riding horses and playing tennis. So it was no surprise that after only three 

months in office Roosevelt told Congress that the forest reserves belonged 

not within the Department of Interior but in the Department of Agriculture, 

under Pinchot’s Bureau of Forestry.

In addition to Pinchot, Roosevelt had strong views on how the forests of 

the United States should be managed and in March of 1903 he presented 

them to the Society of American Foresters. The essence of his views was 

captured as follows: “And now, first and foremost, you can never afford to 

forget for one moment what is the object of our forest policy. That object is 

not to preserve the forests because they are beautiful, though that is good in 

itself, nor because they are the refuges for the wild creatures of the wilderness, though that, too, is good in itself; but the primary object of our forest 

Figure 1—Gifford Pinchot succeeded Bernhard 

Fernow as Chief of the Division of Forestry 

in 1898. He graduated from Yale in 1889 

and furthered his education in Europe, 

refining his views and philosophy of forestry.
4 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

policy, as of the land policy of the United States, is the making of prosperous 

homes... Every other consideration is secondary” (Roosevelt 1905).

In 1905, again with considerable lobbying by the American Forestry As-

sociation, Pinchot’s political savvy, some last minute political bargaining, and 

the argument that forests were crops, the forest reserves were transferred to 

the Department of Agriculture to be administered by the Bureau of Forestry. 

The Bureau of Forestry was then renamed the United States Forest Service. 

Two years later the reserves were renamed national forests, because the term 

reserve suggested they were to be held inviolate. They were not. Under 

Pinchot’s vision, forests’ use was not contrary to conservation, an important 

distinction from previous thought. When conflicting interests arose, the 

question would always be decided from the standpoint of the greatest good 

of the greatest number in the long run. During Pinchot’s tenure as Chief, 

he gave a high priority to boundary survey, and men working alone on 

horseback often added up to 3 million acres per day per man to the national 

forests. For example, Pinchot and his Chief of Boundaries in one evening on 

a hotel room floor prepared 17 proclamations creating or adding to national 

forests in Arizona, California, New Mexico, Nevada, and Utah (Steen 1976).

During Pinchot’s tenure, Yale was the foremost training ground for 

foresters joining the Forest Service. Building on the legacy Fernow initiated, 

the concept of forest management to produce timber crops was central to 

the education the schools offered. Therefore, the central theorem to the 

approach of producing timber crops was protecting forests from damaging 

animals, insects, and diseases and, most importantly, fire.

Timber Production and Forest Protection

By 1910 the forests of the United States were being utilized at a high rate 

to fuel the expanding economy. The Midwest was expanding rapidly and 

the forests of the West were ripe for providing raw materials. The western 

United States was also being settled and, as cities and towns were being 

developed, forest industries were quickly expanding to provide building 

materials locally to the cities and railroads while continuing to ship products 

to the Midwest. Western white pine and ponderosa pine were the primary 

species with Douglas-fir and western larch also of value; many other species 

were considered weeds and were often burned. Land clearing, railroads, and 

a nonchalant view of fires allowed fires to often burn freely throughout the 

Northern Rocky Mountains. In the spring of 1910, fires were ignited and 

continued to burn throughout the summer and, by August, 1,700 fires were 

burning throughout western Montana and northern Idaho. On August 20 

and 21, dry Palouse winds blew causing these fires to erupt which resulted 

in over 3.1 million acres of often very valuable timberlands to burn. This 

loss created a sense of urgency to protect these valuable resources and to 

provide direction for the fledgling Forest Service by establishing a mission of 

protecting forests for human use (figure 2).

In 1864, because of the westward settlement movement, Congress con

-

ditionally granted the Northern Pacific Railroad Company nearly 40 million 

acres to aid in the construction and maintenance of a rail line from Lake 

Superior to the Puget Sound. The land was given as every other square mile 

in a checkerboard pattern in a 40-mile band through Wisconsin, 

Minnesota, and Oregon and an 80-mile band through North Dakota, 

Montana, Idaho, and Washington. These lands not only provided raw 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 5

materials to the railroads in the western United States but also 

became important components of the timber industries in the 

region (Jensen and others 1995). With the combination of 

public and private lands producing raw materials along with 

the foundations of silviculture rooted in the German model, 

nearly all of the silvicultural methods and their supporting 

mensurational techniques being used were aimed at producing 

timber crops. The practice of silviculture was closely intertwined with timber management (Toumey 1916, Ise 1920).

Fernow (1916) expressly stated, “Silviculture, the production of wood crops, is pivot of the whole forestry business.” 

This close association of silviculture and timber management 

was evident even though Schlich (1904) and Gifford (1902) 

both indicated that forests, and the silvicultural practices 

used to maintain them, could be used for purposes other 

than timber production such as “protection and adornment.” 

The necessity to cultivate timber was being expressed by the 

amount of timber being consumed by the developing nation. 

And, for the United States to hold its position as a producer 

of timber or even ensure its future needs for forest products, 

a persistent effort to grow timber would be needed by the 

nation, states, and individuals. Public forests were to be 

managed by the Forest Service so they would ultimately attain 

their maximum production and retain it for all time (Toumey 

and Korstian 1947). This concept that wood supplies would 

diminish prevailed through the management plans and the 

policies affecting both private and public forests.

Contrary to western reserves, forests in the East were 

largely cut over and in private ownership or tax delinquent 

status. The Weeks Law of 1911 authorized the purchase of 

lands as national forests in the East, and by 1920 more than 2 

million acres of land had been purchased (Steen 1976). The 

Clark-McNary Act of 1924 expanded the scope of the Weeks 

Law, and led to the establishment of agreements with states 

for purposes of fire protection on private lands. And finally, 

the McSweeney-McNary Act of 1928 laid the groundwork 

for a nationwide system of Forest Experiment Stations, which 

has evolved into the largest organization for the conduct of 

forestry research in the world.

Intensive Forest Management

By the 1930s, with the available work force from the Civilian Conservation Corp (CCC), forests were being rapidly developed for human use, 

including recreation and water, but disease control, road building, and fire 

fighting activities were also undertaken. This workforce was cheap and, most 

importantly, enabled rigorous planting, cleaning, weedings, and thinnings 

to be accomplished, bringing intensive forest practices to many regions. The 

CCC also helped facilitate the large expansion of the research capabilities 

of the Forest Service. For example, a full 200-man CCC camp F-127 was 

established on the Priest River Experimental Forest and camp F-137 was 

allocated to the Deception Creek Experimental Forest, both in northern 

Figure 2—Early wildfire prevention posters 

exemplified the urgency to protect 

forests from wildfires.
6 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Idaho (Graham 2004). During this period a wide range of experimental 

forests and ranges was established to provide information for intensively 

managing both public and private forests. These experimental areas were 

outdoor laboratories used for developing intensive silvicultural practices, fire 

danger rating systems, and insect and disease control strategies.

The CCC provideda work force for protecting forests from disease and

fire. This work force pulled Ribes (the alternate host of white pine blister

rust) on thousands of acres of public lands in the northern Rocky Mountains.

In addition, they were readily available to fight fires throughout the United

States. Both of these activities were key to bringing the national forests under

management. Wildfire destroyed valuable timber resources, as did white pine

blister rust. Because blister rust needed to be controlled on public lands to

protect private lands from the disease, it made these practices of national sig-

nificance. The legacy of this desire to protect the forests from insects, diseases

and fire continues to impact forest development yet today (2004).

Projections of future wood consumption in the United States, along

with estimates of wood production, indicated an increase in wood supply

would be needed. This was the case during Pinchot’s time and prevailed into

the 1980s (USDA 1984). For example, in 1936 it was estimated that the

United States used 48 billion board feet of timber but was only growing 32

billion board feet. The offered solution was to invest millions of dollars in

acquiring additional areas as public forest, in fire protection, and in bringing

denuded lands of the country into better condition for later crops (Toumey

and Korstian 1947). The perception ofa wood shortage in the United States

was reinforced after World War II with the increased demand for home

construction. The Forest Service was asked to meet this demand, especially

by the timber industry. This was demonstrated by the passing of the Multiple

Use and Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, which called for national forests to be

used for recreation, watershed, and wildlife purposes and for harvest to be in

balance with growth (Steen 1976). The view ofa timber shortage continued

as the annual net growth on commercial timberlands in 1984 was estimated

at 21.7 billion cubic feet in the United States; but it was estimated that these

lands could produce 32.8 billion cubic feet by 2030 (USDA 1984). Again,

it was suggested that to meet the nation’s growing demands for timber and

timber products, large investments in silvicultural activities would be needed.

Therefore, the management plans developed for the national forests through

-

out this period were generally timber management plans but often included a domestic livestock-grazing component, both critical elements of utilizing

forests rather than preserving them. These management plans utilized con

-

cepts presented by Fernow in 1900 as the forests were divided into working

circles, compartments, and sub-compartments. In each of these units timber

resources were inventoried, timber growth estimated, and an allowable cut

calculated to supporta sustained yield of timber. Some of these plans went as

far as to suggest that all lands withina working circle, both public and private,

be regulated together to support the annual cut (USDA 1941).

During this period of expansion, 1910-1960, the Forest Service 

developed a tremendous work ethic and a “can do” attitude. Fires were 

vigorously suppressed and forest insect and disease epidemics were being 

addressed. Silvicultural practices and mensurational techniques to support 

these management plans rose to the challenge by developing planting, clean-

ing, thinning, fertilization, and harvesting methods to support high yield 

forestry (Baker 1934; Steen 1976; Smith and others 1997).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 7

Forest Management Changes

Beginning in the 1960s and continuing in earnest in the 1970s, the

public’s perceptions and uses of the forests started to change. These changing

views were supported by more and more knowledge that forests were more

than crops to be grown and harvested (Spurr 1964). Forests provide an array

of goods and services of which one of the most important is the protection

and production of clean water. This fact was recognized by Theodore Roosevelt as one of the original reasons given for expanding the forest reserves

(Gifford 1902). In the 1970s, these changing attitudes and beliefs of the role

of forests in society were marked by the celebration of the first Earth Day in

1977. Also, this was a time in which significant laws were enacted such as the

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the National Forest Management Act of 1976, and the Endangered Species Act of 1979 that impacted

forest management. Individually and in combination these laws began to

alter how the national forests were perceived and managed. In addition to

these laws, air travel became more common during this era, which allowed

the public to view forests from the air, disclosing the fragmented and artificial

look that forests took on with the application of square harvest blocks and

clearcutting used with high yield forestry (figure 3).

With these changing attitudes toward public forests and their use, 

silvicultural methods and concepts started to acknowledge other forest uses, 

in particular the production and maintenance of wildlife habitat. In 1981 

the Society of American Foresters, in cooperation with the Wildlife Society, 

Figure 3—View of clearcuts from the air showing the patchwork and fragmentation of forests.
8 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

published its monograph describing Choices in Silviculture for American 

Forests (Society of American Foresters 1981). Even though this text exempli-

fied the benefits produced by forests including water production, wildlife 

habitat forage for livestock, aesthetic appeal, and recreation potential, the 

silvicultural systems described were very traditional and differed little from 

those described by Schlich in 1904. Similarly, Silvicultural Systems for the 

Major Forest Types of the United States (Burns 1983) approached silviculture 

in very traditional ways, producing traditional stand structures most often 

designed to produce timber products.

In 1988 guidelines were established for managing spotted owl habitat in 

the Pacific Northwest. These guidelines, and the listing of the spotted owl 

as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1990, changed the em-

phasis of forest management either directly or indirectly on nearly all lands 

administered by both the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management 

(FEMAT 1993). Also during this time the prediction of timber shortfalls 

that had dictated forest management policies for decades was not material-

izing. From 1960 to 1985, the national forests met about 25 percent of 

America’s softwood timber needs. This gave state and private stocks time to 

recover and it is estimated that 50 years from now, timber growing in the 

United States will be nearly double the levels in 1960 (Bosworth 2002).

Silviculture and Wildlife

Even though the conservation of spotted owl habitat wasa novel forest

management objective in many circles, the production and maintenance of

wildlife habitat was not new to forestry. In addition to producing clean water,

some of the original reasons for preserving and managing forests were the

production of game animals for the aristocracies of Western Europe (Smith

and others 1997). What became apparent in the desired forest conditions for

wildlife was what remained was more important than what was removed in

forest treatments. Instead of sustaining

a flow of wood products from forests,

the sustaining of forest processes, structures, and functions became more

prominent as

a reason to manage forests, even though much was not under-

stood about these concepts and less was understood about how they could

be sustained. Froma silvicultural perspectivea component of these concepts

could be identified; that is stand and forest structures could be described as

desirable for wildlife and possibly contain some other advantageous forest

properties.

Thomas and others (1979) described successional stages of forests that 

played various roles in the life histories of wildlife species. These stages 

ranged from grass-forb to old growth and included composition, decadence, 

horizontal structure, vertical structure, and other elements important for 

wildlife. Oliver and Larson (1990) also described the development of forests 

using structural stages including stand initiation, stem exclusion, understory 

reinitiation, and old growth. Both of these classification systems concen

-

trated on describing stands and forests and in particular what was left not 

what was being removed.

Reynolds and others (1992) used structural stage classifications to de

-

scribe stand and forest habitat for the northern goshawk and its prey species 

for the forests of the southwestern United States. What were not included 

in the desired conditions for the goshawk were the preferred silvicultural 

methods to create and maintain these desired conditions. These desired 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 

9

conditions were to be maintained over multiple spatial and temporal scales 

ranging form groups of trees to landscapes and over time periods exceeding 

200 years (figure 4). “While superficially the recommendations by Reynolds 

and others 1992 were another example of narrow, single species focus, is 

in fact a coarse filter approach that includes a mosaic of age and structural 

classes to provide habitats and food chains for a broad spectrum of wildlife 

species including goshawk prey species... approximating the composition, 

structure, and landscape patterns existing in southwestern ponderosa pine 

forests before fundamental changes in natural disturbance regimes and 

forest structure”(Long and Smith 2000). The challenge for the art and 

science of silviculture was to use the knowledge gained over 100 years on 

treating forests to produce timber to use this to create and maintain desired 

conditions for goshawks and their prey. Some of the silvicultural concepts 

appropriate for goshawk habitat management include area regulation of 

desired conditions over large landscape units, free selection silvicultural 

systems (combining group and individual tree selection systems with reserve 

trees left in all structural stages), variable cleaning and weeding prescriptions, 

variable spacing in thinnings, coarse woody debris recruitment, and snag 

retention to name a few. This is far different from the “slick and clean” 

forestry advocated by Fernow in 1900.

Even though the public attitudes toward the value of forests and their

management have changed, there continues to bea strong ethic “that the

most important product of forest management is timber” resulting in timber

Figure 4—Ponderosa pine stand located in the southwestern United States illustrating the 

clumpy and irregular stand structure that is preferred goshawk habitat.
10 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

management and silviculture being synonymous. Because the production and

harvest of timber crops has been the primary objective of American silvicul-

ture for over 100 years, the association was inevitable. In addition, foresters

felt comfortable with this objective and felt “good forestry” would result in

strong, viable wildlife populations, clean water supplies, and ample recre-

ational opportunities asa side benefit. Concerns about wildlife and aesthetics

were reduced to constraints on timber management, such as the size and

location of cutting areas and the minimum age of trees at the time of harvest-

ing (Smith and others 1997). For the practitioners of silviculture or applied

ecology to remain leaders in designing, prescribing, and implementing

management systems, they need to be innovative, adaptable, open minded,

and willing to partner witha range of other disciplines to sustain forests

Silviculture and Wildfire

Nowhere is this leadership and commitment of innovative silvicultur-

ists needed more than in designing forest management systems aimed at 

reducing the occurrence, intensity, and severity of wildfires (Graham 2003). 

Similar to creating and maintaining structures to produce wildlife habitats 

some of the same concepts apply to designing structures for affecting wildfire 

behavior and severity. In our desire to protect forests for human use, society 

has modified the structure, composition, and native processes occurring in 

many of our forests. Most evidence suggests, the dry forests dominated by 

ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir have undergone the most changes because 

of successful fire exclusion while the moist forests (western redcedar, western 

hemlock) and cold forests (lodgepole pine, Engelmann spruce, subalpine 

fire) were minimally impacted (Hann and others 1997). Like the methods 

used for producing wildlife habitat, what is left and its characteristics after 

treatment are important elements in designing stand and forest structures 

aimed at modifying wildfire behavior and severity.

Crown base height, number of fuel strata, surface fuels, fine fuels, coarse 

woody debris, hydrophobic soils, lower duff moisture, ladder fuels, crown 

bulk density, and fuel models are only some of the elements needed when 

designing vegetative treatments to modify the wildfire condition class of for-

ests (Graham and others 1999; Scott and Reinhardt 2001; Robichaud and 

others 2000; Graham 2003). These elements are different than culmination 

of mean annual increment, normal stocking, yield capability, rotation age, 

net present value, rings per inch, Keen’s tree classes, or site index that were 

common elements of many timber production silvicultural prescriptions 

(Smith and others 1997). However, the same basic understanding of 

climate, soil, forest development, silvics, succession, silvicultural methods 

(e.g., planting, tending, pruning, thinning), and so on used for the 

development of both timber and wildlife habitat prescriptions can be used 

to develop these critical fuel modification prescriptions. Most importantly, 

wildland fuels are composed of live and dead vegetation of which silviculture 

is the art and science of managing.

Change Is Often Difficult But Exciting

Silviculturists cannot be experts in all disciplines required for successful 

forest management. However, they need to have a basic understanding of 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 11

these other disciplines. Not only is an understanding beneficial but also 

willingness and collaborative attitude are helpful when venturing into different and new management directions. Because of the long tradition of timber 

management and silvicultural systems associated with this management 

objective, it is easy to repackage the “tried and true” silvicultural methods 

and prescriptions into fuel management or wildlife emphasis prescriptions. 

For example, prescribe evenly spaced plantings, cleanings, and thinnings 

even though a clumpy or groupy nature of a forest may be desired. Similarly, 

through tradition, prescribe the removal of disease or insect susceptible trees 

even though they may be important elements of a functioning forest or 

desirable attributes for wildlife.

Nowhere on the landscape is innovation and imagination needed more 

from silviculturists than designing systems for managing stands within the 

urban interface. Most often people have a tremendous attachment to forests 

in these settings even though their very nature may threaten people’s homes 

and lives if they burn (Kent and others 2003) (figure 5). Prescriptions in the 

urban interface usually necessitate the balancing of people’s desires to live in 

a forest yet maintain conditions that reduce the risks of unwanted fire. Rarely 

will traditional silvicultural methods (e.g., seed tree, shelterwood) used for 

timber production produce and maintain the desired conditions in the urban 

interface.

Figure 5—In recent years management objectives aimed at reducing the intensity and severity of wildfires have 

become more common, especially in the urban interface.
12 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

The size of wildfires and the number of acres burned by wildfires has 

been increasing in recent years after declining for several decades (Agee 

1993, Graham 2003). These areas (Bitterroot-Montana, Hayman-Colorado, 

Biscuit-Oregon, Rodeo-Chediski-Arizona) provide tremendous challenges 

for silviculturists in prescribing treatments to restore these forests. Many of 

these fires burned large areas destroying native seed sources, which makes 

planting of site-adapted seedlings challenging but imperative. The introduction of exotic plants (e.g., cheatgrass) can alter successional pathways and 

make the restoration of native vegetation uncertain. Similarly, because of 

uncharacteristically severe fires, soil properties can be altered to increase 

soil erosion and reduce site productivity, again increasing the challenges 

silviculturists face in addressing the conditions left after wildfires (Robichaud 

and others 2000). Depending on the type of forest burned, large amounts 

of standing and down woody material is often left after wildfires (Brown and 

others 2003, Graham 2003). In some circumstances this material has commercial value that can help pay for fire restoration efforts, but silvicultural 

systems need to be designed to ensure the integrity and long-term future of 

the forest. The above are only some of the issues in which the silviculture 

and fire disciplines must work collaboratively to address.

Silvicultural Legacy

Silviculturists can be extremely proud of what the discipline accomplished 

in the last 100 years. Through their leadership and innovation the timber 

famine projected for many decades never materialized. Within the Forest 

Service, silviculturists set the standard for continuing education and the 

application of science-based practices in land management, a standard which 

other disciplines try to emulate. Beginning with the aristocracies of Europe, 

the importance of forests in maintaining wildlife and water along with timber 

resources was recognized, and silviculturists such as Schlich (1904) provided 

silvicultural methods and principles applicable for meeting these management 

objectives. These same principles can be applied to present management 

objectives such as reducing the risk of severe and intense wildfires, or 

future unknown objectives. Most importantly, silviculturists need to be the 

champions of maintaining forest integrity and resiliency no matter the forest 

setting or the management objectives presented. No other discipline has the 

understanding, legacy, or long-term view necessary to design and prescribe 

forest management activities in the 21st century.

Literature Cited

Agee, James K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest forests. Washington, DC: 

Island Press. 493 p.

Baker, F. S. 1934. The principles of silviculture. New York: McGraw-Hill. 502 p.

Bosworth, Dale. 2002. Striking the right balance: coming to terms with change in 

national forest management. McClure Lecture, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, 

September 18, 2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 10 p.

Brown, James K.; Reinhardt, Elizabeth. D.; Kramer, Kylie A. 2003. Coarse woody 

debris: managing benefits and fire hazard in the recovering forest. Gen. Tech. 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 13

Rep. RMRS-GTR-105. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 16 p.

Burns, R. M., ed. 1983. Silvicultural systems for the major forest types of the United 

States. Agric. Handb. 445. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service. 191 p.

Fernow, B. E. 1916. Suggestions as to possibilities of silviculture in America. Society 

of American Foresters Proceedings. 11: 171-176.

Forest ecosystem management assessment team (FEMAT). 1993. Forest ecosystem 

management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Interior, U.S. Department of Agriculture, [and others]. [Irregular 

pagination].

Gifford, John. 1902. Practical Forestry. D. New York: Appleton and Company. 284 p.

Graham, Kathleen L. 2004. The history of the Priest River Experiment Station. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-129. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 71 p.

Graham, Russell T.; Harvey, Alan. E.; Jain, Theresa B.; Tonn, Jonalea R. 1999. 

The effects of thinning and similar stand treatments on fire behavior in western 

forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-463. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 27 p.

Graham, Russell T., tech. ed. 2003. Hayman Fire Case Study . Gen. Tech. Rep. 

RMRS-GTR-114. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 396 p.

Hann, Wendel J; Jones, Jeffrey L.; Karl, Michael G. Sherm; Hessburg, Paul F.; 

Keane, Robert E.; Long, Donald G.; Menakis, James P.; McNicoll, Cecilia H.; 

Leonard, Stephen G.; Gravenmier, Rebecca A.; Smith, Bradley G. 1997. Chapter 

3: Landscape dynamics of the Basin. In: Quigley, Thomas M.; Arbelbide, Sylvia 

J., tech. eds. An assessment of ecosystem components in the Interior Columbia 

Basin and Portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: Volume II. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 338-1055.

Helms, John A. 1998. The dictionary of forestry. Bethesda, MD: Society of 

American Foresters. 210 p.

Ise, John. 1920. The United States forest policy. New Haven, CT: Yale University 

Press. 395 p.

Jensen, Derrick; Drafffan, George; Osborn, John. 1995. Railroads and clearcuts: 

Legacy of Congress’s 1864 Northern Pacific Railroad land grant. Sandpoint, ID: 

Keoke Co. Publishing, Inc. 198 p.

Kent, Brian; Gerbert, Krista; McCaffrey, Sarah; [and others]. 2003. Social and 

economic issues of the Hayman Fire. In: Graham, Russell T., tech. ed. Hayman 

Fire Case Study. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

315-396.

Long, James N.; Smith, Frederick W. 2000. Restructuring the forest: goshawks and 

restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine. Journal of Forestry. August: 25-30.

Miller, Char. 1992. Wooden politics: Bernhard Fernow and the quest for a national 

forest policy, 176-1898. In: Steen, Harold K., ed. Origins of the national forests: a 

centennial symposium. Durham, North Carolina: Forest History Society. 287-

300.

Oliver, C. D.; Larson, B. C. 1990. Forest stand dynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill 

Inc. 518 p.

Reynolds, R. T.; Graham, R. T.; Reiser, M. H.; Bassett, R. L.; Kennedy, P. L.; 

Boyce, D. A. Jr.; Goodwin, G.; Smith, R.; Fisher, E. L. 1992. Management 

recommendations for the northern goshawk in the southwestern United States. 

Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 90 p.

Robichaud, P. R.; Beyers, J. L.; Neary, D. G. 2000. Evaluating the effectiveness 

of post fire rehabilitation treatments. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. Fort 
14 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station. 85 p.

Roosevelt, Theodore. 1905. Forestry and foresters. In: Proceedings of the Society 

of American Foresters. Washington, DC. Vol I., No. I. Washington, DC: Society 

of American Foresters. 3-9.

Schlich, W. 1904. Manual of forestry, Volume II. Silviculture. London: Bradbury, 

Agnew & Co. 393 p.

Scott, Joe H.; Reinhardt, Elizabeth. D. 2001. Assessing crown fire potential by 

linking models of surface and crown fire behavior. Res. Paper. RMRS-RP29. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Research Station. 59 p.

Smith, D. M.; Larson, B. C.; Kelty, M. J.; Ashton, P. M. S. 1997. The practice of 

silviculture: applied forest ecology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 537 p.

Society of American Foresters. 1981. Choices in silviculture for American forests. 

Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 80 p.

Spurr, Stephen H. 1964. Forest ecology. New York: The Ronald Press Company. 352 p.

Steen, Harold K. 1976. The U.S. Forest Service. Seattle and London: University of 

Washington Press. 356 p.

Steen, Harold K. 1992. The origins and significance of the National Forest System. 

In: Steen, Harold K., ed. Origins of the national forests: a centennial symposium. 

Durham, NC: Forest History Society. 3-9.

Thomas, J. W.; Anderson, R. G.; Maser, C.; Bull, E. L. 1979. Snags. In: Thomas, 

J. W., ed. Wildlife habitats in managed forests, the Blue Mountains of Oregon 

and Washington. Agric. Handb. 553. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service. 60-77.

Toumey, James W. 1916. Seeding and planting; a manual for the guidance of 

forestry students, foresters, nurserymen, forest owners, and farmers. New York: J. 

Wiley & Sons, Inc. 455 p.

Toumey, James W.; Korstian, Clarence F. 1947. Seeding and planting: a manual 

for the guidance of forestry students, foresters, nurserymen, forest owners, and 

farmers. New York: J. Wiley & Sons, Inc. 520 p.

USDA Forest Service. 1941. Management plan for Bitterroot Working Circle, 

Bitterroot National Forest, Bitterroot Valley, Montana. Hamilton, MT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Bitterroot National Forest. 25 p.

USDA Forest Service. 1984. Your Nation’s timber: problems and opportunities. 

Misc. Pub. No. 1440. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 23 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 15

Abstract—Forest Service managers and researchers designed and evaluated alternative disturbance-based fi re hazard reduction/ecosystem restoration treatments in 

a greatly altered low-elevation ponderosa pine/Douglas-fi r/western larch wildland 

urban interface. Collaboratively planned improvement cutting and prescribed fi re 

treatment alternatives were evaluated in simulations of disturbance processes and 

interactions with the partially restored wildland urban interface conditions. The 

SIMPPLLE modeling system was used to reconstruct historic landscape conditions 

across a broad range of fi re regimes and to model future landscapes that reduce 

fi re severity, restore wildlife habitats, reduce bark beetle severity; and disclose 

environmental effects.

Introduction

The Frenchtown Face, on the Ninemile Ranger District of the Lolo 

National Forest, is a south to southwest facing landscape approximately 15 

miles west of Missoula, Montana (fi gure 1). The 96,381 acre landscape is 

comprised of the Lolo National Forest (45 percent), private ownerships (27 

percent), Plum Creek Timberlands (25 percent), and Montana Department 

of Natural Resources and Conservation land (3 percent). The landscape 

character is integral to the rural community settings of Frenchtown and 

Huson, located on the southern edge of the project boundary.

A Collaborative Fire Hazard Reduction/

Ecosystem Restoration Stewardship Project in 

a Montana Mixed Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-Fir/

Western Larch Wildland Urban Interface

Steve Slaughter1, Laura Ward1, Mike Hillis2, Jim Chew3, 

Rebecca McFarlan3

1 USDA Forest Service, Lolo National 

Forest, Ninemile Ranger District, 

Huson, MT.

2 Retired, USDA Forest Service, R1 

Cohesive Strategy Team, Missoula, MT.

3 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Missoula, MT. Figure 1—Frenchtown Face topography.
16 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Roughly one-third of the landscape is considered benchlands that gradu-

ally rise in elevation from the Clark Fork River to the toe of the steeper 

mountain slopes along the Ninemile Fault. The benchlands are characterized 

by open grassland, agricultural land, and/or residences within the forest 

that make up the wildland urban interface zone. The forested residence 

benchland areas consist mainly of ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat types 

with inclusions of western larch.

In 1992 the Lolo National Forest implemented a landscape approach to 

ecosystem management: management for healthy and sustainable communi-

ties and landscapes, and management for sustainable human values, uses, and 

populations. Using this approach, 15 landscapes, or ecosystem management 

areas, of the Ninemile Ranger District were prioritized by restoration needs. 

The highest priority for restoration were landscapes containing the greatest 

amount of low-elevation warm forest habitat types characterized by low 

intensity, frequent fire regimes. Frenchtown Face became the fourth major 

project addressing this approach.

In March 2000, an additional landscape analysis highlighted the need to 

restore the landscape components of composition, structure, and function to 

near presettlement times. The new analysis pointed out the need for:

• fuel reductions in wildland urban interface and upland forests;

• improved forest health;

• reductions of insects and diseases from abnormally elevated risk levels;

• improved big game winter range;

• enhancement and recruitment of old growth forests; and

• meeting Lolo Forest Plan expectations in recreation and aesthetic scenery 

values.

Current Landscape Conditions

Restoration of ponderosa pine forests to landscapes resembling presettle-

ment times has become a necessity due to the current upward density trends 

of small diameter trees along with higher fuel loading levels (Bonnicksen and 

Stone 1982; Chang 1996; Parker 1984; Parsons and DeBenedetti 1979). 

Fire suppression, historic grazing, timber harvesting, and climatic changes 

have all played a role in the upward trends of density and fuel loadings 

within the Frenchtown Face restoration project area (Arno and others 1997; 

Parsons and DeBenedetti 1979; Skinner and Chang 1996). The probability 

of high severity wildfire and deterioration of ecosystem integrity have 

increased on the landscape (Dahms and Deils 1997; Patton-Mallory 1997; 

Stephens 1998; Weatherspoon and Skinner 1996). This deterioration is simi

-

lar to conditions reported in the Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington 

(Everett 1993), the Columbia River Basin (Quigley and Cole 1997), and the 

Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project (SNEP 1996, Weatherspoon and Skinner 

1996). All of these have highlighted the need for large-scale, strategically lo

-

cated small tree thinning, fuel treatment, and use of prescribed fire (McIver 

and others 2001).

The dense, young ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests that occupy the 

low elevation areas of the Frenchtown Face are substantially different from 

historic ponderosa pine stands as a result of fire suppression. Several wildlife 

species are at risk as a result. The goals of the Frenchtown Face project in

-

clude restoring habitat for those species. Wildlife species in the Frenchtown 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 17

Face area include those typical for the Northern Rockies. Species of special 

interest due to their sensitive, management indicator, or federally listed 

status include pileated woodpeckers, flammulated owls, northern goshawks, 

mule deer, elk, wolves, American martens, fishers, wolverines, and Canada 

lynx.

Along with wildlife habitat restoration, invasive weed mitigation is a major 

component of the project. Invasive weeds are abundant in much of the low 

elevation portions of the Frenchtown Face. Weeds can substantially reduce 

the forage productivity for wintering deer and elk (USDA 1999). Weeds 

have a competitive advantage over native plants and are shade-intolerant 

and disturbance-dependent, which complicates the restoration of frequent, 

fire-dependent forests.

Historic Landscape Conditions

The historic range of variability (HRV) encompasses a large temporal 

range that produced ecological conditions that were sustainable over a 

long time frame. The HRV attempts to describe the ecosystems prior to 

influences from European descendents. Human influences are considered a 

part of the natural condition. The HRV was developed from several sources: findings of the Interior Columbia Basin (USDA 1997); Fischer and Bradley 

(1987); Losensky (1993); a fire history study (Losensky 1989) within the 

analysis area; and SIMPPLLE simulations.

Two vegetation groupings used in this project are: (1) habitat type groups 

(HTG) as used in the Lolo Forest Plan (April 1987); and (2) fire groups 

(FG) (Fischer and Bradley 1987). Only the habitat types that comprise the 

warm, dry lower slopes are a focus of this project. These areas represent 61 

percent of the project area.

Warm-Dry Forest Vegetation of Lower Slopes

Historical conditions perpetuated seral forests of ponderosa pine and 

western larch in association with Douglas-fir and, in some instances, 

lodgepole pine. The dry benchlands at low elevations during presettlement 

were typified by open grown stands of old growth ponderosa pine of large 

sawtimber size (Losensky 1993). Frequent low intensity fires kept litter and 

slash accumulations very low, brush species were less common than present 

day and more succulent, and Douglas-fir was a minor component of the 

forests. Fire thinned saplings, removed Douglas-fir thickets, and caused 

pitching of tree boles, which created long-standing snags. Stand replacement 

events were rare. Tree mortality was largely in the form of small pockets of 

windthrow, root disease, or bark beetle activity. These small openings were 

soon regenerated by ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir with ponderosa pine 

being favored by frequent fire.

Adjacent toe-slopes are characterized as warm-dry to warm-moist Doug

-

las-fir, grand fir, ponderosa pine, and larch. Associated firegroups 4, 6, and 

11 characterize these environments. A tendency toward overstocking and 

development of the dense understories increase the hazard of stand-replace

-

ment fires on these sites.

On the north sides of these ridges, it was not uncommon for Douglas-fir 

to dominate all stages of succession. Ponderosa pine, larch, and lodgepole 

pine are seral components whose abundance varies by habitat type phase. 

Figure 2 displays the current extent of the dominant cover types. Figure 3 
18 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Figure 3—Historic representation of ponderosa pine, ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir, larch, and 

Douglas-fir cover types produced by SIMPPLLE simulations.

Figure 2—Current ponderosa pine, ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir, larch, and Douglas-fir cover 

types within Frenchtown Face.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 19

displays a representation of historic cover types produced by SIMPPLLE 

simulations. Stand-replacing fire hazard like the adjacent toe-slopes tendency 

increased on these sites due to dense understory vegetation. A wide array 

of forest structures and compositions within the natural fire regime are possible (figure 4). Stands tended to be evenly distributed over the various age 

classes with 30 percent less than 40 years of age and 35 percent old growth 

(Losensky 1993).

In firegroups 4 and 6, large diameter snags occurred at low densities 

(Ritter and others 2000) and provided nest habitat for pileated woodpeckers 

and flammulated owls (McClelland 1977, Wright 1996). The relatively 

open understories provided flammulated owls opportunities to forage using 

a combination of drop pouncing and hawk gleaning behavior on moths 

and grasshoppers (Wright 1996). Frequent, non-lethal wildfires repeatedly scarred ponderosa pines. This resulted in cumulative pitch build-up 

that made those trees very rot-resistant after they died, resulting in snags 

that stood for very long periods of time (Smith 1999). Low-to-moderate 

stocking and frequent non-lethal underburns resulted in a high forage productivity of understory shrubs and grasses, which provided forage for high 

populations of wintering mule deer and elk (Hillis and Applegate 1998). 

These open forests also provided excellent foraging habitat for northern 

goshawks (Clough 2000), although the stands were generally too open 

for nesting. The small percentage of old growth that remains has dense, 

continuous understories which preclude successful foraging by flammulated 

owls (Hillis and others 2002). While small diameter snags are abundant, they 

lack the high pitch content of trees that are exposed to frequent fires, and 

thus have little durability after death. Mule deer and elk have been largely 

replaced by white-tailed deer. There has been an increase in songbirds, such 

as vireos and Townsend’s warblers, that occupy dense forests (Hutto and 

Young 1999).

Figure 4—Simulated 

occurrence of lightseverity, mixed-severity, 

and stand-replacing fire on 

a historic representation 

of the Frenchtown Face 

landscape for a onedecade period.
20 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Collaborative Process

A community-based purpose and need, and public-recommended proposed actions for the Frenchtown Face project, were formulated through a 

series of public meetings

These meetings formed the basis of the environmental analysis and formal 

public scoping process under NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act). 

An underling premise of this approach is that formal public participation in 

the development of a proposal will lead to a more efficient and less contentious environmental analysis and project decision.

Figure 5 represents the expanded NEPA sequence process including the 

steps taken in collaborating with the public.

Participation was fairly broad with a cross section of local residents, forest 

industry, State agencies, rural fire department, and media. Separate, concurrent meetings were held with local environmental group representatives who 

declined to attend public meetings. Public values were expressed as purpose 

and need statements by the interdisciplinary team and then validated by the 

public at subsequent meetings.

The public identified a need for coordinated block management of 

noxious weed treatments, environmental education in schools, historic site 

interpretation, increased communication through the formation of interest 

groups, and enforceable decisions, e.g., road closures. Environmental group 

participation resulted in a reduced magnitude, or area, of timber harvest 

restoration treatments, and the creation of three alternatives: 2, 3, and 4.

During formal scoping, the public and environmental groups responded 

with issues and concerns to the proposed action. The interdisciplinary team 

used these responses to formulate draft alternatives. The draft alternatives were 

then presented at public meetings for additional feedback and adjustment.

Restoration Treatments

Ecological sustainability requires the restoration of process as well as 

structure (Stephenson 1999, Arno 1996). Fire regimes and stand structures 

Figure 5—Frenchtown Face NEPA sequence.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 21

interact and must be restored in an integrated way. Fire alone may be too 

imprecise or unsafe in many settings, so a combination of treatments may 

often be the safest and most certain restoration approach (Allen 2002). A 

recent wildland urban interface fuel reduction study (Scott 1998) conducted 

on the Ninemile Ranger District to compare thinning treatments found the 

most effective treatment was a thinning from below to a basal area of 76 

ft

2

/acre followed with prescribed fire (similar to the proposed action). And 

that periodic application of the treatment would lead to an open-structured 

forest of large trees with high aesthetic value.

Three recent restoration projects on the Ninemile Ranger District treat 

low-elevation ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests of frequent low intensity 

fire regime in a similar fashion as the Proposed Action, Alternative 2 (i.e., 

Starkhorse, Petty Rock, and Sawmill-Cyr). Single tree selection retaining a 

residual basal area of 30 to 60 ft

2

/acre thinned stands from below, cutting 

excess understory trees and thinning excess crowns in the overstory to par-

tially restore historic structure. The harvesting was followed with understory 

prescribed burning to partially restore historic ecological processes. The 

average harvest volume of these three projects was 3 MBF/acre with 49 

percent of the volume coming from cut trees less than 12 inches DBH, 45 

percent from cut trees 12 to 19 inches DBH, and 6 percent from trees over 

19 inches DBH.

Through our collaborative process, a total of five alternatives were developed.

No Action - Alternative 1

Under the No Action alternative, no new actions would be implemented.

Proposed Action - Alternative 2

The Proposed Action provides for improvement cutting and underburn-

ing on gentle slopes under 35 percent in the warm-dry sites found on 

the benchlands; ecosystem maintenance burning on sites not feasible for 

improvement cutting or on steep slopes or high risk weed sites; decommis

-

sioning of roads; aerial and ground spraying of noxious weeds; and a host 

of recreation and interpretation activities. Reducing the stocking to a range 

of 70-100 BA would increase a stand’s survivability of fire under normal 

burning conditions and provide greater growth and resistance to insect out

-

breaks. A recent wildland urban interface fuel reduction study (Scott 1998) 

conducted on the Ninemile Ranger District to compare thinning treatments 

found the most effective treatment was a thinning from below to a basal area 

of 76 ft

2

/acre followed with prescribed fire (similar to the proposed action). 

And that periodic application of the treatment would lead to an open-struc

-

tured forest of large trees of high aesthetic value. A stocking of 70-100 BA, 

however, was needed to avoid substantially increasing the risk of spreading 

noxious weeds. The 70-100 stocking level was a recognized compromise to 

meet mutually exclusive public needs.

Alternative 2, But With a 12-inch Diameter Limit - 

Alternative 3

This alternative places a 12-inch diameter cut limit on the improvement 

cutting of Alternative 2. This alternative was based on the Environmental 

Group collaboration and the aversion to cutting large diameter trees on 

national forestland. Approximately 78 percent of Alternative 2 timber har

-

vest treatments would be feasible under a 12-inch DBH limitation. Feasible 
22 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

treatment locations have at least 3,000 board feet (MBF) (Barbour 2001 

used 2.7MBF/acre) of excess stocking between 7 inches (minimum sawlog 

size) and 12 inches DBH (example: 38 cut trees per acre averaging 10 inches 

DBH represent 20 ft2

 of basal area and 3 MBF). Using stewardship contract 

revenues, additional area could be treated manually and/or mechanically to 

remove excess trees.

No Commercial Timber Harvest - Alternative 4

This alternative differs from Alternative 2 in that all commercial timber 

harvests are dropped. Prescribed fire is still used.

Modified Proposed Action - Alternative 5

This alternative builds on Alternative 2 by adding improvement cutting 

to high weed risk sites on gentle terrain and adding improvement cutting on 

steep slopes to enhance a portion of the existing old growth stands.

Table 1 compares the alternatives. “Improvement cutting” (IMP) consists 

of both thinning from below and crown thinning to remove excess stock of 

merchantable-sized trees (7 to 19 inches DBH) with a target residual basal 

area of 70 to 100 ft2/acre. Shade-intolerant (seral) ponderosa pine and 

western larch trees are favored for retention though not to the exclusion 

of shade-tolerant Douglas-fir. “Mechanical” (MECH) is a combination of 

noncommercial understory fuel reduction treatments including slashing by 

hand using chainsaws followed by handpiling and burning of the handpiles 

where smoke from underburning would be unacceptable to the surrounding residences. “Underburning” (UB) is ecosystem maintenance burning 

following the improvement cutting or other silvicultural systems. A spring 

burn removing portions of the duff and litter, down fuels, understory 

Douglas-fir seedlings and saplings, and aboveground segments of associated 

understory flora. “Improvement cutting and group tree selection” (IMPGT) 

is group tree selection occurring on 10 percent of the area, in scattered small 

one-quarter-acre to 2-acre patches of seed tree or shelterwood-like cutting. 

“Slash and EMB” is noncommercial hand felling of excess understory (slashing) to augment fuel conditions for the subsequent ecosystem maintenance 

burn (EMB) or to simply ensure that unwanted excess understory seedlings 

and saplings are removed. “Thin” is commercial thinning of western larch 

stands that contain some Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine. Underburning is 

planned after these harvests. “Shelterwood (SW) with reserves” is proposed 

to replace heavily root disease infested Douglas-fir stands with planted nonhost ponderosa pine.

Table 2 shows the restoration projects associated with the alternatives.

Table 1—Comparison of harvests and prescribed fire in alternatives.

Treatment SIMPPLLE equivalent treatment ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5

IMP+MECH Ecosystem management thin & underburn 152 152 152

IMP+UB Ecosystem management thin & underburn 2602 2382 337

ITS+UB Ecosystem management thin & underburn 3242

IMPGT+UB Ecosystem management thin & underburn 493 599

MECH Ecosystem management thin & underburn 387 387 539 364

SW+UB+P Shelterwood cut w/ reserves & plant 41 41

Slsh+EMB Ecosystem management underburn 6829 7583 10104 5727

Thin Ecosystem management thin & underburn 139 139 139

Total acres 10643 10643 10643 10624
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 23

Comparison of Alternatives

Alternatives 3 and 4 were eliminated from the detailed study after a closer 

assessment. Attempting to prescribe-burn overly dense sawlog-sized live 

stands to meet the purpose and need is impractical without first removing 

“excess” trees (Allen 2002). Both Alternative 3 and 4 result in an accumulation of basal area over time (Barbour 2001) as trees 12 inches DBH and 

larger are never removed by timber harvest (Alt 3) and most trees over 5 

inches DBH are never removed by prescribed fire (Alt 4). These alternatives 

create and maintain densely stocked stands of uniform-sized trees that have a 

high risk of bark beetle infestations (Barbour 2001) and fail to restore forest 

health or reduce the risk of stand replacement wildfires (Fiedler 2001). Sites 

with mechanical fuel treatment appear to have more dramatically reduced 

fire severity compared to sites with prescribed fire only. Forests with much 

lower density and larger trees have less continuous crown and ladder fuels, 

higher crowns off the ground, and thicker bark resulting in lower potential 

for crown fire initiation and propagation and for less severe fire effects (Pollet 1999).

The comparison of alternatives utilized simulations by SIMPPLLE.

The relatively small area treated under restoration timber harvests 

provides little distinction between alternatives (see table 1), including the 

No Action alternative, Alternative 1, on a landscape basis as reflected in 

SIMPPLLE simulations. There are no significant differences in simulated 

processes such as bark beetles, root disease, and fire, between alternatives 

at the landscape level. Figure 6 displays the level of fire that is simulated to 

occur with the alternatives and no treatment.

Table 2—Frenchtown Face restoration projects associated with the alternatives and planned to be funded through stewardship 

projects or other appropriations.

Proposed Action Modified Proposed Action 

Alternative 2 Alternative 5

Likely funded Likely funded 

through Proposed through 

Stewardship funded activity Proposed stewardship activity stewardship

Road construction 

Long-term road 0 miles 0 miles 0 miles 0 miles

Short-term road 5.24 miles 5.24 miles 5.94 miles 5.94 miles

Road reconstruction 56.21 miles 56.21 miles 65.82 miles 65.82 miles

Road obliteration 17.68 miles 17.68 miles 22.91 miles 22.91 miles

Road decommissioning 76.8 miles 24.7 miles 114.7 miles 114.7 miles

BMP implementation 65.3 miles 43.77 miles 66.69 miles 66.69 miles

Culvert removal/replacement 19 2 19 15

Little McCormick Cr. stream restoration 0.5 miles 0.5 miles 0.5 miles 0.5 miles

Stony Cr. diversion restoration 0.5 miles 0 miles 0.5 miles 0 miles

Mule pasture/riparian fencing 0.25 miles 0 miles 0.25 miles 0 miles

Weed treatment 6100 acres 6100 acres 6100 acres 6100 acres

Recreation 

Mountain biking trail 0.25 miles 0 miles 0.25 mile 0 miles

Horse trail reconstruction 1.5 miles 0 miles 1.5 miles 0 miles

Dev. parking area 2 0 2 0

Parking area-update/improve 8 0 8 0

OHV trailheads 2 0 2 0

OHV trail 0.5 miles 0 miles 0.5 miles 0 miles

Education 

Signs 3 2 3 2

OHV curriculum 1 1 1 1

Student Monitoring Program-dev. 1 1 1 1
24 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Figure 7 displays the distribution of fire types between the alternatives 

and the historic representation created by SIMPPLLE. The two alternatives 

display very light gains toward the distribution modeled to be the historic 

representation.

Table 3 displays the area of restoration timber harvests by alternative.

Figures 8 and 9 display a slight shift in both ponderosa pine and ponderosa 

pine/Douglas-fir cover types toward the simulated historic conditions.

Figure 6—Acres of stand replacement fire (SRF), moderate severity fire (MSF), and low 

severity fire (LSF) simulated over 50 years by alternative.

Figure 7—Distribution of stand replacement fire (SRF), moderate severity fire (MSF), and 

low severity fire (LSF) simulated over 50 years by alternative compared to the simulated 

historic condition.

Table 3—Restoration timber harvest acres under each alternative shown as a percentage of: (1) 

warm, dry benchlands on national forest lands; (2) total national forest lands in the analysis 

area; and (3) the entire landscape across all ownerships.

Warm-dry

Restoration benchlands Total 

timber National National Entire

Alternatives harvest acres Forest lands Forest lands landscape

No Action 0 0% 0% 0%

ALT 2 – Proposed Action 3,405 11.7% 7.4% 3.5%

ALT 5 – Mod. Proposed Action 4,530 15.6% 9.8% 4.7%
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 25

However, very little change in density is made toward the historic condition with either alternative, as can be seen in figures 10 and 11.

Although major differences may not exist on a total landscape scale as a 

result of the alternatives, significant differences do exist between alternatives 

at very specific locations within the wildland urban interface in comparison 

with untreated conditions.

Since all of these alternatives treated a small portion of the total landscape, 

SIMPPLLE simulations were made increasing the magnitude of treatment 

by three-fold to help identify the level of treatments needed to have an 

impact on the total landscape.

A comparison of the simulated acres of fire spread from a single “lockedin” mixed severity fire was made between the original treatment acres and a 

tripled treatment acres. The simulations were made using average conditions 

with no extreme fire probability and no fire suppression. The tripled treatment acres had slightly fewer simulated fire acres. Tripling treatments and 

locking in a mixed-severity fire with extreme conditions, wind-driven, on the 

Frenchtown Face showed a dramatic difference in the amount of fire spread 

received from one locked in fire. Figure 12 represents the difference between 

tripling versus original acreage treated in Alternative 2, the proposed action, 

and Alternative 5, the modified proposed action.

 Figure 8—Post treatment ponderosa pine acreage in the entire Frenchtown Face landscape 

simulated over 50 years by alternative compared to the simulated historic condition.

Figure 9—Post treatment ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir acreage in the entire Frenchtown Face 

landscape simulated over 50 years by alternative compared to the simulated historic 

condition.
26 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Figure 12—Comparison of simulated fire spread by fire severity for each alternative and the 

spread and severity of the same fire occurring when the treated area is tripled.

Figure 10—Post treatment acreage with 15-39% canopy coverage in the entire Frenchtown 

Face landscape simulated over 50 years by alternative compared to the simulated historic 

condition.

Figure 11—Post treatment acreage with 40-69% canopy coverage in the entire Frenchtown 

Face landscape simulated over 50 years by alternative compared to the simulated historic 

condition.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 27

Project Status

The success of the collaborative process is not yet fully evident as the 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and associated public com-

ment period has not occurred. The Final Environmental Impact Statement 

(FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) are scheduled for completion and 

publication in May 2004. The level and content of public comment to the 

DEIS and subsequent appeals and litigation of the respective FEIS and ROD 

will provide the remaining evaluation of this collaborative process.

Comparisons from SIMPPLLE provide the agencies and the public excel

-

lent opportunities to discuss many questions. SIMPPLLE demonstrated that 

increasing the magnitude of treatment by three-fold would have increased 

the odds substantially that young and old growth stands would survive 

severe events. This helps to address questions as: (1) How much treatment 

is needed to substantially reduce the risk of stand-replacing fire? (2) For spe-

cies-at-risk like flammulated owls, how much treatment across the landscape 

is needed to turn the habitat trend into a positive direction? (3) How much 

treatment is acceptable given the quantified risks of not treating those 

landscapes recognizing the inevitable consequences? SIMPPLLE provided 

landscape level and stand level significance in comparing the alternatives. 

The SIMPPLLE model provided an improved method of describing the 

range of historic variability across all ownerships.

The area feasible for restoration using commercial timber harvest (4,874 

acres under Alternative 5) is typically a small percentage (18 percent of the 

landscape warm-dry type) under second growth forest conditions. SIMP

-

PLLE provided landscape level and stand level significance in comparing 

the alternatives. The SIMPPLLE model provided an improved method 

of describing the range of historic variability across all ownerships. Since 

1992, when the Lolo National Forest implemented a landscape approach to 

ecosystem management, just 4,365 acres of restoration timber harvests have 

been implemented on the Ninemile Ranger District. This represents just 

2.7 percent of the warm-dry habitat type (163,339 acres) on the District. 

Alternative 5 essentially doubles the total area treated by restoration timber 

harvests, for a combined total 5.5 percent of the district’s area. Presently, 

no other landscape scale restoration projects using timber harvests with 

prescribed fire are funded for analysis. A similar level of restoration ac

-

complishment exists for using prescribed fire in these warm-dry habitat types 

where the district program struggles to complete approximately 2,000 acres 

of ecosystem maintenance burning annually, treating about 6 percent of the 

warm-dry type since 1992.

The public more readily accepts restoration projects involving timber 

harvest to enhance wildlife habitat than projects driven by commodityextraction. In similar restoration projects, analysis has disclosed that treating 

a landscape with improvement cutting and underburning has protected and 

recruited old growth habitat, to the benefit of such species as flammulated 

owls and pileated woodpeckers. While the literature supports such findings 

(Hillis and others 2000), further quantification has been lacking. Using 

SIMPPLLE provides further quantification of the risk to survivability 

that any timber stand has for the long-term. For instance, SIMPPLLE 

demonstrated that Alternative 5 still carries substantial risk that much of 

the warm-dry portion of the landscape could lose young and old stands to 

stand-replacing fire during extreme wildfire conditions. SIMPPLLE also 

demonstrated that increasing the magnitude of treatment by three-fold 
28 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

would increase the odds substantially that young and old growth stands 

would survive extreme wildfire conditions. Such comparisons provide agen-

cies and the public excellent opportunities to be involved in dialogue about 

issues such as: (1) what amount of treatment is needed to affect a positive 

wildlife habitat trend and (2) how do treatments compare given the quanti

-

fied risks of taking no action.

References

Arno, Stephen F.; Harrington, Michael G. 1998. The Interior West: managing 

fire-dependent forests by simulating natural disturbance regimes. In: Forest 

management into the next century: what will make it work? 1997 November 

19-21; Spokane, WA. Forest Products Society and U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service. 53-62.

Arno, S. F.; Harrington, M. F.; Fiedler, C. E.; Carlson, C. E. 1995. Restoring 

fire-dependent ponderosa pine forests in western Montana. Restoration and 

Management Notes. 13(1): 32-36.

Arno, S. F.; Scott, J. H.; Hartwell, M. G. 1995. Age-class structure of old growth 

ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir stands and its relationship to fire history. Res. Pap. 

INT-RP-481. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Intermountain Research Station. 25 p.

Arno, S. F.; Smith, H. Y.; Krebs, M. A. 1997. Old growth ponderosa pine and 

western larch stand structures: influences of pre-1900 fires and fire exclusion. 

Res. Pap. INT-RP-495. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Intermountain Research Station.

Barbour R. J.; [and others]. 2001. Assessing the need, costs, and potential benefits 

of prescribed fire and mechanical treatments to reduce fire hazard in Montana 

and New Mexico. A report to the Joint Fire Sciences Program, October 5, 2001. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station.

Bonnicksen, T. M.; Stone, E. P. 1982. Reconstruction of a presettlement giant 

sequoia-mixed conifer forest community using the aggregation approach. 

Ecology. 63: 

1134-1148.

Chang, C. 1996. Ecosystem responses to fire and variations in fire regimes. In: 

Sierra Nevada ecosystem project: final report to Congress. Vol. II Assessments 

and Scientific Basis for Management Options. Wildland Resources Center Report 

No. 37. Davis, CA: Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, University of 

California. 1071-1099.

Clough, Lorraine T. 2000. Nesting habitat selection and productivity of northern 

goshawks in West-Central Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 86 p. 

M.S. Thesis.

Dahms, W. G. 1949. How long do ponderosa pine snags stand? Res. Note 57. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Forest and Range Experiment Station. 3 p.

Dahms, C. W.; Geils, B. W., tech. eds. 1997. An assessment of forest ecosystem 

health in the Southwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-295. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Everett, R. 1993. Eastside forest ecosystem health assessment. Volume I: Executive 

Summary. National Forest System, Forest Service Research, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture.

Fiedler, C. E.; Becker, R. R.; Haglund, S. A. 1988. Preliminary guidelines for 

uneven-aged silvicultural prescriptions in ponderosa pine. In: Baumgartner, 

D. M.; Lotan, J. E., comps. Proceedings, ponderosa pine - the species and its 

management. Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension 

Service. 235-241.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 29

Fiedler, C. E.; [and others]. 2001. A strategic assessment of fire hazard in Montana. 

Report submitted to the Joint Fire Sciences Program, September 29, 2001, in 

cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station.

Fischer, William C., Bradley, Anne F. 1987. Fire ecology of western Montana forest 

habitat types. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-223. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 

95 p.

Hillis, J. M; Applegate, V. 1999. Shrub response from prescribed burns on the Lolo 

National Forest: net changes in ungulated forage productivity, relationship to 

residual conifer density and fire severity, and strategies for successful burning. 

Presented at the Wildlife Society Fire Effects Symposium, Spokane, WA. April 

1999.

Hillis, J. M.; Applegate, V.; Slaughter, S.; Harrington, M. G.; Smith, H. 2000. 

Simulating historical disturbance regimes and stand structures in old-forest 

ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests. In: Proceedings of the 1999 National 

Silvicultural Workshop. RMRS-P-19. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 32-39.

Hillis, J. Michael; Wright, Vita; Jacobs, Amy. 2002. Region One old growth 

ponderosa pine/flammulated owl assessment. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rockies Region. 18 p.

Hillis, J. Michael; Lockman, Dave. 2003. An assessment of American marten habitat 

in Region One. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculure, Forest Service, 

Northern Rockies Region. 8 p.

Hutto, R. L.; Young, J. S. 1999. Habitat relationships of landbirds in the Northern 

Region. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-32. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculure, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Lolo Forest Plan. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculure, Forest Service, 

Lolo National Forest. April 1986.

Losensky, B. J. 1989. Foothills fire history study. On file at Ninemile Ranger 

District, Huson, MT.

Losensky, B. J. 1993 (in draft). Historical vegetation in Region One by climatic 

area. On file at Lolo National Forest, Fire Management Office, Missoula, MT.

McIver, James; Weatherspoon, Phillip; Edminster, Carl. 2001. Alternative ponderosa 

pine restoration treatments in the western United States. In: Ponderosa pine 

ecosystems restoration and conservation: steps toward stewardship. Conference 

proceedings: Flagstaff, AZ, April 25-27, 2000. Proceedings RMRS-P-22. Fort 

Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculure, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station. 104-109.

Parker, A. J. 1984. A comparison of structural properties and compositional trends 

in conifer forests of Yosemite and Glacier National Parks, USA. Northwest 

Science. 58: 131-141.

Parsons, D. J.; DeBenedetti, S. H. 1979. Impact of fire suppression on a mixedconifer forest. Forest Ecology and Management. 2: 21-33.

Patton-Mallory, M. 1997. Southwest wildland/urban interface fire risk reduction 

workshop; August 4-5, 1997, Flagstaff, AZ. Unpublished summary report on 

file. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Research Station. 15 p.

Pfister, Robert D.; [and others]. 1977. Forest habitat types of Montana. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. INT-34. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 174 p.

Pollet, Jolie. 1999. Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on wildfire severity 

in ponderosa pine forests. Final Report. Agreement INT-95075-RJVA. Western 

Forest Fire Research Center, Department of Forest Sciences, College of Natural 

Resources, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, CO. Submitted to Dr. Stephen 

F. Arno, Intermountain Research Station, Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory, 

Missoula, MT.
30 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Quigley, R. M.; Cole, H. B. 1997. Highlighted scientific findings of the Interior 

Columbia Basin ecosystem management project. PNW-GTR-404. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station.

Ritter, S.; Samson, F.; Carotti, J.; Hillis, J. 2000. R1 snag protocol. Available at U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Region One, Missoula, MT.

Scott, Joe H. 1998. Fuel reduction in residential and scenic forests: a comparison of 

three treatments in a western Montana ponderosa pine stand. Res. Pap. RMRSRP-5. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Research Station. 19 p.

Skinner, C. N.; Chang, C. 1996. Fire regimes, past and present. In: Sierra Nevada 

ecosystem project: final report to Congress. Vol. II Assessments and Scientific 

Basis for Management Options. Wildland Resources Center Report No. 37. 

Davis, CA: Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, University of California. 

1041-1069.

Smith, Helen Y.; Anro, Stephen F., eds. 1999. Eighty-eight years of change in a 

managed ponderosa pine forest. RMRS-GTR-23. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 55 p. + 14 

foldout photopoint pages, one poster.

Smith, H. 1999. Assessing durability of ponderosa pine snags in relationship to fire 

history. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 83 p. M.S. Thesis.

Stephens, S. L. 1998. Effects of fuels and silvicultural treatments on potential fire 

behavior in mixed conifer forests of the Sierra Nevada, CA. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 105: 21-34.

Stephenson, N. L. 1999. Reference conditions for giant sequoia forest restoration: 

structure, process, and precision. Ecological Applications. 9: 1253-1265.

USDA. 1997. An assessment of ecosystem components in the Interior Columbia 

Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins, Volume II. PNW-GTR-405. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station.

USDA.1999. Northern Region overview: summary. Missoula, MT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Region. 44 p.

USDA Forest Service. 1999. Lolo National Forest winter range restoration project 

FEIS. Lolo National Forest, Missoula, MT.

Weatherspoon, C. P.; Skinner, C. N. 1996. Landscape-level strategies for forest fuel 

management. In: Sierra Nevada ecosystem project: final report to Congress. Vol. 

II Assessments and Scientific Basis for Management Options. Wildland Resources 

Center Report No. 37. Davis, CA: Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, 

University of California. 1471-1492.

Wright, Vita. 1996. Multi-scale analysis of flammulated owl habitat use: owl 

distribution, habitat and Conservation. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 

91 p. M.S. Thesis. 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 31

Abstract—Pringle Falls Experimental Forest has been a center for research in ponderosa pine forests east of the crest of the Cascade Range since 1931. Long-term 

research facilities, sites, and future research opportunities are currently at risk from 

stand-replacement wildfi re because of changes in stand structure resulting from past 

fi re exclusion. At the same time, many of the special values are increasingly at risk 

from recreational impacts and nearby urban development. We describe the special 

values associated with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex Laws.) stands in 

the Experimental Forest, we present our rationale for a series of treatments, and we 

discuss implementation of a set of silvicultural prescriptions designed to protect and 

enhance the special values of Pringle Falls Experimental Forest.

Introduction

Experimental forests and ranges constitute a national network of outdoor 

laboratories designated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service for the express purpose of providing sites for research. They have a 

rich legacy of providing information to guide forest management activities. 

Experimental forests provide a unique research platform from which to address forest management questions at various scales and offer an important 

advantage for collaborative research. Pringle Falls Experimental Forest (hereafter Pringle Falls) (lat. 43 ̊42’ N, long. 121 ̊37’ W), within the Deschutes 

National Forest in central Oregon and 48 kilometers (30 miles) southwest 

of Bend, Oregon (fi gure 1), is a center for silviculture, forest management, 

and insect and disease research in ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl. 

ex Laws.) forests east of the Oregon Cascade Range. The 4477-hectare 

(11,055-acre) experimental forest is maintained by the Pacifi c Northwest 

Research Station, in cooperation with the Pacifi c Northwest Region and 

Deschutes National Forest, for research in ecosystem structure and function 

and demonstration of management techniques.

Pringle Falls is the oldest experimental forest and the site of some of the 

earliest forest management and silviculture research in the Pacifi c Northwest. 

Thornton T. Munger, first Director of the Pacifi c Northwest Research Station 

(then Experiment Station), and colleague and long-time friend of Gifford 

Pinchot, first Chief of the Forest Service, selected the site in 1914. It was formally established as a unit of the national network of experimental forests on 

May 20, 1931. Headquarters buildings were constructed between 1932 and 

1934. Within Pringle Falls lies a two-unit Research Natural Area, established 

for non-manipulative research in 1936.

The eastside forests of Oregon are replete with special places ranging 

from mountain peaks shaped by fire and ice to rivers cutting through lava 

Silvicultural Activities in Pringle Falls 

Experimental Forest, Central Oregon

Andrew Youngblood1, Kim Johnson2, Jim Schlaich3, and 

Boyd Wickman4

1 USDA Forest Service, Pacifi c 

Northwest Research Station, LaGrande, 

OR.

2 USDA Forest Service, Bitterroot 

National Forest, Stevensville, MT.

3 USDA Forest Service, Deschutes 

National Forest, Bend-Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Bend, OR.

4 USDA Forest Service (emeritus), 

Pacifi c Northwest Research Station, 

Bend, OR.
32 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

tubes and basalt beds. The ponderosa pine forests within Pringle Falls 

Experimental Forest, however, represent special places with unique values: 

their location within the context of environmental and historical settings, 

the resource outputs they have provided and the resource values they continue to provide, and the opportunities they afford to address current and 

future management issues of wildland resource management. In this paper, 

we (1) describe the special values associated with ponderosa pine stands in 

Pringle Falls, (2) present our rationale for developing a set of silvicultural 

Figure 1—The Lookout Mountain and Pringle Butte Units of Pringle Falls Experimental Forest, located on the 

Deschutes National Forest southwest of Bend, Oregon. Also indicated are units of the Research Natural Area 

and a Wild and Scenic River corridor along the Deschutes River. 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 33

prescriptions to protect and enhance these special values, and (3) discuss 

some unique features involved with implementing the silvicultural prescrip-

tions within the experimental forest.

Special Values of Ponderosa Pine Stands in 

Pringle Falls Experimental Forest

We base our assignment of special value of ponderosa pine stands within 

Pringle Falls Experimental Forest on four points. First, ponderosa pine 

stands in Pringle Falls have special value because they represent a dispro

-

portionate amount of remnant eastside old-growth ponderosa pine forests. 

Second, the administration site has special value because the ponderosa pine 

stand encompasses historic buildings that provide a link to the establishment 

and initial functioning of Pringle Falls. Third, ponderosa pine stands on 

Pringle Butte have special value because they are the sites of many historical 

and ongoing long-term studies. Finally, ponderosa pine stands surrounding 

Pringle Butte have special value because they uniquely provide opportunities 

for new landscape-scale research.

Special Value of Remnant Old-Growth Stands

Pringle Falls Experimental Forest exists as two separate but closely spaced 

units, each named for the dominant volcanic feature contained within the 

unit. Pringle Butte, the oldest known geologic formation in the Pringle 

Butte Unit, is a 5-million-year-old shield volcano rising to 1530 meters 

(5020 feet). Lookout Mountain, the highest point in the Experimental 

Forest at 1900 meters (6215 feet) in elevation, is a 300,000-year-old shield 

volcano. Both these features extend above a generally flat or gently rolling 

ancient lake basin with average elevation of 1280 meters (4200 feet) that is 

dotted with small volcanic peaks and cinder cones. Both units are character

-

istic of low- and mid-elevation portions of the High Cascades physiographic 

province (Franklin and Dyrness 1973). The Deschutes River, designated a 

Wild and Scenic River because of outstanding scenic and recreation values, 

flows northeasterly through the Pringle Butte Unit.

Soils in Pringle Falls are dominated by 0.5 to 2 meters (1.5 to 6 feet) of 

6600-year-old aerially deposited pumice and ash from Mt. Mazama (now 

Crater Lake). More recent deposits are additional ash, pumice, and cinders 

from surrounding volcanic cones and sand and silt sediments of the La Pine 

basin, overlain with sands and gravels deposited by glacial outwash from the 

Cascade Range. Soils derived from Mt. Mazama pumice and ash have only 

a thin weathered surface layer. Most of the soil profile is undeveloped, with 

low organic matter content, low nitrogen, sulfur, and phosphorus content, 

and high porosity. Daytime to nighttime temperature variation within the 

soil profile can be extreme.

The climate is continental, modified by proximity of the Cascade Range 

to the west and the Great Basin desert to the east. Most precipitation occurs 

as snowfall. Annual precipitation averages 600 millimeters (24 inches) on 

Pringle Butte and over 1000 millimeters (40 inches) on Lookout Mountain. 

Daytime high temperatures in the summer range between 21 and 32 degrees 

Celsius (70 and 90 degrees Fahrenheit). Summer nights are cool and frosts 

can occur throughout the growing season.

Forest communities within Pringle Falls are representative of low- and 

mid-elevation regional landscapes and contain outstanding examples of 
34 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

undisturbed and managed ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta

Dougl. ex Loud.) and higher elevation mixed conifer forests common 

throughout central and south-central Oregon. Ecological site differences 

such as aspect and elevation, and past disturbance events, especially fires, 

insects, and diseases, and more recent timber harvesting, have created a 

mosaic of rich biological diversity. Ponderosa pine is the dominant conifer 

throughout most of Pringle Falls. Shrub layers associated with ponderosa 

pine include antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata (Pursh) DC.), 

snowbrush ceanothus (Ceanothus velutinus Dougl. ex Hook.), greenleaf 

manzanita (Arctostaphylos patula Greene), giant chinquapin (Chrysolepis 

chrysophylla (Dougl. ex Hook.) Hjelmqvist), and pinemat manzanita (Arcto-

staphylos nevadensis Gray).

Ponderosa pine forests east of the crest of the Cascade Range in the 

Pacific Northwest, including those in Pringle Falls, have undergone dramatic 

physiognomic changes in the last 100 years. Early settlers and surveyors at 

the beginning of the 20th century passed through open forests of ponderosa 

pine with widely spaced trees, few if any down logs, and little litter and 

woody undergrowth (Bonnickson 2000; Languille and others 1903; 

Wickman 1992). Witness trees established during the late 1800s in central 

Oregon were predominantly ponderosa pine with diameters that exceeded 

50 centimeters (20 inches) (Perry and others 1995). The stem pattern of 

these eastside forests was a seemingly uniform parkland of widely spaced me-

dium to large and old trees and continuous herbaceous undergrowth (Agee 

1994). Historical fire regimes in these forests consisted of very frequent to 

frequent, low-intensity fires that burned some or most forest floor plants, 

consumed litter, and killed primarily small trees (Agee 1993). A fire regime 

of low-intensity burns, coupled with infrequent large and more intense 

fires, was common prior to the advent of modern fire suppression efforts. 

Estimated mean fire return interval was 4 to 11 years within Pringle Falls 

(Bork 1984; Morrow 1986).

Current amounts of eastside old-growth ponderosa pine forest are esti

-

mated to range from 3 to 15 percent of pre-settlement levels (Beardsley and 

others 1999; Bolsinger and Waddell 1993; Everett and others 1994; Hann 

and others 1997; Perry and others 1995). Decline in the overall extent of 

eastside old-growth ponderosa pine forest can be attributed to changes in 

natural disturbance regimes resulting from active management programs 

for fire suppression, livestock grazing, selective logging of old fire-resistant 

trees for timber and insect control, and extensive road building (Bergoffen 

1976; Johnson and others 1994; Oliver and others 1994). Pringle Falls is 

one of the few remaining places where old-growth ponderosa pine forests 

endure; about 2145 hectares (5300 acres) of old-growth ponderosa pine 

remain within the experimental forest. Individual dominant ponderosa 

pine in these stands range from 250 to 620 years in age (data on file, PNW 

Research Station, LaGrande, Oregon). With effective fire exclusion, under-

story tree density in these remaining ponderosa pine stands has increased, 

however, and these stands often contain more fire-intolerant species such 

as lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir, and grand fir. With the exception of stands 

recently treated, old-growth ponderosa pine stands are multilayered, contain 

a variety of size classes, and are greatly overstocked with small-diameter 

stems. The smaller, younger trees compete for site resources with residual 

old-growth trees and often lead to mortality of the older and larger diameter 

trees. Multilayered stands also contain increased number of fuel ladders and 

greater ground fuels. Consequently, the old-growth stands are at greater risk 

of stand-replacement wildfire.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 35

Thus, Pringle Falls is a special place because of the disproportionate 

amount of old-growth ponderosa pine forests it contains.

Special Value of the Administration Site

The administration site at Pringle Falls Experimental Forest consists of 10 

hectares (25 acres) on the north bank of the Deschutes River in the Pringle 

Butte Unit. Original headquarters buildings consist of a three-story admin

-

istration building and a single-story cottage constructed between 1932 and 

1934 by Works Progress Administration (WPA) craftsman. These buildings 

are excellent examples of the period architecture and rustic rock, log, and 

frame construction. Later, an additional two-story dormitory, a garage/shop 

complex, and various outbuildings were added. This infrastructure provides 

seasonal living and working conditions for about 20 people.

The ponderosa pine stand surrounding the buildings at the administration 

site has been continuously protected from fire since the early 1930s and, 

like other ponderosa pine stands that have had fire exclusion, has undergone 

dramatic changes in structure and composition. Near the turn of the 20th

century, 40 to 70 large pines per hectare (16 to 28 per acre) comprised the 

overstory, with only a few stems in the understory. With fire exclusion, the 

number of small diameter ponderosa and lodgepole pine saplings increased 

to a stand density of over 2000 trees per hectare (810 trees per acre). Con

-

tiguous fuels represented by decadent antelope bitterbrush, ponderosa pine 

needle drape, and abundant ladder fuels also increased dramatically. These 

conditions represent a high risk for stand replacing wildfire, with the first fire 

likely a high intensity crown fire that would be difficult to control and would 

likely endanger crews living and working in the headquarters buildings.

Thus, the administration site has special value because the ponderosa pine 

stand encompasses historical buildings that provide a link to the establish

-

ment and initial functioning of Pringle Falls and represent fine craftsmanship 

from the WPA era.

Special Value of Research Sites on Pringle Butte

Pringle Falls Experimental Forest has a rich history of serving as a diverse 

natural laboratory used by university and federal scientists for field research. 

Descriptions of past work from establishment through the early 1990s have 

been chronicled in an annotated bibliography (Youngblood 1995). Some of 

the earliest forestry research in central and eastern Oregon occurred within 

Pringle Falls. A large number of these early studies were located on or immedi

-

ately adjacent to Pringle Butte (figure 2). The earliest known published work 

was a rating system for determining the susceptibility of ponderosa pine trees 

to western pine beetle attack by F. Paul Keen (1936). Keen later documented 

the age-class distribution in several stands on Pringle Butte, including stands 

with stems having establishment dates of 1330 A.D. (Keen 1940). One of 

the earliest silvicultural studies was a test of cutting methods with different 

intensities of selection, initiated in 1937 along the northeast slope of Pringle 

Butte (Kolbe and McKay 1939). Later, Edwin L. Mowat described the 

stand structure and analyzed periodic growth measurements for suppressed 

ponderosa pine seedlings that were released from a lodgepole pine canopy 

(Mowat 1950). And at the same time, James Sowder conducted one of the 

earliest studies combining the objective of sanitation and salvage of ponderosa 

pine, judged to be highly susceptible to insect attack, with the objective of fuel 

and fire hazard reduction (Sowder 1951). Contributions such as these added 

greatly to management of ponderosa pine forests throughout eastside forests 
36 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

of Oregon and Washington at a time when vast segments of these forests were 

being harvested to meet society’s increasing demands for lumber products.

During the next several decades, studies that were established on Pringle 

Butte concentrated on determining the competitive effect of shrubs growing with ponderosa pine (Barrett 1965; Dahms 1961); the soil thermal 

properties, surface temperatures, and seed bed characteristics required for 

lodgepole and ponderosa pine regeneration from natural seedfall (Barrett 

1966; Dahms and Barrett 1975); the biology of dwarf mistletoe in ponderosa pine, its spread, and subsequent damage in understory pine (Roth 1953, 

1971; Roth and Barrett 1985); and the effect of underburning on dwarf 

mistletoe in ponderosa pine (Koonce and Roth 1980). During this time, 

logging methods that ensured survival of existing seedlings and saplings 

were developed, thus reducing future reforestation efforts and costs (Barrett 

1960). Long-term or permanent research plots were established to study the 

response of ponderosa pine to fertilization (Cochran 1977), and the release 

and subsequent growth of ponderosa pine at various tree densities (Barrett 

1982; Dahms 1960; Oren and others 1987). Periodic evaluation of these 

stands added to our understanding of structural changes occurring in natural 

and managed stands. Also, the frequency, intensity, and spatial patterns of 

wildfire in old-growth ponderosa pine stands near the top of Pringle Butte 

were examined (Bork 1984; Mazany and Thompson 1983; Morrow 1986).

Work extending through the 1990s emphasized the relationship between 

ponderosa pine vigor and mountain pine beetle attacks (Larsson and others 

1983); the effect of fire on root decay in ponderosa pine and the occurrence 

of fungal microflora on burned and unburned sites (Reaves and others 

Figure 2—Historical and ongoing research sites, either mapped portions of stands (shown in yellow) or mapped 

points (shown in green) in the Pringle Butte Unit, Pringle Falls Experimental Forest.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 37

1990); and the cyclic population dynamics of Pandora moth (Coloradia 

pandora Blake), an important defoliator of ponderosa pine (Speer and others 

2001). Although much of the long-term research in applied forestry has 

continued over the years, such as identification of optimal growing regimes 

for planted pine (Cochran and others 1991), other topics have increased 

in importance. Current research on Pringle Butte is designed to increase 

our understanding of the processes that regulate or influence the structure, 

composition, and pattern of forests and that are critical for the maintenance 

of diverse, healthy, productive, and sustainable forest ecosystems.

Thus, the Pringle Butte portion of Pringle Falls has special value because 

of the concentration and legacy of historical and ongoing research sites.

Special Value of New Research Opportunities

Pringle Falls Experimental Forest was established and continues to be 

managed a priori for research and demonstration. One example of research 

and demonstration identified within the Pacific Northwest Research 

Station’s strategic research planning process is the need to evaluate practices 

and strategies to better manage risks within the wildland/urban interface. A 

critical component in establishing a mutually acceptable active management 

strategy in the area where residential development and wildlands share 

boundaries is the ability to assess risk of wildland fire moving from the 

surrounding forest into urban areas in combination with the ability to assess 

risk of fire originating from the urban setting moving out into the adjacent 

wildlands. Additional components include the needs to develop and test 

operational practices and techniques and to evaluate strategies for reducing 

fuels to manage risks within the wildland/urban interface. Research is 

needed to assess how silvicultural treatments affect fire risk, stand structure, 

wildlife habitat, and the risk of other disturbances such as insect outbreaks 

and invasion by nonnative plants, as well as how treatments influence the 

social values held by forest users and conditions of local communities. 

Evaluating management choices at the wildland/urban interface is limited 

by both inadequate technical knowledge of the effects of treatments, such as 

prescribed fire or surrogates such as thinning, mowing, or crushing, and also 

by public resistance to these treatments or to perceived resulting conditions. 

There also are economic tradeoffs associated with short- and long-term 

solutions to fire risk reduction activities on both public and private lands, 

which include initial costs of treatment, employment opportunities, and 

their attendant impacts on economic well-being, as well as the potential 

repeated treatment needs and property value considerations. There is a need 

to identify factors that influence acceptability of wildland fuel reduction 

strategies and underlying decision-making processes. This includes improved 

understanding of public knowledge, preferences, and understanding of 

tradeoffs and opportunities for mutual gains, and also understanding of 

effectiveness of alternative approaches to enhance public understanding and 

knowledge of wildland management.

Pringle Falls represents a unique place to conduct such research because of 

its proximity to the wildland/urban interface and the high number of forest 

visitors passing through, especially those using the paved highway to the 

higher Cascade lakes or boating on the Deschutes River. Pringle Falls could 

play a pivotal role in focusing attention from various research disciplines and 

resource managers on a set of operational methods for fuels reduction in the 

ponderosa pine stands surrounding Pringle Butte, on the role various part

-

nerships may play across multiple ownerships including the wildland/urban 
38 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

interface, and on the environmental and social consequences of the various 

methods. Thus, the ponderosa pine stands surrounding Pringle Butte at 

Pringle Falls have special value because they uniquely provide opportunities 

for new landscape-scale research.

Silvicultural Prescriptions for Special Places: 

The Dilman Project

Discussions among Research Station scientists and personnel on the 

Bend/Fort Rock District of the Deschutes National Forest resulted in 

agreement on the special values of ponderosa pine stands in Pringle Falls 

Experimental Forest, a set of risks associated with each special value, and the 

need to develop and apply silvicultural prescriptions to maintain and protect 

the values. These values and their needs include the following:

• Pringle Falls has special value because of the disproportionate amount of 

old-growth ponderosa pine forest it contains. Silvicultural prescriptions 

are needed to restore the frequency of low-intensity disturbances and thus 

the resulting periods of stability in these stands. Prescriptions are needed 

to protect these remnant old-growth stands and individual trees from 

stand-replacement disturbances.

• The administration site at Pringle Falls has special value because the 

ponderosa pine stand encompasses historical buildings that provide a link 

to the establishment and initial functioning of the experimental forest and 

represent fine craftsmanship from the WPA era. Because the site continues 

to be used in support of ongoing research, there is a need to provide a 

safe working environment for occupants. Silvicultural prescriptions are 

needed to reduce the fuels and reduce the risk of stand-replacement fire 

within the administration site in order to protect the historical buildings 

and protect the lives of those using the buildings.

• Pringle Butte in Pringle Falls has special value because of the concentra

-

tion and legacy of historical and ongoing research sites. This portion of 

the experimental forest is bordered on three sides by urban development 

or dense recreation sites. Recently, fires started in the wildland/urban 

interface or within recreation sites along the Deschutes River threatened 

ponderosa pine stands and research sites contained within them on 

Pringle Butte. Silvicultural prescriptions are needed to reduce the risk of 

stand replacement fires entering this area from surrounding areas in order 

to protect historical and ongoing research sites.

• Ponderosa pine stands surrounding Pringle Butte have special value 

because they uniquely provide opportunities for new landscape-scale 

research. One fundamental constraint to new research addressing fire risk 

within the wildland/urban interface, however, is that the once relatively 

homogeneous landscape surrounding Pringle Butte is fragmented into 

small stands as a result of past research and management actions. The 

current landscape provides little opportunity for large-scale operational 

studies with sufficient treatment replication. Silvicultural prescriptions are 

needed to modify existing stand structures and consolidate fragmented 

stands into larger blocks with similar structures such that large-scale 

operational fuels reduction practices and strategies to better manage risks 

within the wildland/urban interface may be evaluated.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 39

Prescription Development

Consideration and analysis of silvicultural prescriptions for special places 

within Pringle Falls occurred within the context of the Dilman Environ-

mental Assessment (EA) and the resulting Dilman project. Under National 

Environmental Policy Act guidelines, scoping for the Dilman Environmental 

Assessment began in July 1999. In addition to vegetation management, the 

environmental assessment addressed road closures and recreation manage-

ment activities within Pringle Falls. It was completed in December 2001.The 

environmental assessment is tiered to several layers of management direction 

that guided the development of project alternatives and prescription devel

-

opment. Existing management direction was provided by:

• Deschutes Land and Resource Management Plan (DLRMP), 1990, and 

the Regional Forester’s Forest Plan Amendment #2, 1995. Within the 

DLRMP, Pringle Falls is identified as a single management area with spe-

cific standards and guidelines for managing resource values. The Regional 

Forester’s Plan Amendment, known as “Eastside Screens,” established a 

policy restricting harvest of trees greater than 53 centimeters (21 inches) 

in diameter at breast height (DBH). The DLRMP also provided direction 

for visual concerns along major paved travel-ways.

• Inland Native Fish, 1995. Interim Riparian Habitat Conservation Area ap

-

plied to the Deschutes River. This policy established a buffer on either side 

of the river extending outward from the edge of the active stream channel 

91 meters (300 feet), within which timber harvesting, including fuelwood 

cutting, is prohibited except where silvicultural practices are needed to 

attain desired vegetation characteristics to meet riparian management objec-

tives. Under the Dilman Environmental Assessment, silvicultural practices 

were carefully considered to avoid adverse effects on inland native fish and 

included the use of horses for skidding and locating treatment boundaries 

away from the slope break to prevent sediment from entering the river.

• The Upper Deschutes Wild and Scenic River Final Environmental Impact 

Statement, 1996. Superimposed on Pringle Falls is a 1.6-kilometer-wide 

(1-mile) corridor, centered on the Deschutes River, within which manage

-

ment direction emphasizes protection of the outstanding scenic and 

recreation values.

The Dilman Project focused on the following four objectives:

• Implement the Upper Deschutes Wild and Scenic River Environmental 

Impact Statement for segment 2 of the river to meet stated goals for 

protection and enhancement of outstanding scenic and recreation values, 

and thus protect the special values of old-growth ponderosa pine stands 

and individual trees (special value 1).

• Provide defensible space along wildland/urban interfaces, especially the 

administration site, private in-holdings on the north side of the Pringle 

Butte unit, and the urban interface immediately to the east of Pringle Falls 

(special value 2).

• Provide defensible space along major travel corridors that access National 

Forest land, especially roads on either side of the Deschutes River that 

serve as key access corridors through Pringle Falls, thus protecting the 

special values of historical and long-term research sites concentrated on 

Pringle Butte (special value 3).

• Enhance the special values of existing old-growth ponderosa pine stands 

and create options for future research within Pringle Falls by concentrating 
40 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

treatments around the base of Pringle Butte to restore old-growth condi-

tions and processes (special value 4).

A mix of vegetative treatments was developed that addressed these 

objectives. Because many of the stands were multistructured, contained a 

variety of size classes, and differed greatly in composition, density, and past 

history, various treatments with multiple entries were determined necessary 

to achieve desired conditions. Although the Dilman Project specifically 

addresses about 746 hectares (1844 acres) within Pringle Falls, it also 

addresses stands with similar needs and treatments in proximity to the 

experimental forest. Within Pringle Falls, about 471 hectares (1164 acres) 

will receive commercial thinning, about 85 hectares (185 acres) will receive 

noncommercial thinning, and about 200 hectares (495 acres) will have fuel 

reduction from prescribed broadcast burning, hand piling and burning, 

mowing, mechanical mastication, or some combination of fuel treatments. 

In the old-growth ponderosa pine stands surrounding Pringle Butte, com-

mercial thinning of 13- to 53-centimeter (5- to 21-inch) DBH ponderosa 

pine, at roughly 6- by 6-meter (20- by 20-foot) spacing with retention of 

natural clumping, will reduce stand density, disaggregate fuel continuity, and 

decrease fuel ladders. No ponderosa pines over 53 centimeters (21 inches) 

DBH will be removed. All large lodgepole pines, however, will be removed, 

further reducing stand density and fuel loadings. Along the river corridor, all 

lodgepole pines greater than 8 centimeters (3 inches) DBH will be commer-

cially thinned, with a subsequent noncommercial thin at 3.3-meter (11-foot) 

spacing to follow. To begin developing open stand structures along highly 

visible paved travel ways, ponderosa pines in the 13- to 53-centimeter (5- to 

21-inch) DBH class will be commercially thinned, again retaining all existing 

natural clumping, and all lodgepole pines will be removed through a series 

of commercial and noncommercial thinnings. Noncommercial thinning of 

ponderosa and lodgepole pines will occur in areas of previous harvest activity 

such as old clearcuts and fire and beetle-kill salvage areas to reduce fuels and 

accelerate residual tree growth. Finally, fuel reduction in areas of previous 

harvest, in areas of commercial or noncommercial thinning, or as an activity 

by itself, may include slashing, hand piling, mowing, mechanical mastication, 

or prescribed burning either singly or in combination with other fuel reduc

-

tion methods. When fully applied, the silvicultural prescriptions collectively 

represent a significant amount of vegetation management treatments within 

Pringle Falls (figure 3) while addressing the four identified special values.

Prescription Projection

We used the southeast Oregon variant of Forest Vegetation Simulator 

(FVS), coupled with the Stand Visualization System (SVS) to model and 

project the effects of our prescriptions into the future. For each of the stands 

modeled, the following assumptions applied:

• Marking prescriptions are fully met 90 percent of the time.

• The shrub layer is treated concurrently with activity fuel reduction treat-

ments.

• Natural regeneration of ponderosa and lodgepole pines occurs on a 

frequent but nonuniform basis; only ponderosa pine establishment and 

growth was modeled.

• A single noncommercial thinning after commercial thinning is more 

realistic than frequent noncommercial thinnings given budget constraints; 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 41

this suggests that prescribed fire in subsequent years may serve as a surrogate for additional noncommercial thinning.

• Prescribed fire will be applied after each initial commercial thinning 

treatment, 15 years after the initial treatment and then conservatively, at 

20-year intervals through the remaining 100-year timeframe.

Model outputs were initially configured for 5-year cycles to more accurately account for initial prescribed fire and initiation of natural regeneration 

of ponderosa pine.

As one example of prescription application and projection, we present 

graphical representations of structural changes in stand 904. In 2000, 

this stand consisted of about 2000 ponderosa pine trees per hectare (806 

per acre) and 900 lodgepole pines per hectare (363 per acre) (figure 4). 

Although most of the basal area was in large-diameter ponderosa pine, 

most of the density was in small-diameter ponderosa and lodgepole pine. 

Less than 15 ponderosa pines per hectare (6 per acre) were greater than 53 

centimeters (21 inches) DBH. Total basal area was about 24 square meters 

per hectare (106 square feet per acre). Commercial thinning is projected 

to reduce the density to about 1790 ponderosa pine trees per hectare (726 

per acre) and eliminate most of the standing lodgepole pine (table 1). The 

first prescribed fire is scheduled as a broadcast underburn in 2005; this 

treatment is projected to eliminate all lodgepole pines that escaped the initial 

Figure 3—Commercial thinning, noncommercial thinning, and fuel reduction units of the Dilman project 

(shown in red), overlapped with historical and ongoing research sites (shown in yellow or green) in the 

Pringle Butte Unit, Pringle Falls Experimental Forest.
42 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

thinning and to reduce the stand density to about 321 ponderosa pines per 

hectare (131 per acre) (figure 5). Subsequent underburnings are scheduled 

at 20-year intervals to control establishment of lodgepole pine, to gradually 

reduce density, and to restrain down woody fuels and live shrubs. After five 

underburns, overall density is projected to be about 94 trees per hectare (38 

trees per acre), consisting almost entirely of large-diameter, widely spaced 

old-growth ponderosa pine (figure 6).

Table 1—Change in structural features for stand 904 projected with FVS/SVS.

Percent of maximum Quadratic mean Treatment 

Year Density stand density index diameter Basal area and target

Trees/hectare Centimeters Square meters Trees/ha

(trees/acre) (inches) (square feet) (trees/acre)

2000 2877 (1165) 30 11.7 (4.6) 30.9 (134.4) Thin,1793 (726)

2005 1793 (726) 23 11.7 (4.6) 19.2 (83.8) Burn, 321 (130)

2020 442 (179) 24 23.9 (9.4) 19.0 (82.6) Burn, 193 (78)

2040 230 (93) 25 33.8 (13.3) 20.6 (89.7) Burn, 131 (53)

2060 175 (71) 26 39.9 (15.7) 21.9 (95.4) Burn, 106 (43)

2080 151 (61) 28 43.9 (17.3) 22.9 (99.6) Burn, 94 (38)

Figure 4—Graphical representation of initial structural conditions in stand 904, designated 

for commercial thinning and broadcast burning as part of the Dilman project in Pringle 

Falls Experimental Forest.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 43

Figure 6—Graphical representation of structural conditions in stand 904 projected for the 

year 2080, after the initial commercial thinning and broadcast burning followed by four 

broadcast burnings, as part of the Dilman project in Pringle Falls Experimental Forest.

Figure 5—Graphical representation of structural conditions in stand 904 projected for the 

year 2005, after commercial thinning and initial broadcast burning as part of the Dilman 

project in Pringle Falls Experimental Forest.
44 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Implementation of Prescriptions for Special 

Places

Treatment implementation in Pringle Falls began with the administration 

site. While initially considered within the Dilman Environmental Assessment, 

a categorical exclusion was written to assess treatment on the 10 hectares 

(25 acres) of the administration site separately from the rest of the Dilman 

project in order to take advantage of PNW Station facilities maintenance 

funds. The categorical exclusion was based on Forest Service Policy and 

Procedure Handbook 1909.15 that provides for routine operation and 

maintenance of administration sites and was signed in February of 2000. 

Treatment of the administration site consisted of a single commercial timber 

sale of 30,000 board feet, hand thinning of trees around the buildings, 

pruning of dwarf mistletoe-infested limbs, hazard tree removal, hand-piling 

and burning of slash, and broadcast burning of the shrub layer. Work in the 

administration site began in March 2000 and was completed in October 

2001. This stand now contains about 25 large pines per hectare (10 per acre) 

with DBH greater than 53.3 centimeters (21 inches). Total stand density is 

about 247 trees per hectare (100 per acre), basal area is 22.1 square meters per 

hectare (96.4 square feet per acre), and stand density index is 40 percent of 

maximum (figure 7).

Outside of the administration site, four separate types of timber sale 

contracts (2400-1, 2400-3, 2400-4, 2400-6), service contracts, purchase 

Figure 7—Pringle Falls Experimental Forest administration area after thinning and 

underburning for fuels reduction.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 45

orders, and force account crews are being used to implement the silvicul-

tural prescriptions within the Dilman project. Work began in the spring of 

2002. All activities associated with the first entry are planned for comple

-

tion by spring 2009. High fuels areas within the wildland/urban interface, 

administrative sites, campgrounds, and major access roads represent the 

highest priorities and will be completed first.

Operational Considerations

To address concerns for fisheries during the treatments along the 

Deschutes River within Pringle Falls, thinning within 91 meters (300 feet) 

of the bank involves a combination of hand crews, including those from 

local Youth Conservation Corps, Oregon State Department of Correction, 

Deschutes County Corrections, force account crews from the Deschutes Na

-

tional Forest, and troubled youth programs, in addition to service contracts 

and a contract for horse logging.

Selection of horse logging as a means for skidding of logs within the 

designated buffer along the Deschutes River was based, in part, on a desire 

to prevent opening or creating additional areas for nondesignated, dispersed 

recreational camping. Conventional ground-based skidding operations 

require a network of designated skid roads. On the flat benches adjacent to 

the Deschutes River, these designated skid roads are slow to revegetate with 

trees and shrubs and quickly become permanent access roads to desirable 

dispersed recreation campsites along the river. In addition, horse logging has 

been used over the last decade in campgrounds and other recreational sites on 

the Deschutes National Forest to remove hazard trees and has been well re

-

ceived by the public and public interest groups as an environmentally sensitive 

means of treatment. We anticipated greater public support for this part of the 

Dilman project if horse logging was featured. Material removed during horse 

logging consisted of lodgepole pine greater than 15 centimeters (6 inches) in 

diameter under a 2400-3 contract. This diameter limit was set in part because 

of the potential for the combination of products removed to generate positive 

net revenue for the operator, and the feasibility of hand piling the residual 

stems. Local experience has shown that the upper limit in piece size for most 

hand crews is about 23 centimeters (9 inches) DBH. Production rates for 

horse logging on the gentle terrain average about 2,000 to 4,000 board feet 

per day depending on factors such as skidding distance, average volume per 

log, volume per acre, and stand density. Brush disposal deposits collected 

from the purchaser are used to fund piling of slash by hand crews.

One large sale designed to remove about 1.04 million cubic feet (about 

5.4 million board feet) from Pringle Falls was sold under a 2400-6T contract 

(tree measurement contract) with minimum specifications for merchantable 

trees of 8 centimeters (3 inches) DBH for lodgepole and ponderosa pine. 

Again, harvesting is restricted to trees less than 53 centimeters (21 inches) 

DBH. Final bid price was $35.75 per hundred cubic feet for lodgepole pine 

and $118.58 per hundred cubic feet for ponderosa pine. To minimize dam

-

age on residual vegetation and soils, the contract requires a boom-mounted 

saw/shear with a reach of at least 5 meters (17 feet) from the equipment 

center point. Other requirements include the use of designated skid roads at 

30.5- meter (100-foot) average spacing and moving logging equipment over 

snow and frozen ground. Brush disposal deposits and whole-tree yarding en

-

sure adequate treatment of slash. Minimal residual stand damage associated 

with whole-tree yarding is anticipated because of the flat topography across 
46 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

harvest units, which minimizes the need for sharp turns during skidding, and 

the relatively short tree lengths being harvested.

Post-sale service contracts for noncommercial thinning and removal 

of damaged and unsuitable trees are scheduled in all commercial timber 

sale units. Service contracts will use a variety of funding sources including 

hazardous fuels, Knutsen-Vandenberg Act (KV), and appropriated timber 

stand improvement thinning. Service contracts and purchase orders also will 

be used to conduct noncommercial thinning in stands that have little or no 

commercial size material.

Force account crews will be used to conduct prescribed burns, prune, dis

-

pose of brush, establish road closures, and rehabilitate dispersed recreation 

sites and designated campsites within Pringle Falls.

Summary

Pringle Falls Experimental Forest has been a center for research in 

ponderosa pine forests east of the crest of the Cascade Range since 1931. 

Long-term research facilities, sites, and future research opportunities are 

currently at risk from stand-replacement wildfire because of changes in stand 

structure resulting from past fire exclusion, especially the dramatic changes 

in tree density and establishment of lodgepole pine under ponderosa pine. 

We identified four conditions or locations within Pringle Falls that represent 

special values that are increasingly at risk from fire because of the structural 

changes either within the stands themselves or in adjacent stands that 

receive recreational impacts or urban development. Our set of silvicultural 

prescriptions is designed to protect and enhance these four special values. 

Implementation of the silvicultural prescriptions involves innovative use of 

existing contracting and workforces. To date, results have been well received 

by the visiting public.

References

Agee, James K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest forests. Washington, DC: 

Island Press. 493 p.

Agee, James K. 1994. Fire and weather disturbances in terrestrial ecosystems of the 

eastern Cascades. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-320. Portland, OR: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 52 p.

Barrett, James W. 1960. Intensive control in logging ponderosa pine. Iowa State 

Journal of Science. 34: 603-608.

Barrett, James W. 1965. Spacing and understory vegetation affect growth of 

ponderosa pine saplings. Res. Note PNW-27. Portland, OR: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment 

Station. 8 p.

Barrett, James W. 1966. A record of ponderosa pine seed flight. Res. Note PNW-38. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p.

Barrett, James W. 1982. Twenty-year growth of ponderosa pine seedlings thinned to 

five spacings in central Oregon. Res. Pap. 301. Portland, OR: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment 

Station. 18 p.

Beardsley, Debby; Bolsinger, Charles; Warbington, Ralph. 1999. Old-growth 

forests in the Sierra Nevada: by type in 1945 and 1993 and ownership in 1993. 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 47

Res. Pap. PNW-RP-516. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 46 p.

Bergoffen, W. W. 1976. 100 years of Federal forestry. Info. Bull. 402. Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 200 p.

Bolsinger, Charles L.; Waddell, Karen L. 1993. Area of old-growth forests in 

California, Oregon, and Washington. Resource Bull. PNW-RB-107. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 26 p.

Bonnicksen, Thomas M. 2000. America’s ancient forests–from the ice age to the age 

of discovery. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 594 p.

Bork, Joyce L. 1984. Fire history in three vegetation types on the eastern side of the 

Oregon Cascades. Ph.D. thesis. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 94 p.

Cochran, P. H. 1977. Response of ponderosa pine 8 years after fertilization. Res. 

Note PNW-301. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 7 p.

Cochran, P. H.; Newman, R. P.; Barrett, James W. 1991. Fertilization and spacing 

effects on growth of planted ponderosa pine. Res. Note PNW-RN-500. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 13 p.

Dahms, Walter G. 1960. Long-suppressed ponderosa pine seedlings respond to 

release. Res. Note 190. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p.

Dahms, Walter G. 1961. Chemical control of brush in ponderosa pine forests of 

central Oregon. Res. Pap. 39. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 17 p.

Dahms, Walter G.; Barrett, James W. 1975. Seed production of central Oregon 

ponderosa and lodgepole pines. Res. Pap. PNW-191. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 13 p.

Everett, Richard; Hessburg, Paul; Lehmkuhl, John; Jensen, Mark; Bourgeron, P. 

1994. Old forests in dynamic landscapes. Journal of Forestry. 92: 22-25.

Franklin, Jerry F.; Dyrness, C. T. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon and 

Washington. Gen. Tech Rep. PNW-8. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment 

Station. 417 p.

Hann, Wendel. J.; Jones, Jeffrey L.; Karl, Michael G.; Hessburg, Paul F.; Keane, 

Robert E.; Long, Donald G.; Menakis, James P.; McNicoll, Cecilia H.; Leonard, 

Stephen G.; Gravenmier, Rebecca A.; Smith, Brad G. 1997. Landscape dynamics 

of the basin. In: Quigley, Thomas M.; Arbelbide, Sylvia J., tech. eds. An 

assessment of ecosystem components in the interior Columbia basin and portions 

of the Klamath and Great Basins. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 337-1055.

Johnson, Charles G., Jr.; Clausitzer, R. R., Mehringer, P. J.; Oliver, Chadwick 

D. 1994. Biotic and abiotic processes of eastside ecosystems: the effects of 

management on plant and community ecology, and on stand and landscape 

vegetation dynamics. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-322. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

66 p.

Keen, F. P. 1936. Relative susceptibility of ponderosa pine to bark-beetle attack. 

Journal of Forestry. 34: 919-927.

Keen, F. P. 1940. Longevity of ponderosa pine. Journal of Forestry. 38: 597-598.

Kolbe, Ernst L.; KcKay, Donald. F. 1939. Seven methods of cutting tested at 

Pringle Falls. Res. Note 27. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest Experiment Station. 1 p.

Koonce, Andrea L.; Roth, Lewis F. 1980. The effects of prescribed burning on 

dwarf mistletoe in ponderosa pine. In: Martin, Robert E.; Edmonds, Robert L.; 

Fulkner, Donald A. [and others]. 6th conference on fire and forest meteorology. 
48 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Proceedings of a symposium; 1980 April 22-24; Seattle, WA. Bethesda, MD: 

Society of American Foresters. 197-203.

Languille, H. D.; Plummer, F. G.; Dobwell, A.; [and others]. 1903. Forest 

conditions in the Cascade Range forest reserve—Oregon. Professional Paper 

9, Series H, Forestry 6. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Geological Survey. 298 p.

Larsson, S.; Oren, R.; Waring, R. H.; Barrett, J. W. 1983. Attacks of mountain pine 

beetle as related to tree vigor of ponderosa pine. Forest Science. 29: 395-402.

Mazany, Terry; Thompson, Marna Ares. 1983. Fire scar dates from the Pringle Falls 

area of central Oregon. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, Laboratory of TreeRing Research. 14 p.

Morrow, Robert J. 1986. Age structure and spatial pattern of old-growth ponderosa 

pine in Pringle Falls Experimental Forest, central Oregon. Corvallis, OR: Oregon 

State University. 80 p. M.S. Thesis.

Mowat, Edwin L. 1950. Cutting lodgepole pine overstory releases ponderosa pine 

reproduction. Journal of Forestry. 48: 679-680.

Oliver, Chadwick D.; Irwin, Larry L.; Knapp, Walter H. 1994. Eastside forest 

management practices: historical overview, extent of their applications, and 

their effects on sustainability of ecosystems. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-324. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 73 p.

Oren, R.; Waring, R. H.; Stafford, S. G.; Barrett, J. W. 1987. Twenty-four years 

of ponderosa pine growth in relation to canopy leaf area and understory 

competition. Forest Science. 33: 538-547.

Perry, D. A.; Henjum, M. G.; Karr, J. R.; Bottom, D. L.; Bednarz, J. C.; Wright, S. 

G.; Beckwitt, S. A.; Beckwitt, E. 1995. Interim protection for late-successional 

forests, fisheries, and watersheds: a summary of the report of the eastside forests 

scientific society panel. In: Everett, Richard L.; Baumgartner, David M., comps. 

Ecosystem management in western interior forests. Proceedings of a symposium; 

1984 May 3-5; Spokane, WA. Pullman, WA: Washington State University, 

Department of Natural Resource Sciences. 103-114.

Reaves, Jimmy L.; Shaw, Charles G., III; Mayfield, John E. 1990. The effects 

of Trichoderma spp. isolated from burned and non-burned forest soils on the 

growth and development of Armillaria ostoyae in culture. Northwest Science. 64. 

39-44.

Roth, L. F. 1953. Pine dwarf mistletoe on the Pringle Falls Experimental Forest. 

Res. Note 91. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 3 p.

Roth, L. F. 1971. Dwarf mistletoe damage to small ponderosa pines. Forest Science. 

17: 373-380.

Roth, Lewis F.; Barrett, James W. 1985. Response of dwarf mistletoe-infested 

ponderosa pine to thinning: 2. Dwarf mistletoe propagation. Res. Pap. PNW331. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 20 p.

Sowder, James E. 1951. A sanitation-salvage cutting in ponderosa pine at the 

Pringle Falls Experimental Forest. Res. Pap. 2. Portland, OR: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment 

Station. 24 p.

Speer, James H.; Swetnam, Thomas W.; Wickman, Boyd E.; Youngblood, Andrew. 

2001. Changes in Pandora moth outbreak dynamics during the past 622 years. 

Ecology. 82: 679-697.

Wickman, Boyd E. 1992. Forest health in the Blue Mountains: the influence of insects 

and disease. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-295. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 15 p.

Youngblood, Andrew. 1995. Research publications of the Pringle Falls Experimental 

Forest, central Oregon Cascade Range, 1930 to 1993. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-347. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. 45 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 49

Abstract—In northern Rocky Mountain moist forests, riparian systems contain many 

attributes that create unique biophysical conditions that alter disturbances and microenvironments; thus creating distinct forest structures, species composition, and 

management challenges. For example, browsing, limited opening size, competition 

from surrounding ground vegetation, high soil moisture, and cold air drainage challenge the application of any silvicultural method, but if these aspects are considered 

prior to applying restoration efforts, they can also facilitate a successful result. This 

paper discusses a series of silvicultural tools that can be used in riparian restoration, 

including integrating knowledge on competitive thresholds for western white pine 

(Pinus monticola) (occupancy, competitive advantage, and free-to-grow status), 

maintaining overstory canopy for modifying cold air drainage, and using coarse 

woody debris and other vegetation to decrease browsing damage while minimizing 

sedimentation input and soil compaction. Although applying an integrated silvicultural system is critical in any restoration project, non-technical expertise concentrating on the interactions among people during project implementation is needed to 

achieve successful restoration results.

Introduction

In northern Rocky Mountain moist forests, riparian systems contain many 

attributes different from upland forests. These systems are characterized as 

areas where vegetation and physical components (soils, topography) contribute directly to a stream or lake’s physical and biological characteristics (i.e., 

shading, stream fauna habitat) (Swanson and Franklin 1992). Depending on 

the stream type, the associated riparian areas contain diverse environmental 

conditions that affect the composition, regeneration, establishment, and 

growth of plants. Herbivory, competition, microsite topography, fl oods, 

erosion, abrasion, drought, frost, and variable nutrition directly affect these 

plants. Riparian plants also are indirectly affected by landscape components 

including topography, geomorphology, stream shape, soil type, water quality, 

elevation, climate, and surrounding upland vegetation (Odum 1971). Fire, 

ice, windstorms, and insect infestations, although less common, can directly 

or indirectly infl uence riparian systems (Agee 1988, Naiman and Dècamps 

1997).

Plants that colonize and grow in riparian areas have evolved to adapt to 

these diverse environments and disturbances by invading, enduring, or resisting these conditions (Agee 1988, Naiman and Dècamps 1997). Therefore, 

it is important to understand both the riparian environment and a plant’s 

adaptations and life history prior to applying silvicultural methods for 

restoring these systems. The objective of this paper is to discuss the role of 

Enhancing Moist Forest Restoration 

Opportunities in Riparian Systems

Theresa Benavidez Jain1 and Russell T. Graham1

1 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Moscow, ID.
50 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

silviculture in riparian restoration. Topic areas include the ecological aspects 

of the northern Rocky Mountain moist forest riparian environment, which 

can affect silvicultural applications, the applicability of integrating multiple 

spatial and temporal scales into the silvicultural system or method, and 

providing silvicultural tools useful in riparian restoration.

Riparian Environment

Three classes of perennial streams occur in moist forest settings: rifflepool, cascade-pool, and meandering glide (Rabe and others 1994, Savage 

and Rabe 1979). Riffle-pool streams have moderate gradients and contain 

riffles (shallow, turbulent flow over rock) alternating with smooth-flowing 

glides or deep, quiet pools (figure 1). These occur in valleys with narrow 

flood plains. Shrubs, grasses, and sedges are the primary riparian vegetation 

on the flood plains, and trees occupy settings above these plains (Savage 

and Rabe 1979). Since they contain a diverse aquatic insect community 

and favorable fish habitat, these streams are often fish bearing. Cascadepool streams have torrential flows over large rocks and logs; these streams 

dissect steep slopes and have narrow riparian zones (figure 2). Logs are an 

important component in cascade-pool streams and are largely responsible for 

creating the cascades. Bedrock is usually exposed in the channel and heavy 

shading from trees is common. Fish rarely occur in these streams because 

the cascades create barriers during low water flow, water velocity is too high 

during spring runoff, and resting areas for fish are less abundant (Savage and 

Rabe 1979).

Figure 1—Canyon Creek at Priest River Experimental Forest in northern Idaho is an example of a riffle-pool 

stream. These streams are often fish bearing and contain a diversity of aquatic insects.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 51

Riffle-pool and cascade-pool streams in northern Rocky Mountain moist 

forests are characterized by two habitat types: western redcedar (Thuja 

plicata)/devil’s club (Oplopanax horridum) and western hemlock (Tsuga 

heterophylla)/wild ginger (Asarum cadatum) (Cooper and others 1991). 

Dominant tree species include western redcedar and western hemlock, but 

Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), western white pine (Pinus monticola), western larch (Larix occidentalis), and grand fir (Abies grandis) can 

also occur. Soils are quartzite and alluvial mixtures of metasediments, siltite, 

ash, and mica schist. These soils have fairly coarse textures (gravelly loamy 

sands to sandy loams) with up to 40 to 50 percent gravel content. The riparian areas contain deep forest floors and no bare soils or rock (Cooper and 

others 1991).

Meandering glide streams contain many curves and meander along a 

shallow gradient (approximately 1 percent) (Savage and Rabe 1979). These 

streams have riparian areas that support significant wetland communities 

maintained by high water tables and are frequently flooded (figure 3). The 

stream biota is adapted to soft substrate, slow water velocities, and sometimes-low oxygen saturation. These conditions often favor only plant species 

(sedges, grasses, and forbs) adapted to these conditions. Although many tree 

species do not grow in the wetland surrounding the stream or lake, trees 

may grow along the edge (poorly drained areas often occur between, but are 

not limited to, permanent open water zones and uplands) (Rabe and Bursik 

1991, Tiner 1999). For example, some of these areas were once occupied by 

large old western redcedar forming shady groves (figure 4).

Figure 2—Benton Creek at Priest River Experimental Forest in northern Idaho is an 

example of a cascade-pool stream type. This is characterized as containing very narrow 

riparian areas often with trees and logs in the stream and along the riparian area.
52 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Figure 3—Meandering glide streams have low gradients and considerable sinuosity. They 

support wetland ecosystems consisting of grasses, sedges, and shrubs. This is the North 

Fork of the Clearwater River in northern Idaho.

Figure 4—This picture shows a western redcedar riparian grove along Cedar Creek above the North Fork of the 

Clearwater in northern Idaho. These western redcedar are approximately 400+ years, and the understory 

consists of dense herbaceous cover.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 53

Why Restore Riparian Areas?

There are many physical, biological, and social reasons for managing 

or restoring riparian areas. Streams and associated riparian areas influence 

hydrologic characteristics (Naiman and Dècamps 1997, Windell and others 

1986). Depending on the soil type and permeability, they alter biogeochemistry, ground water discharge and recharge, erosion control, water 

purification, and flood control; moderate air temperatures; contribute water 

vapor to the atmosphere; and produce gasses from biomass decomposition 

and nutrient cycling (Windell and others 1986). Biologically, they provide 

habitat and corridors for a wide range of wildlife species and the vegetation, 

soils, and micro-topographical environments favor insect populations (a 

requirement for maintaining fisheries). Socially, they are prime areas for 

recreational use such as providing spiritual, physical, aesthetic, and recreation 

values (Windell and others 1986). In addition, they can also be quite valuable for timber production (Berg 1994, Newton and others 1996).

Historically, riparian areas (particularly, meandering glide and riffle-pool 

stream types) were frequently the first places developed by European 

immigrants because the floodplains provided excellent farmlands. Trees 

(narrowleaf cottonwood [Populus angustifolia], western redcedar, western 

hemlock, and western white pine) were used for firewood, timber, house 

building material, or for a combination of uses (Windell and others 1986). 

In the moist forests, channelization often occurred in streams and rivers, 

thus decreasing sinuosity (Hann and others 1997, Windell and others 

1986). Excessive cattle grazing damages vegetation, increases soil compaction and erosion, introduces exotic plants, and degrades water quality with 

fecal contamination (Dobkin and others 1998). Because riparian zones are 

highly valued for a variety of purposes and represent a limited fraction of 

the landscape, and because past use has led to degraded conditions (Windell 

and others 1986), riparian restoration has become an increasingly important 

issue.

Restoration of Moist Forest Riparian 

Ecosystems

Knowing where to begin is the first step in any restoration effort. Landscape attributes can provide a biophysical template for setting restoration 

priorities. Some have suggested a step-down process from broad to fine 

scales for planning restoration activities (Jensen and Greene 1991, Naiman 

and others 1993). For example, in the Coeur d’Alene River Basin of the 

northern Rocky Mountains, Jain and others (2002) used multiple spatial 

scales combined with historical pattern of western white pine abundance to 

define possible restoration priorities. They determined western white pine 

was most abundant and most productive in places where subsurface flow of 

water and water retention occurred in areas found on slopes highly dissected 

by streams, slopes adjacent to streams, toeslopes, benches, or wide stream 

bottom riparian areas. Camp and others (1997) identified fire refugia based 

on physical landscape attributes occurring at multiple spatial scales in the 

eastern Cascades. They too found these protected areas occurred near or 

adjacent to riparian areas. Jensen and Greene (1991) used a hierarchical 

approach to describe and map riparian areas. They used this information 
54 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

to identify location, extent, and diversity of riparian areas, evaluate existing 

condition, and identify reasonable desired future conditions for manage-

ment. Because the approach was hierarchical in nature, broad scales provided 

context for fine scale prioritization; and the approach identified relative 

uniqueness of stream and riparian areas, current condition relative to other 

riparian areas, and whether a particular future desired condition was possible 

(Jensen and Greene 1991). Using a multiple scale approach at least by 

linking the entire watershed to site-specific treatments of riparian areas is one 

key area that has proven effective in restoration projects (Cannin 1991).

Temporally, understanding the past history relative to the current condi

-

tion can help identify the time frame needed to attain a future desired goal 

in restoration efforts. Moreover, time can provide an indication of what 

might be a feasible desired future condition. For example, if old growth 

western redcedar once occupied the site, but was harvested in the early part 

of the 20th century, a possible desired future condition is to restore this 

area to a western redcedar grove. However, the conditions for regeneration 

may be vastly different today when compared to 400 years ago, when the 

original western redcedar regenerated. Furthermore, over time, intermittent 

disturbances probably encouraged the development of the grove. The cli

-

mate, stream morphology, and other physical and biological aspects may also 

be quite different today when compared to historical conditions. Chambers 

and others (1998) discovered that riparian areas in Nevada could not be 

restored to conditions that existed prior to the past 150-200 years. They 

determined climate change and stream incision from recent floods prevented 

these riparian areas from attaining characteristic forest compositions and 

structures of the past. If similar changes occurred in riparian areas that once 

held large old western redcedar, it may not be appropriate to plant western 

redcedar (late-seral species) in hopes of obtaining a historical condition. This 

may be particularly true if current plant communities reflect an early succes

-

sional stage. In this case, early-successional tree species (western white pine, 

lodgepole pine, Engelmann spruce) may be more appropriate with future 

western redcedar reintroductions possible underneath an established canopy. 

Therefore, the time frame to achieve the desired condition may take multiple 

centuries rather than one or two centuries.

Two silvicultural objectives often applied in riparian restoration include 

establishing desirable high cover (>12 m in height) or improving forest 

ground cover (<3.5 m in height). Large conifers play important roles in 

riparian and stream sustainability (such as wood input, wildlife habitat, and 

long-term nutrition); hence, maintaining or regenerating conifers is often 

a goal in riparian restoration (Newton and others 1996). Meandering glide 

or riffle-pool streams occur in valley bottoms and have been most likely 

harvested in the past or have roads along the streams. Therefore, the follow

-

ing discussion will be most applicable in these stream types but may also be 

applied to other types (i.e., lakes, small springs) of riparian restoration.

Restoration activities associated with silvicultural systems occurring along 

cascade-pool streams will be most similar to upland regeneration techniques. 

Minimum competition from shrubs and grasses will tend to occur in 

these settings, since the dominant vegetation is often composed of trees. 

Browsing damage can occur from deer (Odocoileus spp.) and elk (Cervus 

elaphus nelsoni) but will be similar to damage occurring in the upland forest. 

Regeneration in riffle-pool stream riparian areas will have some competition 

from grass and shrubs, but if regeneration occurs far enough from the 

stream, competition may be minimized. However, browsing may impact 

regeneration efforts, since riffle-pool streams attract both ungulates and 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 55

small animals. In the meandering-glide streams, a silvicultural system will 

need to address competition, high water tables, browsing, and sedimentation 

from flooding.

Restoration techniques that include enhancing current forest structure or 

composition may include cleanings, weedings, and thinnings. Historically, 

these treatments were associated with altering tree structure and composi-

tion. Silvicultural methods could be applied to encourage sprouting in 

deciduous trees such as narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia), paper 

birch (Betula papyrifera), and aspen (Populus trimuloides). Silvicultural treat-

ments can also be used to develop desired shrub communities. For instance, 

coppicing can be applied to favor large shrubs like alder (Alnus spp.), willow (Salix spp.), or Rocky Mountain maple (Acer glabrum). However, care must 

be taken as not to have adverse outcomes such as introducing exotic plants, 

compacting or displacing soil, or losing excessive surface organic matter.

Establishing Trees

To meet many restoration goals, species presence may be as important 

as ensuring tree numbers. In many restoration efforts, regeneration and 

establishment of conifers is difficult and often fails without some type of 

disturbance (Newton and others 1996). However, these treatments must 

minimize erosion, avoid harmful levels of water contamination by silt 

or herbicides, and maintain adequate stream cover (Newton and others 

1996). In riparian settings prone to aggressive colonization by ground level 

vegetation, large planting stock (3-0 or greater) is preferred no matter what 

species or combination of species is selected. Grasses, forbs, and sedges not 

only compete for nutrients and light but they can also mechanically injure 

trees and attract trampling animals. Moreover, overstory competition (trees, 

shrubs) should be irregularly spaced to maximize sunfleck duration and 

decrease sunfleck density (Jain 2001). Large seedlings are more resilient to 

damage from browsing or other animal damage and once established can 

compete more readily with other plants (Cafferata 1992; Giusti and others 

1992; Graham and others 1992; Marsh and Steele 1992; Newton 2002; 

Rochelle 1992). However, the planting of large seedlings requires additional 

care and handling to ensure they have proper root to shoot ratios, are not 

bent or twisted (j-rooted) when planted, and have good root to soil contact.

Species Preference

In moist forests, suggested species include western white pine, lodgepole 

pine, western redcedar, western hemlock, and Engelmann spruce. In stream 

reaches that tend to pool cold air creating frost pockets, lodgepole pine, 

western white pine, and Engelmann spruce are the favored species, because 

of their tolerance to frost when dormant (Minore 1979). In settings with 

high forest cover and minimal competition from ground level vegetation, 

western redcedar, western hemlock and/or western white pine may be more 

applicable.

Although western white pine is an early to mid-successional species, it is 

well suited to growing in many riparian settings since it can tolerate a range 

of growing conditions and endemic diseases in northern Rocky Mountains 

moist forests. The species is well suited for planting in small openings within 

riparian systems and its growth is predicated on the size of opening or gap 

in which it is located. Jain and others (2002) determined openings within 

riparian areas might only need to be 0.25 ha in size for western white pine 

to achieve competitive advantage and 0.5 ha in size to achieve free-to-grow 
56 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

status (i.e., when a seedling or small tree is free from competition from other 

plants) (Helms 1998).

Controlling Competition

In many riparian areas, successful conifer establishment and growth 

is dependent upon the ability to control competing vegetation. Most 

often, overtopping of seedlings needs to be minimized until they become 

established and are able to obtain free-to-grow status (figure 5). In riparian 

areas, grasses tend to be tall (sometimes 2 meters) and there is often a high 

density of shrubs and various herbaceous plants (figure 6). Moreover, when 

overtopping grass or forbs die or collapse, seedlings can be crushed and/or 

covered by the grass (especially under snow). Therefore, competing vegetation control needs to extend beyond the immediate planting area (possibly 

up to a 2 meter radius around a tree) (figure 7). The preferred method for 

controlling competition depends on cost, impacts, method efficacy, and 

personal safety when applied (Newton and others 1996), but it can include 

mechanical or chemical treatments.

Mechanically removing vegetation can elevate sediment input, increase soil 

compaction, and may be difficult to apply to small areas (Harvey and others 

1989). Furthermore, results may be short lived. Mechanical applications 

often favor sprouting of shrubs, and forbs and grasses may colonize areas 

before a tree becomes established and achieves free-to-grow status (Miller 

1986). Applying a second mechanical treatment risks injuring or destroying 

planted seedlings. Mechanical treatments may also present risks for exotic 

plant invasion, since mineral soil exposure is an ideal seedbed for many plant 

species (Haig and others 1941). Manually cutting and removing competition 

Figure 5—In riparian restoration, grass and shrubs are considered part of the canopy when 

establishing new seedlings. Under tall grass, this canopy opening is approximately 60 

percent and would not achieve free-to-grow status for western white pine.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 57

Figure 6—Riparian areas tend to have 

high concentrations of grass, forbs, and 

shrubs that are usually quite tall. In this 

picture, the grass is at least 1 m tall. If 

the objective is to establish conifers, 

some site preparation and competition 

control is required. 

Figure 7—Western white pine seedling with competition 

removed in planting spot that was not large enough to 

avoid being crushed by surrounding grass and other 

vegetation.
58 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

minimizes compaction and sediment input, but it is extremely labor intensive 

and may require several treatments per year (Newton and others 1996).

Another option is to use herbicides to control competition. Spot herbicide 

application has several advantages over broadcast application (Boyd 1986). 

First, it is less costly because there is less chemical used per unit area. 

Second, spot application is usually more environmentally acceptable and 

desirable over broadcast application, because small areas are treated and 

application is possible under a wider variety of weather conditions. Finally, 

this treatment provides a diversity of habitats that may benefit wildlife and 

prevent the concentration of animals that could physically damage trees. 

If the herbicide is applied conservatively and the appropriate herbicide 

(glyphyosate, imazapyr, metsulfuron, and/or triclopyr) is used, this method 

can provide systemic and non-systemic herb and shrub control with no water 

contamination (Newton and others 1996, Newton 2002). Disadvantages include greater labor costs compared to broadcast application, more hazardous 

to workers because they most likely will be applying it by hand or intimately 

working with the herbicide, and if used in site preparation, spots may be 

difficult to locate at planting time so flags may need to be placed in applied 

areas (Boyd 1986). Herbicides used for shrub control in forests include 

2,4-D, glyphosate, imazapyr, picloram, or triclopyr. To control herbaceous 

plants (grasses and forbs), Atrizine, 2,4-D, sulfometuron, and hexazinone 

are suggested (Newton 2002). However, specific time of application and 

effectiveness of herbicide to affect targeted vegetation varies. Specific details 

on application and target species are available through the Pacific Northwest 

Experiment Station Weed Management Handbook (Newton 2002).

If one cannot treat competition either 

mechanically or chemically, the only viable 

option is planting Engelmann spruce, 

since it has a stiff enough stem to avoid 

crushing or bending under grasses or other 

vegetation (Robert Hassoldt, personnel 

communication) (figure 8). Additionally, 

there is some evidence that spruce may 

grow relatively well in places with moderate 

amounts of competition. For example, 

white spruce (Picea glauca) has been shown 

to perform similarly or better in places with 

low and medium shrub densities when compared to areas with no shrubs. White spruce 

growth was only affected in places with high 

shrub densities (Posner and Jordan 2002).

Browsing

A variety of animals (insects, rodents, 

omnivores, ungulates, and livestock) may 

eat or damage tree seedlings. Livestock and 

wildlife damage can occur from browsing, 

trampling, and rubbing, and most western 

tree species are susceptible. Wildlife species 

including, but not limited to, beaver (Castor

canadensis), porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum), lagomorphs (Lepus spp. and Sylvilagus

spp.), black bear (Ursus americanus), deer, Figure 8—Engelmann spruce seedling planted with no 

competition control.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 59

and elk can damage seedlings. Riparian areas attract a wide range of these 

wildlife and livestock, making animal conflicts an issue in many restoration 

efforts. Hence, the potential for browse damage should be thoroughly 

evaluated prior to implementing the silvicultural system (Knapp and Brodie 

1992, Nolte 2003a). Nolte (2003a) suggested using a five step process: (1) 

assess the severity and potential damage if no action is taken, (2) evaluate the 

feasibility of alleviating the problem, (3) develop a strategy prior to browse 

damage prevention measures, (4) implement program, and (5) monitor 

consequences.

It may also be wise to evaluate potential browse impacts at multiple spatial 

scales, to help identify how a riparian area contributes to the overall wildlife 

habitat matrix (McComb 1992). The size of the area to evaluate will depend 

on the species of interest (figure 9). If the species is beaver, then an evaluation 

of riparian attributes will be sufficient; however, if deer or elk are the species 

of interest then a landscape (watershed) perspective may be more appropriate. 

If the riparian area to be restored is the only source of water or has unique 

habitat attributes favoring a particular species, then it may receive abundant 

use. Under these circumstances seedlings may require considerable protection 

or else damage can be severe enough to reevaluate restoration objectives.

A variety of preventive and remedial techniques have been tested, with 

mixed results. These have included providing alternative food source or 

planting unpalatable trees species, silviculturally modifying habitat to 

disfavor specific browsing species, physically or chemically protecting tree 

seedlings, frightening browsers away, or trapping or killing browsing threats. 

Unfortunately, there is not one method that solves all browsing problems. 

The preferred approach will depend on assessment results and the most 

effective treatment may require integrating several methods.

Sometimes, providing a preferred food source decreases the probability of 

trees being browsed (Nolte 2003b). This method, in theory, provides benefits 

like the maintenance of plant diversity and water quality, and can be relatively 

cost-effective compared to fencing or other types of plant protection. But 

extensive evaluation of methods is limited and results are highly variable 

(Cafferata 1992; Giusti and others 1992; Graham and others 1992; Marsh 

and Steele 1992; Newton 2002; Rochelle 1992). With spot application of 

herbicides, fewer food sources are eliminated, which may potentially diminish browsing problems. Another technique is to plant tree species that are 

tolerant to or less susceptible of being browsed (Black and Lawrence 1992). 

Unfortunately, in the moist forests, western redcedar (which is very palatable) 

Figure 9—Wildlife habitats occur at 

different spatial scales (McComb 

1992). Therefore, riparian 

restoration efforts should consider 

multiple spatial scales when 

evaluating potential animal 

damage.

Size of Home Range

Riparian

Stand

Landscape

Beaver

Pocket

Gopher

Douglas

Squirrel

Porcupine

Deer/Elk

Spatial Scale
60 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

is the preferred species used in riparian restoration; therefore seedling damage 

from wildlife can be prohibitive to its establishment. Many recommend large 

planting stock because it typically is less vulnerable to animal damage (Cafferata 1992; Giusti and others 1992; Graham and others 1992; Marsh and 

Steele 1992; Newton 2002; Rochelle 1992).

Physical protection of seedlings with polypropylene mesh tubes is an op

-

tion and appears to be successful in some cases (Black and Lawrence 1992). 

Fencing riparian areas to keep livestock out can be effective, but expense 

limits its use (Nolte 2003c). Other forms of physical deterrents might be 

possible. Graham and others (1992) noted that when coarse woody debris 

(>7.5 cm in diameter) was greater than 50 Mg/ha before livestock utiliza-

tion fell below 10 percent. These are well within the recommended amounts 

(37 to 74 Mg/Ha) necessary for maintaining long-term soil productivity 

(Graham and others 1994). In some cases, minimizing disturbance avoids 

creating habitat that may increase pocket gopher (Thomomys talpoides) 

populations (Marsh and Steele 1992).

In riparian restoration, application of chemical repellents or poisons may 

not be an acceptable option unless the browsing problem is severe and posi

-

tive results are substantial. First, water quality issues should be investigated 

before using any repellents or poisons. In some cases repellents have had 

inconsistent results, making chemical treatment an impractical option (Nolte 

2003d). Moreover, competition and browsing issues are often interdepen

-

dent. In these situations, herbicide application for competition control may 

take precedence over the use of chemical repellents. Removing, killing, 

trapping, or frightening the animal may be valid options. Studies have shown 

that controlling pocket gopher populations with strychnine baiting poses 

relatively little risk to non-target species (Arjo 2003). But the effects of re

-

moval may be short-lived since a replacement mammal usually occupies the 

vacant habitat, necessitating the continuous application of treatments. This 

option may also prove socially unacceptable (Schmidt and others 1992). 

Frightening devices are usually ineffective in deterring ungulates; however, 

other methods are currently under evaluation and testing (Nolte 2003c).

Biological methods may be useful for decreasing populations of unwanted 

browsers. For example, a recent study considered the interaction between 

weasels (Mustela spp.) and pocket gophers (Arjo 2003). In this study, 80 

percent of the weasels killed and consumed healthy pocket gophers. All 

weasels ate strychnine-baited gopher carcasses 72 hours after gophers died, 

but no weasels died from secondary poisoning.

Successful Restoration Requires More Than 

Technical Expertise

Riparian restoration can be enhanced and successful only when treatments 

are integrated into a silvicultural system. However, the application of a 

silvicultural system by itself will not lead to a successful restoration project; 

other aspects also need ample consideration. Cannin (1991) summarized 

attributes characteristic of successful riparian restoration projects. Many were 

not technical application of treatments but rather the interaction of people 

in conducting the project. Strong leadership from a few designated people 

was critical, as was a political environment that promoted creativity, financial 

support, and effective implementation.

A multiple scale approach when planning projects is essential to recognize 

riparian zones as a part of the landscape rather than treating them as isolated 

areas. Pretreatment evaluation and surveys that clarify goals at the beginning 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 61

allow participants to develop effective solutions to address problems. Posttreatment monitoring to evaluate success (or failure) allows for adaptive 

management. Increased public awareness through demonstration projects 

and proper land use practices should positively influence human behavior to

-

ward respecting sensitive riparian areas. Community involvement in project 

implementation is critical as is close communication between agencies, local 

governments, and landowners. In conclusion, it takes both technical and 

social expertise to implement a successful restoration project with ingenuity 

and imagination.

References

Agee, James K. 1988. Succesional dynamics in riparian zones. In: Proceedings of the 

symposium on streamside management: riparian wildlife and forestry interactions: 

1987 February 11-13; Seattle, WA. Seattle, WA: University of Washington, 

Institute of Forest Resources. 31-43.

Arjo, Wendy M. 2003. Is it a pocket gopher or mole? Western Forester. 48(4): 

12-13.

Berg, Dean Rae. 1995. Riparian silvicultural system design and assessment in the 

Pacific Northwest Cascade Mountains, USA. Ecological Applications. 5(1): 

87-96.

Black, Hugh C.; Lawrence, William H. 1992. Chapter 2: Animal damage 

management in Pacific Northwest Forests: 1901-90. In: Black, Hugh C., tech 

ed. Silvicultural approaches to animal damage management in Pacific Northwest 

forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 23-56.

Boyd, Raymond J. 1986. “Spot” herbicide treatments for site preparation and 

conifer release: a viable alternative to aerial broadcast application on many sites. 

In: Baumgartner, David M.; Boyd, Raymond J.; Breuer, David W.; Miller, 

Daniel L., comp. and eds. Weed control for forest productivity in the interior 

west: symposium proceedings; 1985 February 5-7; Spokane, WA. Pullman, WA: 

Washington State University. 105-106.

Cafferata, Stephen L. 1992. Chapter 11: Mountain beaver. In: Black, Hugh C., 

tech. ed. Silvicultural approaches to animal damage management in Pacific 

Northwest forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 231-252.

Camp, Ann; Oliver, Chad; Hessburg, Paul; Everett, Richard. 1997. Predicting 

late-successional fire refugia pre-dating European settlement in the Wenatchee 

Mountains. Forest Ecology and Management. 95: 63-77.

Cannin, Sean L. 1991. Characteristics of successful riparian restoration projects 

in the Pacific Northwest. Report for the U.S. EPA Region 10, Water Division 

Seattle, WA: United States Environmental Protection Agency. 53 p.

Chambers, Jeanne C.; Farleigh, Karen; Tausch, Robin J.; Miller, Jerry R.; 

Germanoski Dru; Martin, David; Nowak Cheryl. 1998. Understanding long- and 

short-term changes in vegetation and geomorphic processes: the key to riparian 

restoration. In: Proceedings, AWRA specialty conference: rangeland management 

and water resources; Reno, Nevada. Technical Publication Series. Herndon, VA: 

AWRA. 101-110.

Cooper, S. V.; Neiman, K. E.; Roberts, D. W. 1991. Rev. 1991. Forest habitat types 

of northern Idaho: A second approximation. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-236. Ogden, 

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research 

Station. 143 p.

Dobkin, Davis S.; Rich, Adam C.; Pyle, William H. 1998. Habitat and avifaunal 

recovery from livestock grazing in a riparian meadow system of northwestern 

Great Basin. Conservation Biology. 12(1): 209-221.

Giusti, Gregory A.; Schmidt, Robert H.; Tim, Robert M.; Borrecco, John E.; 

Sullivan, Thomas P. 1992. Chapter 14: The lagomorphs: rabbits, hares and 
62 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

pica. In: Black, Hugh C. tech. ed. Silvicultural approaches to animal damage 

management in Pacific Northwest forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

289-308.

Graham, R. T.; Harvey, A. E.; Jurgensen, M. F.; Jain, T. B.; Tonn, J. R.; PageDumroese, D. S. 1994. Recommendations for managing coarse woody debris 

in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Res. Pap. INT-RP-477. Ogden, UT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station.

Graham, Russell T.; Kingery, James L.; Volland, Leonard A. 1992. Chapter 17: 

Livestock and forest management interactions. In: Black, Hugh C., tech. ed. 

Silvicultural approaches to animal damage management in Pacific Northwest 

forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest research Station. 351-364.

Haig, I. T.; Davis, K. P.; Weidman, R. H. 1941. Natural regeneration in the western 

white pine type. Tech. Bulletin No. 767 Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture. 99 p.

Hann, Wendel J.; Jones, Jeffrey L.; Karl, Michael G. Sherm; Hessburg, Paul F.; 

Keane, Robert E.; Long, Donald G.; Menakis, James P.; McNicoll, Cecilia H.; 

Leonard, Stephen G.; Gravenmier, Rebecca A.; Smith Bradley G. 1997. Chapter 

3: Landscape dynamics of the Basin. In: Quigley, Thomas M.; Arbelbide, Sylvia 

J., tech. eds. An assessment of ecosystem components in the Interior Columbia 

Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: Volume II. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 338-1055.

Harvey, A. E.; Meurisse, R. T.; Geist, J. M.; Jurgensen, M. F.; McDonald, G. I.; 

Graham, R. T.; Stark, N. 1989. Managing productivity processes in the inland 

Northwest-mixed conifers and pines. In: Perry, D. A.; Meurisse, R.; Thomas, 

B.; Miller, R.; Boyle, J.; Means, J.; Perry, C. R.; Powers, R. F., eds. Maintaining 

long-term forest productivity of Pacific Northwest Forest Ecosystems. Portland, 

OR: Timber Press. 164-184.

Hassoldt, Robert. 2003. [Personal communication]. Jullieta, Idaho: Consulting 

Forester.

Helms, John A. 1998. The dictionary of forestry. Bethesda, MD: Society of 

American Foresters. 210 p.

Jain, Theresa B. 2001. Biophysical characteristics influencing growth and abundance 

of western white pine (Pinus monticola) across spatial scales in the Coeur D’Alene 

River Basin, Idaho. Moscow, Idaho: University of Idaho. 221 p. Dissertation.

Jain, Theresa B.; Graham, Russell T.; Morgan, Penelope. 2002. Western white pine 

development in relation to biophysical characteristics across different spatial scales 

in the Coeur d’Alene River basin in northern Idaho, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of 

Forest Research. 32(7): 1109-1125.

Jensen, Mark; Greene, Pat. 1991. An integrated approach for riparian inventory. 

In: Harvey, A. E., ed. Proceedings: Management and productivity of westernmontane forest soils; Gen. Tech. Rep. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 237-239.

Knapp, Walter H.; Brodie, J. Douglas. 1992. Chapter 18: The process of managing 

animal damage. In: Black, Hugh C., tech ed. Silvicultural approaches to animal 

damage management in Pacific Northwest forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 365-376.

Marsh, Rex E.; Steele, Robert W. 1992. Chapter 10: Pocket gophers. In: Black, 

Hugh C., tech. ed. Silvicultural approaches to animal damage management in 

Pacific Northwest forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 205-230.

McComb, William C. 1992. Chapter 19: Modeling systems for prescription 

development. In: Black, Hugh C., tech. ed. Silvicultural approaches to animal 

damage management in Pacific Northwest forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 377-394.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 63

Miller, Daniel L. 1986. Manual and mechanical methods of vegetation control: what 

works and what doesn’t. In: Baumgartner, David M.; Boyd, Raymond J.; Breuer, 

David W.; Miller, Daniel L., comp. and eds. Weed control for forest productivity 

in the interior west: symposium proceedings; 1985 February 5-7; Spokane, WA. 

Pullman, WA: Washington State University. 55-60.

Minore, D. 1979. Comparative autecological characteristics of northwestern tree 

species: a literature review. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-87. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 72 p.

Naiman, Robert J.; Decamps, Henri. 1997. The ecology of interfaces: riparian 

zones. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 28: 621-658.

Naiman, Robert J.; Decamps, Henri; Pollock, Michael. 1993. The role of riparian 

corridors in maintaining regional biodiversity. Ecological Applications. 3(2): 

209-212.

Newton, Michael. 2002. Pacific Northwest weed management handbook, Available: 

http://pnwpest.org/pnw/weeds?20W_FORS01.dat.

Newton, Michael; Willis, Ruth; Walsh, Jennifer; Cole, Elizabeth; Chan, Samuel. 

1996. Enhancing riparian habitat for fish, wildlife, and timber managed forests. 

Weed Technology. 10: 429-438.

Nolte, Dale L. 2003a. Developing strategies to alleviate wildlife damage to forest 

resources. Western Forester. 48(4): 16-27.

Nolte, Dale L. 2003b. Developing approaches to reduce wildlife damage to forest 

resources. Western Forester. 48(4): 1-3.

Nolte, Dale L. 2003c. Managing ungulates to protect trees. Western Forester. 

48(4): 14.

Nolte, Dale L. 2003d. Repellents are socially acceptable tools. Western Forester. 

48(4): 22-23.

Odum E. P. 1971. Fundamentals of ecology. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders Co. 

574 p.

Posner, S. D.; Jordan, P. A. 2002. Competitive effects on plantation white spruce 

saplings from shrubs that are important browse for moose. Forest Science. 48(2): 

283-289.

Rabe, Fred; Bursik, Robert. 1991. Natural wetland diversity in Idaho. Moscow, 

Idaho: Idaho Water Resources Research Institute. 13 p.

Rabe, Fred W.; Elzinga, Caryl; Breckenridge, Roy. 1994. Classification of 

meandering glide and spring stream natural areas in Idaho. Natural Areas Journal. 

14(3): 188-202.

Rochelle, James A. 1992. Chapter 16: Deer and elk. In: Black, Hugh C, tech. ed. 

Silvicultural approaches to animal damage management in Pacific Northwest 

forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 333-350.

Savage, Nancy L.; Rabe, Fred W. 1979. Stream types in Idaho: an approach to 

classification of streams in natural areas. Biological Conservation. 15: 301-315.

Schmidt, Robert H.; Brooks, Dale L.; Salmon, Terrell P. 1992. Chapter 20: Social, 

political, legal, and ethical aspects of animal damage management in forestry. In: 

Black, Hugh C., tech. ed. Silvicultural approaches to animal damage management 

in Pacific Northwest forests. PNW-GTR-287. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 395-404.

Swanson, F. J.; Franklin, J. F. 1992. New forestry principles from ecosystem analysis 

of pacific northwest forests. Ecological Applications. 2(3): 262-274.

Tiner, Ralph W. 1999. Wetland indicators: a guide to wetland identification, delineation, classification, and mapping. Washington, D.C.: CRC Press LLC. 392 p.

Windell, John T.; Willard, Beatric E.; Cooper, David J.; Foster, Susan Q.; KnudHanse, Christopher F.; Rink, Lauranne P.; Kiladis, George N. 1986. An ecological 

characterization of Rocky Mountain montane and subalpine wetlands. Biol. Rep. 

86(11). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 

298 p.
64 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Abstract—Southwestern pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlands cover large areas of 

the western United States. The woodlands have been viewed as places of beauty and 

sources of valuable resource products or as weed-dominated landscapes that hinder 

the production of forage for livestock. They are special places because of the emotions and controversies that encircle their management. Silvicultural methods can be 

employed on better sites to meet multiresource objectives and to maintain the health 

and sustainability of the woodlands. Silviculture must be based on an understanding of the silvics of the woodlands and their major species. Single-tree selection and 

diameter-limit prescriptions are being evaluated in central Arizona. Silvopastoral 

prescriptions that can maintain the tree component and provide for increased forage 

production and improved wildlife habitat are being tested in New Mexico.

Introduction

Why are pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlands special places? Is it because 

they are uncommon? There are more than 47 million acres of coniferous 

woodlands within the western states and they are important landscape 

components in seven states (Evans 1988). The woodlands are divided into 

the Great Basin and southwestern woodlands. Pinyon-juniper woodlands 

cover approximately 7.7 million acres and associated juniper woodlands cover 

an additional 3.1 million acres in Arizona. Together the two woodland types, 

which will be considered together for this paper, comprise 56 percent of the 

forestland within the state (O’Brien 2002). The woodland types also are 

important in New Mexico, where they cover about 56% of the forestland or 

8.5 million acres (Van Hooser et al. 1993). The woodlands are special places 

because of the emotions and controversies that their management generates among the diverse human populations of the Western United States. 

Some people view them as areas of natural beauty, an integral part of many 

southwestern national parks such as the Grand Canyon, Mesa Verde, or Zion. 

The woodlands are important to the cultural traditions and activities of the 

region’s American Indian and Spanish people, some of whom depend on the 

woodlands for fuelwood, timber, and pinyon nuts; for habitats for game and 

species with ceremonial importance; and for medicinal crops and for grazing 

livestock. They provide a source of employment in areas where jobs are often 

scarce. The woodlands provide important watershed cover and are of increasing importance for recreation by the region’s growing urban populations. On 

the other side are some interests who hold that the trees are weeds that are 

invading natural grasslands and that the best management is to remove them 

so that more forage can be produced for livestock. There are, of course, large 

ranges of opinions that fall between the two extremes.

Silvics and Silviculture in the Southwestern 

Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands

Gerald J. Gottfried1

1 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Phoenix, AZ.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 65

Pinyon-juniper woodlands produce a large variety of natural resource 

products and amenities. Silvicultural prescriptions can be used to sustain pro-

ductivity of these lands for multiple resources and to maintain stand health. 

Silvicultural activities have the best chance of ecological and economic 

success on better sites. Approximately 88 percent of the pinyon-juniper 

and juniper woodlands have been classified as “high-site” indicating that 

they have the potential for growing wood products on a sustainable basis 

(Conner and others 1990). Silvicultural prescriptions can be formulated to 

enhance other resources such as wildlife habitat or forage for livestock.

The objectives of this paper are to review the silvics of southwestern pin-

yon-juniper woodlands and their component species and the relative merits 

of silvicultural options that have been applied to or proposed for woodland 

stands. The paper will then describe preliminary results from two ongoing 

silvicultural case studies. The first study involves an evaluation of single-tree 

selection and diameter-limit prescriptions in northern Arizona. Silvicultural 

prescriptions often are prepared to primarily benefit other resources such as 

wildlife habitat or forage production where the impacts on the tree products 

are secondary. The second case study describes three silvopastoral treatments 

that recently have been completed in central New Mexico to demonstrate 

that tree management and forage or wildlife habitat management can be 

compatible.

Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Silvics For 

Silviculturists

Tree and Stand Characteristics

The southwestern pinyon-juniper woodlands vary in species composition, 

density, and physiographic characteristics. At least 70 plant associations have 

been recognized in Arizona and New Mexico (Moir and Carleton 1987). 

Colorado pinyon (Pinus edulis), which has two-needles on a fascicle, is the 

most common pine within the type. Pinyon grows to between 9 and 35 

ft in height and 5 to 18 inches in diameter. These slow growing trees may 

attain ages of 300 years or older on some sites in Arizona and New Mexico. 

Stands may contain one or several species of junipers; the four main species 

are oneseed juniper (Juniperus monosperma), Utah juniper (J. osteosperma), 

alligator juniper (J. deppeana), and Rocky Mountain juniper (J. scopulorum). 

Junipers usually are less than 40 ft tall. They can attain great age, but it is 

difficult to age most juniper trees because of the large number of false or 

missing rings. The floristic diversity in the woodlands is reflected in their 

herbaceous components rather than in the tree cover. While the total under

-

story biomass may be small, the total number of species associated with the 

widely distributed woodlands is large (Gottfried and others 1995).

Most natural stands have an uneven-aged structure. In Arizona, total 

tree volume per acre averages 698 ft

3

 in the pinyon-juniper type; net annual 

volume growth averages 6.4 ft3 /yr (Conner and others 1990). Clary (1987) 

reported that herbaceous understory plant biomass ranged from 78 to 1,042 

lb/acre on seven sites in Arizona and New Mexico.

Autecology

Pinyon trees are generally monoecious, although dioeciousness may occur 

in trees stressed by drought or insect attack. The pine produces a relatively 
66 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

large, wingless seed, which weighs less than 0.01 oz (Ronco 1990). Seed 

crops are usually produced every four to seven years, depending on weather 

and site conditions. Cones mature in three growing seasons and seeds are 

released in mid-September and October. About 300 lbs of seed are produced 

on an acre in a good year (Ronco 1990). Seeds have a high nutritional value 

and are important food for wildlife. They are harvested by local human 

populations for personal consumption or sold commercially. Seed and cone 

insects sometimes reduce the amount of seed available for regeneration, 

wildlife, or human consumption.

Some of the southwestern junipers are monoecious, such as Utah juniper, 

and some are predominately dioecious, such as oneseed juniper (Johnsen and 

Alexander 1974). Seed-bearing age varies by species and by climatic condi

-

tions during seed development. Juniper “berries” contain one to four seeds 

depending on the species. The flowers of most southwestern junipers develop 

in the spring and the fruit ripens in the fall; some species require two years for 

the seeds to mature. Alligator juniper is the only major woodland tree that has 

the ability to regenerate vegetatively when the main trunk is injured.

The heavy mature seeds generally fall to the ground under or next to the 

tree crowns. Birds and small mammals are important for the wide dispersal 

of both pinyon and juniper seeds. Balda (1987) reported that four species of 

corvid birds, scrub jays (Aphelocoma coerulescens), pinyon jays (Gymnorhinus 

cyanocephalus), Clark’s nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana), and Steller’s jay (Cyanocitta stelleri), are responsible for caching thousands of pinyon seeds 

during a year with a large crop. The birds cache the seeds in the ground and 

return in the spring to feed on the buried seeds. Seed that escapes the birds 

and rodents provide a main source for tree regeneration. Several birds, such 

as Townsend’s solitaire (Myadestes townsendi), are important dispersal agents 

for juniper seed. Germination of oneseed juniper is enhanced after passing 

through a bird’s digestive tract (Johnsen 1962).

Pinyon will germinate in the spring, but if conditions are not suitable, 

germination will be delayed until the summer monsoon period (Gottfried 

and others 1995). Most juniper seed germinates in the spring, but germina-

tion may be delayed because of embryo dormancy, chemical inhibitors, 

or impermeable seed coats. Juniper germination is generally less than 50 

percent while pinyon germination is between 83 and 96 percent. Both trees 

are shade-intolerant, but germination and establishment is greater in the 

protection of mature trees, shrubs, and logging debris. Large cohorts of 

seedlings in the Southwest have been linked to the combination of bumper 

seed crops and favorable climatic conditions during the initial germination 

and establishment period. Seedling growth is slow, with root growth exceed

-

ing top growth in the early years. Growth of older trees of both genera also 

is relatively slow; a pinyon may grow to 12 inches in diameter in 150 years 

on a good site (Ronco 1990). However, pinyon grows at twice the rate of 

junipers (Conner and others 1990).

Synecology

Pinyon-juniper woodlands occupy the warmest tree-dominated zone in 

the southwestern United States. They are found from about 4,500 to 7,500 

ft in elevation where annual precipitation ranges from 12 to 22 inches. 

Precipitation is influenced by geography, topography, and elevation. Differ

-

ences in species composition have been related to the proportion of winter 

and summer precipitation (Springfield 1976). Woodlands are found on soils 

derived from a variety of parent materials.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 67

The woodlands grade into juniper savannas, grasslands, oak woodlands, 

and brush-dominated vegetation zones on drier sites and into ponderosa 

pine (P. ponderosa) forests on moister, higher elevation sites. Junipers, which 

are more drought-tolerant, dominate on drier sites but the proportion of 

pinyon increases with increased elevation and available water. The upper and 

lower ecotones have shifted over time because of wildfires and decade-level 

climate fluctuations. The extended drought of the 1950s caused extensive 

mortality of all woodland tree species and caused shifts in ecotonal areas 

throughout the region. The woodlands increased at higher elevations 

replacing ponderosa pine stands, and grasslands or shrub ecosystems became 

more common at the lower elevations. Several insects, diseases, and parasites 

attack the trees, and insect infestations during drought cycles can result 

in high mortality over relatively large areas. Outbreaks of a bark engraver 

beetle, the pinyon ips (Ips confusus), during the current period of drought, 

are causing heavy pinyon mortality in the Southwest and southwestern 

Colorado (USDA Forest Service 2004). The juniper bark beetle (Phloeosinus 

christatus) is contributing to the mortality of drought-stressed junipers in 

areas throughout the Southwest. Pinyon dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium 

divaricatum) is an important parasite that causes locally severe damage and 

mortality. True mistletoes (Phorodendron spp.) are common on junipers but 

generally do not cause heavy damage. Fire was the most common natural 

disturbance prior to the introduction of livestock by European-American 

settlers. Fires were uncommon in the recent past because of the loss of a 

healthy and continuous herbaceous understory that could carry fire through 

the stands. Fire exclusion has been linked to increases in tree stand densities 

in the forests, woodlands, and savannas of the Southwest. However, pinyonjuniper woodlands will burn under severe conditions, and one of the impacts 

of the recent drought and associated insect mortality has been an increase in 

the intensity and frequency of wildfires within the woodlands. Successional 

stages in the woodlands usually contain the same species but in differing 

densities and dominance (Evans 1988). Junipers are the first tree species to 

return to a site after a fire or other disturbance but are often followed and 

replaced by pinyon.

Silviculture For Multiple Resources

There was a shift in attitudes toward pinyon-juniper woodlands after 

the oil crisis of the mid-1970s when the demands for firewood increased dra

-

matically throughout the Southwest. Managers began to consider woodland 

management that would sustain healthy stands that could be managed for 

multiple resources. However, not all sites can produce the full range of re

-

source benefits, and this must be considered in land management planning. 

Silviculture has the best potential for success on the most productive sites 

that can sustain the production of tree products based on soil properties, 

slope, and the presence of regeneration (Van Hooser and others 1993). 

Most pinyon-juniper woodlands in the Southwest have been classified as 

high-sites. There is a renewed interest in silvicultural systems and methods 

for the woodlands, especially on the more productive high-sites.

A number of silvicultural regeneration methods can be prescribed for 

pinyon-juniper woodlands (Bassett 1987), depending on the land manager’s 

desired biological and economic objectives. Single-tree selection has a 

number of advantages since it favors natural regeneration of the main tree 
68 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

species, protects the site from wind and water erosion, can maximize vertical 

diversity important for wildlife, is easier to manipulate composition, and is 

esthetically pleasing (Bassett 1987). There are disadvantages since it is more 

difficult to plan and administer wood sales, residual trees can be damaged, 

horizontal diversity may be reduced over large areas, prescribed burning is 

not possible, and dwarf mistletoe control is difficult.

Other prescriptions, such as two-step or three-step shelterwood and 

group selection, are used in the Southwest. Clearcutting, which is the easiest 

prescription to plan and administer, is discouraged unless the objective is 

to increase forage and browse for livestock and wildlife, or to control dwarf 

mistletoe. Clearcuts are difficult to regenerate because of poor seed dispersal, 

except where alligator juniper, which sprouts, is a major stand component. 

Clearcuts are the least esthetically pleasing. However, the harvesting of nar

-

row stripes of woodland or small openings is beneficial for deer (Odocoileus 

spp.) and elk (Cervus elaphus) because large homogeneous landscapes are 

broken up, providing food and adjacent hiding-thermal cover. While some 

private landowners may continue to remove the tree cover, many have 

recognized the values for their lands and livestock operations of creating 

mosaics of openings and woodlands, or of attempting to create savannas by 

retaining larger trees or groups of trees. Artificial regeneration of woodland 

species is not common because of the high expense but is used to reclaim 

mining sites and to restore vegetation around recreational areas following 

wildfires. However, artificial regeneration may be necessary if pinyon is to be 

restored in drought and insect-impacted woodlands. One treatment will not fit all situations and several may be valid within a landscape. New ecological 

knowledge and management techniques will contribute to future activities 

within the southwestern pinyon-juniper woodlands.

A Silviculture Experiment

The Rocky Mountain Research Station, in cooperation with the Black 

Mesa Ranger District of the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests, Arizona, 

has completed the field phase of a study of several woodland silvicultural 

treatments, including single-tree selection and diameter-limit prescriptions, 

compared to changes in unharvested control plots. The diameter-limit 

prescription also could be characterized as the removal harvest of a one-cut 

shelterwood or an overstory removal, except that an upper diameter for 

residual trees was specified. The prescriptions were selected because they 

were being conducted by the District or were being considered for future 

management. The objectives of the treatments were to evaluate the effects of 

treatment on overstory characteristics and tree regeneration and to demon-

strate the feasibility of these prescriptions for woodland management. A case 

study will be reported based on results from one of the single-tree selection 

plots and from one of the diameter-limit plots. Prescription planning was 

coordinated with the forest managers who administered the treatments as 

commercial fuelwood sales. Treatments had to be practical, considering the 

constraints of time and money, to be accepted by managers and fuelwood 

contractors.

The Study Area

The long-term study is located on the Black Mesa Ranger District of the 

Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests. The study site is 7 miles northeast of 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 69

the town of Heber, which is approximately 110 mi northeast of Phoenix. 

Topography on the study site is relatively flat. Ephemeral stream channels 

that drain the area were not included in the study plots to reduce variability. 

Elevation is approximately 6,600 to 6,800 ft. Precipitation occurs during 

two seasons. Winter precipitation, usually snow, is produced by frontal 

storms that originate in the Pacific Ocean while summer monsoon precipita-

tion occurs as convectional rains from moisture from the Gulf of Mexico. 

Winter storms produce about 55 percent of the average annual precipitation 

(with standard deviation) of 19.0 ± 3.3 inches, as measured at the Ranger 

District office from 1981 through 2001. Precipitation for the 12-year 

study period was 18.5 ± 4.2 inches. The soils are derived from undivided 

Cretaceous sedimentary rocks, mostly limestone, shale, and sandstone; most 

are classified as Lithic Ustochrepts or Udic Haplustalfs and have fine loams 

in the surface horizon (Laing and others 1987).

The woodland in the study area consisted of Colorado pinyon, oneseed 

juniper sites, alligator juniper, and occasional ponderosa pine. Pinyon is 

the most common tree species. Stand conditions in the general area had an 

average basal area of 101 ± 23.5 ft

2

/acre and average canopy cover of about 

40 percent (Laing and others 1987). The primary plant association is Pinus 

edulis/Bouteloua gracilis (USDA Forest Service 1997), which is one of the 

most common associations in Arizona and New Mexico. Cattle grazed the 

area during part of the study period, but use was minimal. Local residents 

had removed some large trees over the years prior to the study.

The preliminary results reported here for the single-tree selection and 

diameter-limit silvicultural treatment are from one replication (block) of a 

larger study. The prescriptions were applied to 10-acre plots. Each treat-

ment plot contained 12 permanent circular 0.20-acre inventory plots. The 

treatments were randomly assigned among the four plots in the block, and 

inventory plots were located using a stratified random design. Measurements 

included species, diameter or equivalent diameter at root collar (d.r.c. or 

e.d.r.c.), height, disease or insect damage, crown characteristics, and tree 

defects or utilization. Equivalent diameter is necessary because most of the 

oneseed junipers are multi-stemmed with branching occurring at or near 

ground level. Tree seedlings were located within each inventory plot and 

pinned and numbered for re-identification. The blocks were measured in 

1989; prior to treatment; in 1993; after harvesting; and in 2000. Changes 

in small mammal populations, understory responses, and soil-plant nutrient 

dynamics associated with the treatments were studied in some of the silvicul

-

tural treatment blocks (Kruse 1999, Kruse and Perry 1995).

Treatment Design and Administration

Single-Tree Selection

The single-tree selection prescription was based on the 1989 pre-treat

-

ment inventory that measured a total of 456 trees/acre and 150 ft

2

/acre. 

The general objective was to sustain the production of tree products while 

maintaining the stand’s uneven-aged structure, provide micro-sites for tree 

regeneration, improve stand health, maintain hiding and thermal cover for 

wildlife, and produce an aesthetically acceptable landscape. The immediate 

objective was to reduce the basal area of trees greater than 4 inches in 

diameter by about 60 percent while maintaining the existing structure. The 

desired maximum diameter for crop trees was 13 to 14 inches; however, 

some larger junipers were retained for wildlife and aesthetic considerations. 
70 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

These large trees were considered when the inverse-J diameter distribution 

curve was defined. Regulation was directed to trees that were equal to or 

greater than 4 inch d.r.c., about 95 percent of the total basal area, because 

smaller trees do not have an economic value and it would be difficult to 

justify the tree marking costs to achieve the desired diameter distribution in 

these smaller trees. One objective was to keep the existing distribution of 

species in the stand. The desired number of trees in each diameter class was 

calculated using a “q-value” of 1.25 (figure 1), and a basal area target of 60 

ft2/acre. The q is the ratio of the geometric series that defines the number of 

trees in each successive diameter class (Husch and others 1972).

The Ranger District marked the residual trees within the harvesting block. 

The crew consisted of three people: a tally keeper and two measurers/

markers. The crew was supplied with the desired stand structure and noted 

residual trees as they were measured and marked. Leave trees exhibited good 

vigor, had a potential for seed production, and were free of insect or disease 

problems. Higher basal areas were allowed in part of the area to keep highquality trees. The guides also specified that cutting should not create new or 

enlarged openings of more than 0.25 acre. Markers used a 10 BAF wedge 

to maintain an average basal area of 60 ft2/acre, and they were within 0.9 

ft2/acre of the target.

Diameter-Limit Prescription

The diameter-limit prescription was applied to another 10-acre plot. The 

stand on an average acre in the block had 438 trees and 142 ft2 of basal area. 

The prescription called for the removal of all trees equal to or greater than 

7 inches in diameter and the protection of remaining trees and regeneration 

classes. This prescription was similar to one of the common practices in the 

area, but one that has not previously been carefully evaluated. The logging 

Figure 1—Initial, proposed, and post-harvest stand conditions in 1993 and 2000 for the 

single-tree selection block. The graph shows the changes related to the treatment and to 

growth and mortality among the trees. Diameter is measured at the root collar (d.r.c).

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

5 8 11 14 17 20 >23

Diameter at root collar (inches)

Pre-harvest, 1989

Proposed stand

Post-harvest stand

Stand in 2000
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 71

debris was not burned on one block. Burning is a common practice but 

currently is questioned because of damage to residual trees, and because 

high-intensity fires can have a negative effect on soil nutrient dynamics 

(Teidemann 1987). Retaining the debris provides protected regeneration 

sites for trees and herbaceous plants, slows surface runoff and sedimentation, 

provides shelter for small mammals, and in some rural areas, is an important 

source for firewood (Gottfried and others 1995).

Results and Discussion

Single-Tree Selection

The block was harvested in December 1992; approximately 225 ft

3

/acre 

were removed. Although the diameter distribution for larger trees was 

achieved (figure 1), stand density goals were not achieved because of the 

reluctance of the harvesters to cut smaller diameter trees. The post-harvest q-value met the goal of 1.20 but the harvesting did not achieve the basal 

area reduction goal for trees equal to or greater than 4 inches in diameter; 

only 36 percent of the stand basal area was removed leaving about 90 

ft

2

/ac. The graph shows the post-harvest and the present stand, including 

movement of trees among the diameter classes. One solution in the future 

is to give greater consideration to market preferences; it may be more 

realistic to regulate trees in the 7-inch and larger classes than to include 

the smaller sizes of trees. However, the impacts of dense groups of small 

trees on residual tree and stand growth still need to be determined. Ap-

proximately 678 trees/acre in the regeneration classes (85 percent) survived 

the harvest. The treatment did achieve the overall goals of retaining tree 

productivity, wildlife habitats, and of aesthetics. While an economic analysis 

was not part of the study, Ranger District personnel felt that they would 

recover the additional administrative costs from the amount received from 

a logging contractor for the wood. The effects of treatment on individual 

residual tree growth relative to growth on similar sized trees in the control 

block will be analyzed, as will the impacts of treatment on tree regenera

-

tion. However, the number of trees/acre increased in many size classes 

from 1993 through 2000, indicating increased growth of residual trees 

(figure 1).

Diameter-Limit Prescription

The diameter-limit harvest, without debris burning, removed 112 ft

2

/acre of basal area or 79 percent of the initial overstory cover, retaining 30 

ft

2

/acre, and removed 37 percent of the trees per acre, leaving 275 trees/

acre. The harvest removed about 375 ft

3

 /acre of volume. Approximately 

89 percent of the tree seedlings survived harvesting (515 trees/acre). 

Stand density in the diameter-limit block was similar in 1993 and 2000.

Some of the reductions in both blocks can be attributed to attacks 

and mortality by ips. The infestation that Wilson and Tkacz (1992) 

described occurred a short distance to the north of the study area. A 

1993 inventory of herbaceous vegetation in harvested and un-harvested 

blocks indicated that harvesting increased the production of blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) (the primary understory species), perennial forbs, and 

total herbaceous cover (Kruse and Perry 1995). Total production, for 

example, was 172 lb/acre in the treated blocks and 70 lb/acre in the 

un-harvested blocks.
72 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Silvopastoral Prescriptions

The lack of commercial markets for alternative, higher-value juniper 

wood products limits management practices (Ffolliott and others 1999). 

In February 1999, the USDA Forest Service’s Forest Products Labora

-

tory and Rocky Mountain Research Station received a CROPS (Creative 

Opportunities) grant for the restoration demonstrations and workshops 

for management of pinyon-juniper savannas in New Mexico. The grant 

is part of an effort to develop new products and markets for the juniper 

resource that could improve the economics of treating these woodlands, 

not only for range restoration but also for more intensive management for 

sustainable tree products. Ongoing research projects at the Forest Products 

Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin, have demonstrated the potential of 

value-added products from the wood and fiber of oneseed juniper. P & M 

Signs, Inc. in Mountainair, New Mexico, is using extrusion and injection 

molding technologies in the manufacture of sign panels and sign posts. 

The use of wood chips and fiber would increase the economic potential 

of woodlands dominated by smaller trees that are difficult to harvest for 

traditional products. The proposed manufacturing facility could influence 

management on a large part of the 252,402 acres of woodlands in Tor

-

rance County with its net volume of about 102,579,000 ft

3

 (Van Hooser 

and others 1993). The facility would have a positive effect on employment 

and the general economy of Mountainair and Torrance County and 

adjacent areas.

Approximately 61 percent of the woodland area and 57 percent of the 

woodland volume are on private land in Torrance County. The goal of the 

project is to demonstrate to the landowners several ecosystem restoration 

prescriptions with the potential for economic wood and range products 

recovery while resulting in sustainable management. The plan is to use 

different techniques on three areas and to compare results with an adjacent 

untreated control site. The activity has resulted in two field workshops to 

provide participants with overviews of restoration approaches and in an 

evaluation of the economics of restoration including the value of products 

compared to the cost of treatments. Although the prescriptions were 

designed to integrate range and tree production objectives, the prescriptions 

could also be useful for treatments in pinyon-juniper dominated wildland-ur

-

ban-interface areas.

The Demonstration Site

The demonstration was conducted within an area on the Greene Ranch 

in the Estancia Basin of Torrance County, New Mexico. New Mexico State 

University is studying the economics of the value of wood products relative 

to treatment costs in the same general area. It has six 1-acre plots that 

have been harvested by mechanized equipment (Bobcat) or by chainsaws 

(Maynard and others, unpublished report). Stand densities were reduced to 

5-10 ft

2

 /acre.

The site contains sandy soils that are 5 to 6 ft deep, and are representative 

of a band of soil that extends across the county. It is within a mile of the 

Gran Quivera Unit of the Salinas Missions National Monument and US 

Highway 54. The site is unique in the number of huge oneseed junipers that 

it supports; many have straight trunks with large diameters at breast height. 

This area is considered old-growth by local ecologists. The larger trees may 

date from the period when Gran Quivira was abandoned in the 1670s. 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 73

There is little surface erosion on the site that can be related to water move-

ment probably because of high infiltration capacity of the sands. The area is 

grazed in winter but has a good cover of grasses, including blue grama (B. 

gracilis), side-oats grama (B. curtipendula), and sand bluestem (Andropogon 

hallii). Most grass is under the protection of larger junipers and there is less 

in interspaces. Larger natural openings within the area have a good cover of 

grass. This site is reserved for winter grazing partially because the tree cover 

provides thermal cover for the cattle. Average annual precipitation at the 

Gran Quivira National Monument was 15.4 inches between 1938 and 2001; 

most of the precipitation occurs during the summer.

Monitoring and Marking

The site was divided into four 20.3-acre treatment blocks, and a tree 

inventory was conducted in each block prior to marking the residual trees 

or designating prescriptions. Since the hope was to make this practical for 

ranchers and small acreage landowners, it was decided to arbitrarily limit 

sampling to 10 randomly located, permanent 0.20-acre fixed plots within 

each block. It later was apparent that either larger plots or more numerous 

plots would have given us a better idea of stand conditions because of the 

variability in each plot. Often 30 percent of the plots were non-stocked and 

others contained more than 32 trees/plot. The crew measured species and 

d.r.c. or e.d.r.c.; on some plots, total height was measured so that volumes 

could be determined. However, the permanent plots will be measured 

to provide an indication of post-treatment growth. Harvested trees are 

utilized for firewood, fenceposts, latillas, and vigas. Range resources were 

sampled on four transects in each block using a double sampling procedure 

(Maynard, J. personal correspondence, 2002). The average forage for each 

plot was: Block I with 260.2 lb/acre; Block II with 373.3 lb/acre; Block 

III with 585.9 lb/acre; and Block IV with 589.2 lb/acre.

All residual trees were marked within the blocks to be harvested. The 

goal was to maintain a relatively uniform crown cover within the limitations 

of the existing stand; however, groups of trees were retained along water 

courses and to maintain wildlife cover. Trees that had signs of wildlife activ

-

ity, such as bird or rodent nests, were retained. Diameters were measured on 

all residual trees. The crew consisted of three people: two diameter measur

-

ers and one person who calculated and recorded the e.d.r.c. values. Leave 

trees were flagged in all directions around the tree.

The Prescriptions and Results

The specific prescriptions were designed to be general enough to be ap-

plied to juniper woodlands in a variety of different sites. The four treatments 

included a multiresource production block, a “savannarization” cut, a strip 

cut for wildlife, and an untreated control block.

The blocks were marked and harvested for firewood during the summer 

of 2002. A Bobcat equipped with a shear was used to fell trees in the savan-

narization and strip cut blocks. The trees were bucked for transportation 

and sale. The sustained multi-resource production block was harvested by 

chainsaw because there were concerns that the Bobcat would cause excessive 

damage to residual trees. At this time, not all of the wood has been removed 

from the site, so only the results of the harvesting can be reported. An 

evaluation of the impacts on forage production will wait until the wood is 

removed; however, the rancher recently has noticed more cattle and deer use 

in the treated blocks.
74 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Sustained Multi-Resource Production

The prescription for the first treatment block (Block I) was designed to 

increase the herbaceous cover but still retain sufficient trees of all size classes 

in order to sustain the tree production option on these productive sites. 

The denser stand could have wildlife benefits for some small mammal and 

bird species. The prescription was designed to remove approximately 50 

percent of the initial basal area but retain the variety of size classes present 

on the site. However, at least 65 percent of the crown cover should be left. 

The objective was not to force the residual stand into either an even-aged 

or uneven-aged structure, although the final result (figure 2) was a relatively 

all-aged stand. The marking favored healthy trees of all size classes in an 

attempt to retain younger trees to replace natural losses or additional 

harvesting. (Slash can be chipped for fiber as long as it can be done without 

damaging the residual trees.) Pinyon, which is a minor component of the 

block, and some snags were retained and protected for wildlife. This block 

contains some channels and signs of erosion, and slash was left in the channels to slow water movement and to trap soil. Groups of trees were retained 

for wildlife or for esthetic considerations. The final tally indicated that the 

residual stand contained 30 trees/acre and 29.4 ft2

/acre of basal area. The 

residual volume was estimated at 2.9 cds/acre. Preliminary estimates are 

that about 7 to 10 cds/acre were harvested but a final tally had not been 

conducted. Measurements of the inventory plots indicate that the residual 

basal area is 38 percent and the density is about 21 percent, respectively, of 

the original amounts.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 >35

Diameter at root collar (inches)

Trees per acre

Figure 2—Residual stand on the multiresource silvopastoral treatment in New Mexico . The 

residual stand is uneven-aged and has a “q-value” of 1.08. Some of the largest trees are 

about 50 inches in d.r.c.

Savannarization

The second block (Block II) was treated according to a savannarization 

prescription. The objective is to restore the range value of the landscape by 

returning it to the savanna condition that probably existed prior to European settlement. However, no one knows exactly what conditions existed 

during the period, so managers must select an option. One option of leaving 

six trees/acre had already been applied to an experimental site near the Abo 

Unit of the Salinas Missions National Monument in the Cibola National 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 75

Forest (Brockway and others 2002), and it would not be that useful to 

reproduce it here. The selected prescription on the demonstration site was 

designed to leave a larger number of individual large trees or groups of large, 

medium, and small trees throughout the 20-acre block. The distribution of 

trees would not be uniform and would consider scenic views. The selected 

option was to leave between 15 and 25 large trees or groups of smaller trees 

per acre. Some areas would have no trees and others had more than 25 trees. 

One recommendation is that large trees should be retained on 40 to 60 

percent of the area (USDA Forest Service 1993). The larger slash elements 

would be chipped and smaller material would be lopped and left for soil 

cover and regeneration protection. Some snags were retained and protected 

but were not counted as part of the residual stand.

The final mark indicated that 14 trees/acre in a variety of size classes had 

been retained on the savanna block (figure 3); this was 34 percent of the 

amount indicated by the pre-harvest inventory. The residual basal area was 

26.3 ft2/acre and the residual trees contained about 1.2 cds/acre.

Figure 3—Residual stand for the savannaization silvopastoral treatment. The harvest left 

about 14 trees/acre. Approximately 1.2 cds/acre remain in the largest size classes.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 >35

Diameter at root collar (inches)

Trees per acre

Strip Cut

Research and observations throughout the West have indicated that 

wildlife do not move into openings that are too large, even when sufficient 

forage or browse is available. Animals tend to remain near the edges to take 

advantage of hiding cover. The general recommendation is that openings 

be limited to about 600 ft in width (Gottfried and Severson 1994) and that 

“leave areas” that border the strip be at least 200 and 330 ft wide (USDA 

Forest Service 1993, Gottfried and Severson 1994). The leave areas can be 

harvested but there should be sufficient residual density so that the animals 

will not be able to see through the stand to other nearby openings. Very 

open stands are treated as extensions of the opening and lose their value as 

hiding and thermal cover.

The final prescription for Block IV was to harvest a strip of 500 to 600 ft 

in width to run through the block and to cover about 12 acre. The strip was 

to have “feathered” edges and not be a regular rectangle and be oriented 
76 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

perpendicular to the direction of the prevailing winds to minimize soil 

erosion because of wind action on the sandy soil. The border strips were 

to be harvested to reduce stand density by 20 percent but had to retain a 

mix of size classes. The actual width of the border was closer to 300 ft since 

areas immediately outside of the plot were included. Some trees or small 

groups of trees were retained in the strip to break up and raise the wind flow. 

Unmerchantable slash was to be lopped and left on the ground to keep the 

wind above the soil surface and to provide protected regeneration sites for 

herbaceous generation. An administrative study on an alligator juniper (J. 

deppeana) site in central Arizona estimated that forage production increased 

to 809 lb/acre in openings where harvesting slash had been treated and to 

1,366 lb/acre under slash (Soeth and Gottfried 2000). Larger slash could be 

chipped for the P & M plant or left on the site. Some snags in the strip and 

borders were to be retained and protected for wildlife. Critical nesting or 

birthing sites were to be identified and the plan altered accordingly.

The actual harvesting created a 13.1 acre strip in the middle of the 

treatment block; the base was 556 ft wide. The edges were feathered and 

3.9 trees/acre were left in the strip to provide additional hiding or thermal 

cover. In addition, an average of 2.9 trees/acre were harvested in the border 

strips; this accounted for 14 percent of the strip basal area.

Control

The fourth block (Block III) was not treated and will be monitored to 

compare with the three treated units. The control is particularly important 

for herbaceous production and wildlife comparisons. It is anticipated that 

stand differences will not be great over the demonstration period.

Conclusions

There is a growing recognition that the southwestern pinyon-juniper 

woodlands are valuable and should be managed for multiple resources. 

Silviculture, based on a sound knowledge of silvics, provides a tool for 

multiple resource management. Several silvicultural systems and methods are 

applicable to the southwestern pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlands, but 

the prescription must be matched to stand and site characteristics and to the 

landowner’s objectives.

Most woodland silvicultural prescriptions have been developed through 

adaptive management procedures often with little post-treatment evalua

-

tion. A case study was initiated in Arizona to evaluate several prescriptions 

with the objectives of providing managers with information that could 

be used in evaluating and planning treatments. The results indicate that 

single-tree selection is feasible for high-quality sites. The selection treatment 

met the objectives of sustaining tree production and maintaining habitat 

for woodland dependent species but full regulation and targeted density 

reductions are difficult because of the lack of demand for small diameter 

wood products. However, attitudes should change if markets develop for 

pinyon and juniper fiber. The stand continues to be esthetically pleasing and 

can sustain future entries on a relatively short cycle. It appears that residual 

trees are growing but it is not yet known if post-harvest growth exceeds 

normal growth in non-treated stands. The need for growth and survival 

information for the advance regeneration and new regeneration is important 

to the question of long-term sustainability. The more dramatic diameter-
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 77

limit prescription reduced stand densities but accelerated growth of residual 

trees, and the survival of most of the advance regeneration should allow a 

more rapid return to productivity for tree products relative to more severe 

stand reductions. However, the diameter-limit area has been removed from 

general tree product production for a long period. The observed increases in 

herbage production should benefit livestock and some wildlife species.

The three silvopastoral treatments in New Mexico should show that 

tree production is compatible with forage production for livestock and 

wildlife. However, it is too early to make this assessment until additional 

range inventories can be conducted. The characteristics of the residual 

stands will provide hiding and thermal cover for animals and are esthetically 

more pleasing to most observers than cleared areas. The trees also provide 

a financial reserve for the ranches. The trees continue to grow and add 

volume. In some years, ranchers may earn more from selling firewood and 

vigas than from calf crops. Silvopastoral treatments are a viable option to 

tree eradication programs and also are applicable for treating woodlands in 

wildland-urban-interface areas.

The pinyon-juniper woodlands are important to many of our constitu-

ents—they are special places. Even our urban neighbors are becoming aware 

and concerned about the woodlands and lower ponderosa pine forests as 

drought, fires, and insects take their toll. The current natural onslaught is 

creating challenges to foresters and other land managers. What are we going 

to do with the areas that have suffered extreme mortality? Do we take an 

active approach to rehabilitation or do we allow nature to take its course? 

The loss of large areas of woodlands will put addition pressures on the 

remaining lands; not just by humans but also by wildlife that depend on the 

woodlands for all or part of their habitat requirements. It is my opinion that 

silviculture will become more important in the pinyon-juniper woodlands 

as we try to manage them for sustain and improved health and productivity. 

We have seen that there are a large number of silvicultural options that are 

appropriate to the woodlands and are available to us. New or modified pre

-

scriptions will be developed to fit the variety of stand and site conditions and 

management objectives. New scientific knowledge will contribute to future 

silvicultural prescriptions and management activities. The pinyon-juniper 

woodlands are worthy of our attention—and they are special places.

Acknowledgments

The assistance of H. C. Sanchez and J. H. Yazzie of the Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Flagstaff, Arizona, and statistical assistance of R. M. King 

of the Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, are greatly 

appreciated. The study could not be conducted without the support and 

active collaboration of the personnel of the Black Mesa Ranger District, 

Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests, Arizona.

The New Mexico Demonstration Study would not have been possible 

without the support of the CROPS Grant Program. The contributions 

of J. Youngquist of the Forest Products Laboratory, H. Shanks of the 

Central Mountains R.C. & D., ranchers Brian and Lynn Greene, who gave 

permission to use the site and cooperated with the treatments, and the New 

Mexico Land’s Department who administers the site are acknowledged. The 

field assistance of J. H. Yazzie and P. Niv is appreciated.
78 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

References

Balda, Russell P. 1987. Avian impacts on pinyon-juniper woodlands. In: Everett, R. 

L., comp., Proceedings, pinyon-juniper conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, 

NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 525-533.

Bassett, Richard L. 1987. Silvicultural systems for pinyon-juniper. In: Everett, R. L., 

comp., Proceedings, pinyon-juniper conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Intermountain Research Station. 273-278.

Brockway, Dale G.; Gatewood, Richard G.; Paris, Randi B. 2002. Restoring 

grassland savannas from degraded pinyon-juniper woodlands: effects of 

mechanical overstory reduction and slash treatment alternatives. Journal of 

Environmental Management. 64: 179-197.

Clary, Warren P. 1987. Herbage production and livestock grazing on piñon-juniper 

woodland. In: Everett, R.L., compiler. Proceedings pinyon-juniper conference; 

1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 

440-447.

Conner, Roger C.; Born, J. David; Green, Alan W.; O’Brien, Renee A. 1990. Forest 

resources of Arizona, Res. Bull. INT-69. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 92 p.

Evans, Raymond A. 1988. Management of pinyon-juniper woodlands. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. INT-249. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Intermountain Research Station. 34 p.

Ffolliott, Peter F.; Gottfried, Gerald J.; Kruse, William H. 1999. Past, present, and 

potential utilization of pinyon-juniper species. In: Monsen, S. B.; Stevens, R., 

comp. Proceedings: ecology and management of pinyon-juniper communities 

within the Interior West; 1997 September 15-18, Provo, UT. Proceedings 

RMRS-P-9. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Research Station. 254-259.

Gottfried, Gerald J.; Severson, Kieth E. 1994. Managing pinyon-juniper woodlands. 

Rangelands. 16: 234-236.

Gottfried, Gerald J.; Swetnam, Thomas W.; Allen, Craig D.; Betancourt, Julio L.; 

Chung-MacCoubrey, Alice. 1995. Chapter 6. Pinyon-juniper woodlands. In: Finch, 

D. M.; Tainter, J. A., tech. eds. Ecology, diversity, and sustainability of the Middle 

Rio Grande Basin, Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-268. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

95-132.

Husch, Bertram; Miller, Charles I.; Beers, Thomas W. 1972. Forest Mensuration, 

Ronald Press, New York. 410 p.

Johnsen, Thomas N., Jr. 1962. One-seed juniper invasion of northern Arizona 

grasslands. Ecological Monographs. 32: 187-207.

Johnsen, Thomas N., Jr.; Alexander, Robert R. 1974. Juniperus L. Juniper. In: 

Schopmeyer, C. S., tech. coord. Seeds of Woody Plants of the United States. 

Agric. Handb. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 460-469.

Kruse, William H. 1999. Commercial fuelwood harvesting affects on small mammal 

habitats in central Arizona. In: Monsen, S. B., Stevens, R., comp. Proceedings: 

ecology and management of pinyon-juniper communities within the Interior 

West; 1997 September 15-18, Provo, UT. Proceedings RMRS-P-9. Ogden, 

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research 

Station. 215-218.

Kruse, William H.; Perry, Hazel M. 1995. Ecosystem management research in an 

“old growth” piñon-juniper woodland. In: Shaw, D. W., Aldon, E. F., LoSapio, 

C., tech. coords. Desired future conditions for piñon-juniper ecosystems; 1994 

August 8-12; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-258. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 79

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 219-224.

Laing, Larry; Ambos, Norman; Subirge, Tom; McDonald, Christina; Nelson, Chris; 

Robbie, Wayne. 1987. Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey of the Apache-Sitgreaves 

National Forest. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southwestern Region. 453 p.

Maynard, James L.; Shanks, Howard; Greene, Brian; Archuletta, Phil; Fowler, John 

M. Juniper harvest costs in central New Mexico. Unpublished report on file 

at: Department of Agricultural Economics, New Mexico State University, Las 

Cruces, NM. 5 p.

Moir, W. H.; Carleton, J. O. 1987. Classification of piñon-juniper (P-J) sites on the 

national forests in the Southwest. In: Everett, R. L., comp. Proceedings pinyonjuniper conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215. 

Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain 

Research Station. 216-226.

O’Brien, Renee A. 2002. Arizona’s forest resources, 1999. Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station. 116 p.

Ronco, Frank P., Jr. 1990. Pinus edulis Engelm. Piñon. In: Burns, R. M.; Honkala, 

B. H., tech. coords. Silvics of North America, Vol. 1 Conifers. Agric. Handb. 

654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 327-337.

Soeth, James R.; Gottfried, Gerald J. 2000. Adaptive management in pinyonjuniper woodlands of central Arizona. In: Proceedings of the Society of American 

Foresters 1999 National Convention; 1999 September 11-15; Portland, OR. 

Bethesda, MD: Society of American Foresters. 505-508.

Springfield, H. W. 1976. Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyonjuniper ranges: the status of our knowledge. Res. Pap. RM-160. Fort Collins, 

CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest 

and Range Experiment Station. 32 p.

Tiedemann, Arthur R. Nutrient accumulations in pinyon-juniper ecosystemsmanaging for future site productivity. In: Everett, R. L., comp. Proceedings 

pinyon-juniper conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Intermountain Research Station. 

352-359.

USDA Forest Service. 1993. Watershed management practices for pinyon-juniper 

ecosystems. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southwestern Region. 41 p.

USDA Forest Service. 1997. Plant associations of Arizona and New Mexico. 

Volume 2: woodlands. Albuquerque, NM. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southwestern Region. 196 p.

USDA Forest Service. 2004. Forest insect and disease conditions of the Southwest, 

2003. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southwestern Region. 34 p.

Van Hooser, Dwane D.; O’Brien, Renee A.; Collins, Dennis C. 1993. New 

Mexico’s forest resources. Res. Bull. INT-79. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 110 p.

Wilson, Jill L.; Tkacz, Borys M. 1992. Pinyon Ips outbreak in pinyon juniper 

woodlands in northern Arizona: a case study. In: Ffolliott, P. F.; Gottfried, G. J.; 

Bennett, D. A.; Hernandez C., V. M.; Ortega-Rubio, A.; Hamre, R. H., tech. 

cords. Ecology and management of oak and associated woodlands: perspectives 

in the southwestern United States and northern Mexico; 1992 April 27-30; 

Sierra Vista, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-218. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment 

Station. 187-190.
80 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Abstract—Recent interest in adding old-growth reserves confl icts with a projected 

increase in the demand for forest commodities. However, managing for old-growthlike characteristics may permit timber production from stands designed to be similar 

to primeval forests. A silvicultural strategy based on presettlement forest conditions 

is being tested on 120 ac of mature loblolly (Pinus taeda) and shortleaf (Pinus echinata) pine on the Crossett Experimental Forest in Arkansas. Reference conditions 

from historical photographs, surveyor notes, old explorer journals, early research 

papers, and technical reports guided the prescription’s design. A combination of 

harvesting, prescribed burns, and competition control should gradually produce 

structure similar to pine-dominated presettlement forests. Timber yield and natural 

attributes will be monitored and compared to traditional silvicultural practices to 

develop fl exible prescriptions that can be modifi ed later, if appropriate.

Introduction

Old-growth forests have garnered considerable attention in public land 

management because they are often associated with higher levels of biodiversity, ecological complexity, aesthetics, and unique recreational opportunities. 

However, the desire for additional old-growth preserves confl icts with a 

projected increase in the demand for wood products. For instance, by 2040 

the need for softwood fi ber in the southeastern United States is forecast 

to increase more than 50 percent over current levels (Prestemon and Abt 

2002). This level of consumption does not favor new areas being made 

available for unmanaged old forests, especially when almost 90 percent of 

the timberland in the southeast is privately or industrially owned (Wear and 

Greis 2002).

Public land managers are under increasing pressure to reduce their 

commercial timber production and alter their harvesting methodologies 

(Murphy and others 1993). In part, this is a response to widespread displeasure with clearcutting and monoculture plantations and a perceived timber 

bias in public land management. It also refl ects a growing interest in matching anthropogenic disturbances with natural disturbance regimes (Aber and 

others 2000; Palik and others 2002; Seymour and others 2002). Furthermore, our value systems have shifted to include non-timber attributes like 

biodiversity, aesthetics, and water quality that may be compromised under 

intensive, short rotation monocultures.

We are just becoming aware of many of the complex patterns and 

processes involved in the formation and maintenance of old-growth (Aber 

and others 2000; Franklin and others 2002). Silviculture for old-growthlike characteristics permits harvesting in mature stands structured to better 

A Prescription for Old-Growth-Like 

Characteristics in Southern Pines

Don C. Bragg1

1

USDA Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station, Monticello, AR.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 81

resemble primeval forests. Note that artificially creating old-growth-like 

environments does not result in conditions identical to those from unaltered 

natural events. However, many old forest attributes can be encouraged in 

managed landscapes (Deal and others 2002; Guldin 1991; Morton and 

others 1991). For example, Lennartz and Lancia (1989) proposed the use 

of “creative” silviculture to enhance second-growth habitat for red-cockaded 

woodpeckers (Picoides borealis) by retaining larger trees and reducing 

midstory density.

A strategy for managing for old-growth-like conditions is being 

implemented on the Crossett Experimental Forest (CEF) in southern 

Arkansas. One hundred and twenty acres of mature loblolly (Pinus taeda) 

and shortleaf (Pinus echinata) pine will be transformed from an even-aged, 

relatively homogeneous stand (figure 1) into a multi-aged complex using a 

combination of group selection, competition control, and ecosystem management principles. This paper will outline the basic principles of a managing 

for old-growth-like upland pine forests, including the monitoring of project 

progress to determine the success of the effort.

Methods

Study Area

The study area is located in the Upper West Gulf Coastal Plain of southern Arkansas, on three 40 ac parcels on the CEF (figure 2). Compartments 

1, 2, and 12 are relatively level, with slopes less than 3 percent. The soils 

adjacent to the drainage are Arkabutla silt loams, midslopes (comprising 

most of the area) are Bude silt loams, and Providence silt loams cap the low 

ridgetops (Gill and others 1979). A small, ephemeral stream runs down the 

west side of the study area. The CEF receives about 54 inches of precipitation annually, with average winter and summer temperatures of 47o

F and 

80oF, respectively (Gill and others 1979).

Currently, Compartments 1, 2, and 12 are dominated by loblolly pine, 

with a lesser component of shortleaf pine and hardwoods (table 1, figure 

3). The woody understory consists primarily of hardwoods like sweetgum 

Figure 1—A perspective of 

contemporary forest conditions 

typical of Compartments 1, 2, 

and 12. Photo by D.C. Bragg in 

2003.
82 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Figure 2—Location of the study 

compartments and the Crossett 

Experimental Forest in Arkansas.

Table 1—Merchantable (DBH >3.5 inches) species composition of Compartments 2 and 12 only, sampled in the 

summer of 2000.

 Basal

Min. Mean Max. Live area 

 Species DBH DBH DBH trees (ft2

)

----------------- inches ------------------ --------- per acre ---------

loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) 3.9 15.2 28.5 40.49 57.69

shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) 4.4 17.5 26.1 11.34 20.80

water oak (Quercus nigra) 4.1 8.6 16.2 7.56 3.48

sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) 4.0 6.8 21.7 10.80 3.31

white oak (Quercus alba) 3.6 7.5 14.9 8.10 2.85

winged elm (Ulmus alata) 3.8 5.6 9.7 9.18 1.73

cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda) 4.3 6.7 8.7 2.97 0.76

red maple (Acer rubrum) 3.8 6.3 10.0 3.24 0.75

flowering dogwood (Cornus florida) 3.8 4.8 6.3 3.51 0.45

southern red oak (Quercus falcata) 5.8 7.9 13.6 1.08 0.43

blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica) 4.0 6.3 8.3 1.35 0.32

black cherry (Prunus serotina) 3.8 6.5 8.3 1.08 0.27

post oak (Quercus stellata) 4.4 5.5 6.8 0.81 0.14

green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 3.9 4.7 5.5 1.08 0.13

red mulberry (Morus rubra) 4.6 5.2 5.6 0.81 0.12

blackjack oak (Quercus marilandica) 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.27 0.12

sassafras (Sassafras albidum) 5.3 6.4 7.4 0.54 0.12

American holly (Ilex opaca) 3.8 4.8 6.7 0.81 0.11

black oak (Quercus velutina) 7.7 7.7 7.7 0.27 0.09

eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana) 6.4 6.4 6.4 0.27 0.06

mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa) 3.6 4.4 5.2 0.54 0.06

willow oak (Quercus phellos) 3.9 3.9 3.9 0.27 0.02

 TOTALS: 106.37 93.81
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 83

(Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum), and white oak 

(Quercus alba), with a large component of briars (for example, Rubus spp., 

Smilax spp.), vines (for example, Vitis spp., Toxicodendron radicans), and 

shrubs (for example, Callicarpa americana). There is virtually no pine in the 

understory and very little midcanopy except for some scattered hardwoods.

Reference Condition Acquisition

Reference conditions for presettlement pine forests in the Upper West 

Gulf Coastal Plain were developed from a number of historical sources, 

including photographs, surveyor notes, old explorer journals, and early 

research and technical reports. This work helped guide the old-growth-like 

prescription’s design and implementation by quantifying key attributes of 

stand structure and composition to use as silvicultural targets (table 2).

Table 2—Proposed reference targets for restoring old-growth-like upland pine stands on the Crossett 

Experimental Forest in southeastern Arkansas.

 Attribute Reference target Implementation strategy

Species composition 50 to 60 percent loblolly Preferentially cut

35 to 45 percent shortleaf loblolly and hardwoods

up to 10 percent hardwoods

Basal area 50 to 70 ft2

/ac Group selection and

periodic thinnings

Maximum tree DBH/age unlimited Avoid cutting trees 

>25 inches DBH

Number of big trees 5 to 15 pines Cut no pines

>30 inches/ac >30 inches DBH

Reserved timber volume 5000 to 10,000 Volume reserved solely

board feet/ac in “keepers”

Spatial pattern patchy Group selection with

reserves

Under/midstory open Fire and herbicide

Red heart 10 to 50 percent cull Old trees, fungal 

in retained trees inoculation(?)

Large woody debris 5 to 10 snags/ac No salvage, girdling, 

285 to 715 ft3

/ac hot fires

Figure 3—The 2000 inventory of 

Compartments 2 and 12, featuring 

hardwoods and pines by size class.
84 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Historical information used to define reference conditions was preferred 

to contemporary studies of old-growth pine remnants (for example, Cain 

and Shelton 1994; Fountain and Sweeney 1987; and Murphy and Nowacki 

1997) because of the impact of decades of fire exclusion, exotic species 

introduction, and other alterations to the original structural, compositional, 

and functional behavior of these reserves. For instance, evidence suggests 

that presettlement upland forests had a much greater proportion of shortleaf 

pine than modern examples (Bragg 2002). Other traits common to the pre-

settlement pine forests of southern Arkansas included open, relatively poorly 

stocked stands with an abundance of grasses and forbs and fewer woody 

stems and vines, substantially higher levels of old, very large, and frequently 

decadent canopy pines, and sporadic but locally considerable volumes of 

coarse woody debris (Bragg 2002, 2003).

Treatment Implementation

Using a combination of harvesting, competition control, and adaptive 

management, the study compartments will be gradually converted into a 

stand similar in composition, structure, and dynamics to the pine-dominated 

presettlement forests once common to the region. Adaptability is key to 

this silvicultural prescription: there is no absolute, immutable recipe for 

producing an old-growth-like forest. For instance, we believe that we must 

incorporate the ability to adjust, modify, or even redesign some aspects of its 

implementation if suggested by monitoring.

Flexibility...flexibility...flexibility. Adaptive management strategies based 

on effective monitoring and the response to unforeseen change will help 

achieve the desired prescription. Given the duration of this effort, it is inevi

-

table that unanticipated events (droughts, excessive rain, beetle outbreaks, 

windthrow, wildfire) will complicate the restoration. Such disturbances are 

not necessarily a problem unless the merchantable timber is completely lost. 

After all, presettlement forests were characterized by their large volume 

of dying and dead trees (biological legacies that contributed to ecosystem 

complexity). However, since a major objective of this prescription is to pro

-

duce some timber products, limited salvage or preemptive thinning to avoid 

catastrophic loss may be required. Delays in harvesting due to bad weather, 

unexpected slow growth, or weak timber markets are also inconvenient but 

not crippling.

In this region, an operable cut typically contains 1500 to 2000 board feet 

(Doyle log rule)/ac in sawtimber, with pulpwood usually supplementing 

the sawlog yield. If a typical stand grows 300 to 400 board feet per acre per 

year, this results in 5-year cutting cycles. Longer cutting cycles than tradi

-

tionally applied (for instance, 10-year versus 5-year) will probably be needed 

to provide the desired structural and compositional control. Prolonged 

cutting cycles are important because it may take longer to grow sapling- and 

pole-sized pine to sufficiently large size under these conditions, particularly 

when fewer large pines are available for harvesting. Extended harvest return 

intervals should also help avoid unnecessary logging damage, especially to 

the smallest merchantable size classes.

Anticipated Competition Control

Long treatment cycles should also allow most of the advanced pine 

regeneration to survive periodic controlled burns (Cain 1993). Prescribed 

fire will be an important component of this study for several reasons. First, 

it consumes the litter and duff and improves pine establishment. Second, 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 85

it provides some degree of competition control. As an example, efforts to 

control woody vines may especially benefit from the return of fire. Third, 

controlled burning encourages the return of native fire-dependent grasses, 

forbs, and shrubs that have largely disappeared under traditional forest management. Finally, the fire-related wounding and subsequent decay of large 

trees helps to reintroduce decadence absent in most managed stands (figure 

4). This is significant because punky, hollow, or dead trees provide critical 

habitat for cavity-dependent species.

However, there is only so much that can be achieved with controlled fire 

in the fragmented forests of southern Arkansas. Issues of smoke management, liability, and the ecological timing of the burns represent major 

challenges. In addition, excessive burning can drastically understock pine 

stands and introduce too much decay (Bruner 1930), reducing the potential 

of timber harvesting to support the overall restoration effort. Hence, some 

chemical competition control will almost certainly be needed to achieve 

management objectives. Hardwood and woody shrub rootstocks are often 

so well established that most controlled burns do little more than topkill. 

Given their ability to resprout, these competitors have a distinct edge over 

seed-origin pines. Experience has shown that an appropriate mixture and 

timing of herbicides and controlled burning can effectively reduce hardwood 

and brush competition (Cain 1993; Zedaker 2000).

Hardwood Management

As can be seen in figure 3, many small hardwoods are found in the study 

compartments. Hardwoods were a minor component of the presettlement 

pine forests of the region, usually constituting less than 25 percent of the 

stand (Bragg 2002; Chapman 1913; Reynolds 1980). The hardwood-filled 

drain in Compartments 2 and 12 will be treated as a riparian management 

zone, with very few of the hardwoods removed. Small hardwoods in the 

Figure 4—A “decadent” 54-inch DBH 

loblolly pine from Ashley County 

(circa 1937). If sound, this tree 

would have scaled 7,000 board feet 

(International rule), but note the 

prominent cankers and scars. Photo 

#350916 in CEF (USFS) archives.
86 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

upland forest zone are available for cutting, girdling, or spraying, but a 

handful of large oak will be retained to preserve some mast.

Monitoring

As mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, monitoring is an important 

component of any long-term strategy because it tells the manager if the 

treatment has been implemented as designed, and if not, what needs modification. Close supervision should also help alert the manager to growing 

pest or competition problems that may require unscheduled intermediate 

treatment(s). Furthermore, monitoring can facilitate the prediction of future 

conditions.

If overall structural or compositional targets are not consistently reached, 

either the targets or the thinning strategies must change to meet the desired 

objectives. However, we must manage for a historical range of a suite of 

acceptable stand features, not a narrowly defined and singular density or 

compositional target (Trombulak 1996). Irregularity and heterogeneity are 

key attributes of old-growth forests. For this reason, table 2 identifies ranges 

of a number of characteristics expected in old-growth stands. As an example, 

the spatial distribution of stems in the presettlement forests of southern 

Arkansas (figure 5) lacked the consistency of most managed forests (Bragg 

2002; Chapman 1912). Hence, some locations would match the “average” 

stocking range, while others are denser or more open.

Timber production and natural attributes will be compared to traditional 

alternatives (intensive timber yield and no harvest reserve) to help identify 

the economic trade-offs of managing for old-growth-like attributes. For 

example, it is expected that the relatively understocked, lightly cut oldgrowth-like prescription will produce noticeably less fiber. Other non-timber 

attributes will also be tracked to more fully evaluate the success of the 

system.

Figure 5—Example of a possible spatial pattern of the original pine stands of southern 

Arkansas circa 1910 (adapted from Bragg (2002) and Chapman (1912)). The dark areas 

represent individuals or small clusters of old, declining pine, the stippled area is large, 

vigorous pine, and the white areas are young timber.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 87

Anticipated Results

Compartments 2 and 12 have been marked using thinning from below to 

reduce stand basal area to approximately 65 to 70 ft2/ac. No trees greater 

than 21 inches in DBH were selected, and all shortleaf pine will be spared 

in this harvest. Compartment 1 was only recently added to this study, and 

since it was harvested about 3 years ago, it was not remarked for treatment. 

Structurally and compositionally, Compartment 1 differs little from 2 and 

12, although it will be a few cutting cycles before the compartments are 

fully integrated. The desired stand structure (encapsulated in figure 6) is 

the critical result, not the starting condition or developmental path of any 

given compartment. Using group selection and thinning from below, the 

first treatment cut (scheduled for 2008) will reduce average stand density to 

approximately 60 ft2/ac.

Figure 6—Temporal sequence showing the 

idealized developmental trajectory of 

the old-growth-like study compartments. 

Starting from a relatively even-aged, 

50-year-old stand, repeated harvests 

and natural mortality gradually open the 

stand, which by year 100 has numerous 

regenerating gaps, and contains a 

relatively small number of large “keeper” 

pines with multiple patches of varying 

age by year 150.
88 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Keepers, Groomers, Thinners, and Regeneration

Rather than following a predetermined and fixed rotation length (for 

example, 150 years in loblolly/shortleaf pine), certain individual trees 

(“keepers”) will be identified and permanently excluded from regular timber 

marking. This will allow them to reach their biological lifespan, perish of 

natural causes, and eventually fall to the earth and decompose (unless specifi-

cally identified as an unacceptable hazard). Keepers will exceed 30 inches 

DBH and may range from poorly formed culls to prime crop trees. Keepers 

may be found individually or in clumps, but rarely in patches larger than a 

fraction of an acre. The residual volume held in keepers will eventually range 

from 5000 to 10000 board feet (Doyle)/ac, comparable to presettlement 

forests (Bragg 2002) (a single 30 inch DBH pine contributes about 5 ft

2

 of 

basal area and scales approximately 1400 board feet).

Pines from 20 to 30 inches DBH will be treated as “groomers” in which 

the most “eligible” individuals are destined for a future as keepers. Groom

-

ers will be continually evaluated to ensure they contribute to long-term 

stand goals. Groomers that show promise as long-term keepers will be 

preferentially retained, while others will be harvested as appropriate. Most 

large groomers that perish will also be left to supplement the large dead 

wood pool.

The merchantable-sized pines less than 20 inches DBH are called “thin

-

ners.” Thinners may range from saplings barely making pulpwood (3.6 

inches DBH) to prime sawtimber 17 to 20 inches DBH During the years a 

pine grows from saplings to sawlogs, good forestry practices should be en

-

couraged. Hence, cut the worst to favor the best. Remove the poles bent by 

glaze accumulation or afflicted with fusiform rust (Cronartium fusiforme). 

Aggressively thin the maturing groups to encourage rapid growth, but 

protect the residual stand from unnecessary logging damage by encouraging 

the loggers to leave tops and defective logs in the woods.

Regeneration will be achieved via variable-sized group selection openings. 

These gaps should range from 0.25 to 1 ac, often with keepers scattered 

amongst them. Since loblolly and shortleaf pine are shade intolerant species, 

most gaps will cover at least 0.5 ac. Once established, it is critical that the re

-

generation be protected to ensure that the gap maintains adequate stocking.

Treatment Timeframe

The objective of this effort is to gradually convert a relatively even-aged, 

mature forest into a patchy mixture of immature, mature, and old timber 

similar to the presettlement upland pine forests of southeastern Arkansas 

(figure 7). Thinnings may vary depending on access, markets, and growth. 

Competition control treatments will be scheduled to ensure that pine regen

-

eration benefits the most from overstory and understory release. However, 

an extended period between seedbed preparation and controlled burns is 

needed so that enough pine saplings get large enough to survive the fire. 

Chapman (1952) recommended an 8- to 10-year burn interval for loblolly 

pine-dominated ecosystems.

Figure 8 provides a framework for treatment applications, including the 

long-term application of group selection with reserves. Since one of the 

goals of this prescription is to maintain an average stand basal area of 50 to 

70 ft

2

/ac, this means that locally some areas will average less than 30 ft

2

/ac, 

while others will exceed 90 ft

2

/ac. If a well-stocked stand on the CEF adds 

3 ft

2

/ac of basal area annually (Baker and others 1996), then it is capable of 

growing 30 ft

2

/ac in 10 years. This longer cutting cycle should allow for low 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 89

Figure 8—A possible schedule of treatment 

actions under regulated management for oldgrowth-like stand characteristics in loblolly 

and shortleaf pine-dominated stands in 

southern Arkansas.

Figure 7—An image of 

presettlement pine forest stand 

structure in southern Arkansas. 

Photo by Russ Reynolds, circa 

1935.
90 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

density areas to recover to the desired level. The denser areas will be more 

heavily cut when conditions are suitable. Mid-cycle thinnings may occur if an 

operational harvest volume is available.

Conclusions

A prescription that focuses on old-growth-like forests requires a 

dedicated, flexible, and long-term commitment to the treatment. Unlike 

many other timber operations, the desired outcome of this strategy may not 

become apparent for many years. Close monitoring of key stand attributes 

like species composition or big tree numbers is vital to help adjust treatments 

over time, with the sustainable achievement of structural and composition 

complexity (figure 6) being the true measure of success.

In principle, managing for old-growth-like characteristics appears to be a 

workable compromise between sustainable timber yield and functional old 

forests. This type of silviculture may seem inefficient, but since the primary 

objective is old-growth-like structure rather than commodity production, some irregularity is desirable. The effort involved in this project, the 

extension of the rotation period, and the reduction in timber yield are not 

likely to make this strategy widespread on the Gulf Coastal Plain, but when 

implemented, many other non-timber benefits should be realized.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank O.H. “Doogie” Darling, Jim Guldin, 

Ernest Lovett, Mike Shelton, Bruce Walsh, and many others for making 

this research possible. Special thanks go to the Crossett Public Library for 

access to their historical archives and photographs. Robert Deal and Michael 

Shelton provided reviews of an earlier draft of this paper.

References

Aber, J.; Christensen, N.; Fernandez, I.; [and others]. 2000. Applying ecological 

principles to management of the U.S. National Forests. Issues in Ecology, volume 

6. Washington, D.C.: Ecological Society of America. 19 p.

Baker, J. B.; Cain, M. D.; Guldin, J. M.; Murphy, P. A.; Shelton, M. G. 1996. 

Uneven-aged silviculture for the loblolly and shortleaf pine forest cover types. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-118. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 65 p.

Bragg, D. C. 2002. Reference conditions for old-growth pine forests in the Upper 

West Gulf Coastal Plain. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society. 129: 261-288.

Bragg, D. C. 2003. Natural presettlement features of the Ashley County, Arkansas 

area. American Midland Naturalist. 149: 1-20.

Bruner, E. M. 1930. Forestry and forest fires in Arkansas. Agricultural Extension 

Circular 281. Fayetteville, AR: University of Arkansas.

Cain, M. D. 1993. A 10-year evaluation of prescribed winter burns in uneven-aged 

stands of Pinus taeda L. and P. echinata Mill.: woody understorey vegetation 

response. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 3: 13-20.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 91

Cain, M. D.; Shelton, M. G. 1994. Indigenous vegetation in a southern Arkansas 

pine-hardwood forest after a half century without catastrophic disturbances. 

Natural Areas Journal. 14: 165-174.

Chapman, H. H. 1912. A method of investigating yields per acre in many-aged 

stands. Forestry Quarterly. 10: 458-469.

Chapman, H. H. 1913. Prolonging the cut of southern pine. I. Possibilities of a 

second cut. Yale University Forestry School Bulletin. 2: 1-22.

Chapman, H. H. 1952. The place of fire in the ecology of pines. Bartonia. 26: 39-

44.

Deal, R. L.; Tappeiner, J. C.; Hennon, P. E. 2002. Developing silvicultural systems 

based on partial cutting in western hemlock-Sitka spruce stands of southeast 

Alaska. Forestry. 75: 425-431.

Fountain, M. S.; Sweeney, J. M. 1987. Ecological assessment of the Lake Winona 

Research Natural Area. Res. Pap. SO-235. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 14 p.

Franklin, J. F; Spies, T. A.; Van Pelt, R; [and others]. 2002. Disturbances and 

structural development of natural forests with silvicultural implications, using 

Douglas-fir forests as an example. Forest Ecology and Management. 155: 399-

423.

Gill, H. V.; Avery, D. C.; Larance, F. C.; Fultz, C. L. 1979. Soil survey of 

Ashley County, Arkansas. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation 

Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; Arkansas Agricultural 

Experiment Station. 92 p.

Guldin, J. M. 1991. Silvicultural practices applied to old-growth stand management. 

In: H enderson, D.; Hedrick, L. D., eds. Restoration of old growth forests in 

the Interior Highlands of Arkansas and Oklahoma. Morrilton, AR: Winrock 

International Institute for Agricultural Development and Ouachita National 

Forest. 171-190.

Lennartz, M. R.; Lancia, R. A. 1989. Old-growth wildlife in second-growth forests: 

opportunities for creative silviculture. Proceedings of the National Silvicultural 

Workshop: silviculture for all resources. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Timber Management. 74-103

Morton, D.; [and others]. 1991. Maintaining old growth in northern hardwood 

ecosystems. In: Proceedings of the 1991 Society of American Foresters 

Convention. Bethesda, MD: Society of American Foresters. 527-528.

Murphy, P. A.; Nowacki, G. J. 1997. An old-growth definition for xeric pine and 

pine-oak woodlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-7. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 7 p.

Murphy, P. A.; Shelton, M. G.; Graney, D. L. 1993. Group selection—problems 

and possibilities for the more shade-intolerant species. In: Gillespie, A. R.; Parker, 

G. R.; Pope, P. E.; Rink, G., eds. Proceedings, 9th central hardwood forest 

conference; 1993 March 8-10; West Lafayette, IN. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-161. St. 

Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest 

Experiment Station. 229-247.

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

disturbance to sustain biodiversity in the longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) 

ecosystem: balancing complexity and implementation. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 155: 347-356.

Prestemon, J. P.; Abt, R. C. 2002. Timber products supply and demand. In: Wear, 

D. N.; Greis, J. G., eds. Southern Forest Resource Assessment. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. SRS-53. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station. 299-325.

Reynolds, R. R. 1980. The Crossett story: the beginning of forestry in southern 

Arkansas and northern Louisiana. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-32. New Orleans, LA: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment 

Station. 40 p.
92 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Seymour, R. S.; White, A. S.; deMaynadier, P. G. 2002. Natural disturbance regimes 

in northeastern North America—evaluating silvicultural systems using natural 

scales and frequencies. Forest Ecology and Management. 155: 357-367.

Trombulak, S. C. 1996. The restoration of old-growth: why and how. In: Davis, 

M. B., ed. Eastern old-growth forests: prospects for rediscovery and recovery. 

Washington, D.C.: Island Press. 305-320.

Wear, D. N.; Greis, J. G. 2002. Southern forest resource assessment. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. SRS-53. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station. 635 p.

Zedaker, S. M. 2000. Fire “and” herbicides? Fire “or” herbicides? What are the 

issues? In: Moser, W. K.; Moser, C. F., eds. Fire and forest ecology: innovative 

silviculture and vegetation management. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference 

Proceedings, No. 21. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station. 127-130.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 93

Abstract—In 2000, the Jasper fire in the Black Hills, SD, created a mosaic of burned 

and unburned patches of different sizes within the contiguous ponderosa pine forest. 

To study the spatial regeneration of ponderosa pine seedlings and the ecological gradients existing between burned and unburned areas two years after fire, we used a 

transect approach. We demonstrated that seedling establishment was prolifi c within 

the peripheral part of the burned areas due to the presence of seed sources close by, 

the seedbed conditions, and the relatively low competitive pressure. This transect 

study provides information to consider when managing forests after fire.

Introduction

Regeneration of Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine) has been previously 

described as prolifi c in the Black Hills of Wyoming and South Dakota (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002) compared to the common pattern encountered in 

the Rocky Mountain and Southwest areas. This prolifi c regeneration is due 

to local climate conditions and more particularly to abundant precipitation 

occurring during spring and early summer. However, the unprecedented 

size and severity of the fi re that occurred in 2000 in the Black Hills (Jasper 

fi re) may affect the future establishment of ponderosa pine seedlings in this 

area. Ponderosa pine has long been considered a species very well adapted 

to fi re (Vlamis and others 1955; Weaver 1967, 1974) because of its high 

tolerance to heat and high regeneration abilities after fi re. Dispersal distance 

of ponderosa pine seeds is considered to extend to approximately 75 m to 

100 m from the seed trees (Barrett 1966), with a minor infl uence of secondary dispersion factors on dispersal distance (Vander Wall 1997). Oliver 

and Ryker (1990) reported 8 percent seedfall at 120 m from seed source 

in central Oregon. Seed dispersal distance is not the only factor affecting 

ponderosa pine seedling distribution. Post-fi re environmental conditions 

may also affect seedling establishment. Ponderosa pine has propensity for 

developing seedlings on mineral soil seedbeds, such as after severe fi re (Harrington and Kelsey 1979). The seedlings benefi t from the ash-covered soils, 

whereas unburned compacted litter would allow little moisture for seedling 

survival (Biswell 1973, Harrington and Kelsey 1979). The reduction of litter 

by fi re favors ponderosa pine seedlings by reducing shade and mechanical 

obstructions to seedling emergence (Schultz and Biswell 1959). Finally, 

water and nutrient supply can limit the establishment of ponderosa pine after 

fi re, in conjunction with the competition pressure that herbaceous species 

can exert on seedlings (Elliott and White 1987, Larson and Shubert 1969). 

Consequently, areas subject to high herbaceous recovery after the Jasper fi re 

may obstruct ponderosa pine seedling establishment.

Spatial Distribution of Ponderosa Pine 

Seedlings Along Environmental Gradients 

Within Burned Areas in the Black Hills, 

South Dakota

V.H. Bonnet1, A.W. Schoettle2, and W.D. Shepperd2

1 MatCom, Fort Collins, CO.

2 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.
94 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

We set out to determine the favorable and unfavorable environmental 

conditions for seedling establishment within the Jasper fire. We estimated 

the spatial distribution of seedlings by using transects running from un

-

burned areas to the center of burned areas. This paper discusses the benefits 

of using a transect-based approach for defining areas where rehabilitation 

operations can be useful and other areas where they could threaten seedling 

regeneration.

Study Area

The study area is located in the south-central Black Hills (South Dakota) 

on the western section of the limestone plateau on the Black Hills National 

Forest. The elevation varies from 1800 m to 2200 m. The southern Black 

Hills is characterized by a continental climate, with average annual precipita

-

tion around 400 mm (Driscoll and others 2000), mostly occurring from 

April to July. Mean annual temperature is around 9  ̊C, with a mean annual 

high of 17.2  ̊C and mean annual low of 2.1  ̊C (Shepperd and Battaglia 

2002). The vegetation is mainly ponderosa pine forests, with Populus 

tremuloides (aspen), Quercus macrocarpa (bur oak), and Picea glauca (white 

spruce) groves. Pine regeneration in this area, under natural conditions or 

silvicultural treatments, is among the most successful in the western United 

States (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002) and most of the germination occurs 

in early summer, during the months of May and June when precipitation is 

abundant and temperature starts increasing. The Jasper fire burned 33,000 

ha of ponderosa pine forests in August and September 2000 in the Black 

Hills of South Dakota, and it was the largest fire recorded in the history of 

the Black Hills. It created a variety of competitive environments. Our study 

took place within this area two years after the fire, from May to October 

2002.

Methodology

We established 20 transects within 10 burned patches of different sizes 

(two transects per patch). To allow a regular and dense sampling pressure, 

we prioritized the utilization of a high number of small plots. To enhance 

the effects of distance on seedling establishment and environmental 

variables, we chose rectangular plots having their longest side (6 m) perpen

-

dicular to the line of the transect and the smallest side (2 m) parallel to the 

transect. The distance between each plot was chosen to be twice the width 

of the plots to favor independence between plots. Transects began 36 m 

within the unburned areas (-36 m) and extended to the center of the burned 

areas (distance depending on the size of the burned patch). The unburned 

edge corresponded to 0 m. The shortest transect was 66 m long (from 

-36 m to +30 m) and the longest was 288 m (-36 m to +252 m).

Within the plots, we counted the new 2002 germinated ponderosa pine 

seedlings. We recorded the ground and vegetation conditions, the floristic 

richness, the topographic conditions, and other tree characteristics, at 

2 x 6 m scale (total of 24 variables). The 24 variables measured in each 

2 x 6 m plot are summarized in table 1 and all the variables are described 

thereafter.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 95

Ground Conditions Per Plot

1. Within the 2 x 6 m plots, ground cover appearance was measured using 

estimated percentages of: unburned ground (UGR); unburned needle 

litter (ULUG); scorched needle litter on burned ground (ULBG); burned 

ground (BGR); burned needle litter (BLi); Cryptogam, i.e., bryophytes 

in this study (Cry); rock (RCK); gravel (GRV); woody debris (WDB); 

and the total cover of understory vegetation (E). The total cover of these 

variables equaled 100 percent of the ground cover seen from above and 

excluding the overstory canopy.

2. Vegetation conditions per plot: The percent cover and burn status of 

vegetation per stratum (0-10 cm high = stratum E; 10-50 cm high = 

stratum D; 50-200 cm high = stratum C; burned shrubs 50-200 cm high 

= stratum BSH; “unburned” trees <10 m = stratum UTRB; “burned” 

trees <10 m = BTRB; “unburned” trees >10 m = UTRA; “burned” trees 

>10 m = BTRA) and understory + overstory vegetation (TOTC) on the 

ground were also recorded. The “burned” or “unburned” status of the 

trees was established in relation to the percentage of the needle canopy 

burned (>50 percent / <50 percent). The total cover of these different 

strata may be greater than 100 percent.

3. Topography: Slope (SLP) and aspect (ASP) were recorded for each plot.

Table 1—Environmental variables taken into account to explain seedling distribution.

BGR % cover burned ground

BL % cover burned litter

BSH % cover burned shrubs

CRY % cover mosses + lichens

Ground GRV % cover gravel

covers RCK % cover rocks

UGR % cover unburned ground

SL % cover scorched litter on burned ground

UL % cover unburned litter on unburned ground

VEG % cover understory vegetation

WDB % cover woody debris

Topography ASP Aspect

SLP Slope

BTRA % cover dead trees <10 m

BTRB % cover dead trees >10 m

UTRA % cover alive trees <10 m

Vegetation UTRB % cover alive trees >10 m

covers C % cover shrubs

D % cover stratum 0.1 - 0.5 m

E % cover stratum <0.1 m

TOTC % cover whole vegetation

MeanDm Mean tree DBH

MeanHg Mean tree height

Other BasArea Basal area

variables Moist Soil moisture

Temp Soil temperature

Richn Floristic richness

Tree # Tree density
96 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

4. Other variables per plot: The number of trees (>3 m tall and with 

DBH >7 cm) (Tree#) was counted and their diameter and height were 

measured and means were calculated for each plot. The floristic richness, 

defined as the number of species in each plot (Richn), was measured for 

information about plant diversity.

Statistical Analyses

The distribution of the ponderosa pine seedlings along the transects was 

analyzed using non-linear regressions. Relationships were explored between 

average seedling density in June 2002 and distance from the unburned areas. 

Nineteen out of 20 transects were used for the analyses, from -36 m up to 150 

m; plots located farther than 150 m were used only as observations due to low 

sample size. One transect was not used for analysis because of the high number 

of seedlings in some of the plots (up to 115 seedlings per plot at -12 m), cor-

responding to 55 times the average number of seedlings in any other plot.

To test the influence of environmental variables on seedling emergence in 

June, a PLS (Partial Least Squares) regression was performed between the 

28 environmental variables, used as explanatory variables (table 1), and the 

number of seedlings per plot used as the dependent variable. This analysis 

was conducted on the 406 individual plots located along the 19 transects at 

up to 150 m from the edge. The PLS provides for each explanatory variable 

a regression coefficient, either negative or positive, with the dependent vari

-

able, and thus a hierarchy of the influence of the explanatory variables on the 

dependent variable.

The regressions were created using SPSS (SPSS Inc., Chicago IL) and 

Statistica (Statsoft France 1997); the plots within transects were examined 

using SAS Proc Mixed (SAS Institute Inc., Cary NC) and found to be rela

-

tively uncorrelated (serial 

γ = 0.19). The PLS were performed using ADE-4 

(Thioulouse and others 1997).

Results

Average seedling density in June across the 19 transects varied with the 

distance from the edge (figure 1). This transect approach allowed us to 

determine different distances from the unburned areas where a change 

occurred in the distribution of the seedlings: (1) from -36 to -6 m, the 

distribution was regular and the average seedling density was about 350 

seedlings per ha; (2) from 0 to 24 m, the seedling density increased to an 

average of 660 seedlings per ha and reached up to 1125 seedlings per ha at 

12 m; (3) from 30 to 60 m, the seedling density decreased drastically with 

an average density of 110 seedlings per ha; and (4) after 60 m from the un

-

burned areas, the seedling density averaged 40 seedlings per ha. In addition, 

some seedlings were encountered at up to 180 m from the unburned areas.

To explain the irregular distribution of the seedling density, the quantifi

-

able environmental conditions were studied as explanatory variables of the 

number of seedling per hectare. The PLS regression performed between the 

28 variables and the seedling densities per ha (figure 2) demonstrated that 

the seedling densities were explained by one combination of the different 

variables (first component significant p = 0.04) and were positively 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 97

Figure1—Ponderosa pine seedling 

densities per distance classes: UNB = 

-36 m to -6 m; EDGE = 0 m to 24 m; 

BURN1 = 30 m to 60 m; BURN 2 = 

66 m to 150 m.

Seedling density related to the distance from unburned areas

 Mean 

 ±0.95*SE UNB EDGE BURN1 BURN2

Distance classes

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Seedling density (seedling/ha)

-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Richn

E

RCK

GRV

BGR

SLP

MeanHg

MeanDm

Tree #

BTRA

ULUG

WDB

UGR

C

UTRB

BTRB

BSH

BLI

D

TOTC

ASP

CRY

ULBG

UTRA

Figure 2—Graphic representation of the 

regression coefficients of environmental 

variables on seedling density; Partial 

Least Squares regression, 1st component. 

UTRA: Unburned trees <10 m; 

ULBG: Scorched litter cover; Cry: 

Cryptogamous cover; ASP: Aspect; 

TOTC: Total understory cover; D: Small 

unburned shrubs; BLi: Burned litter; 

BSH: Burned shrubs; BTRB: Burned 

trees >10 m; UTRB: Unburned trees 

>10 m; C: High unburned shrubs; UGR: 

Unburned ground; WDB: Woody debri 

cover; ULUG: Unburned litter; BTRA: 

Burned trees <10 m; Tree#: Tree number; 

Mean Dm: Mean tree diameter; Mean 

Hg: Mean tree height; SLP: Slope; BGR: 

Burned ground; GRV: Gravel cover; 

RCK: rock cover; E: Herbaceous cover; 

Richness: Floristic richness.
98 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

correlated to the abundance of live trees >10 m high (seed sources) and to 

the abundance of scorched litter on top of burned ground, and negatively 

correlated to the high floristic richness and to high covers of vegetation <10 

cm high (indicating high competition pressure). Figure 2 shows the regres

-

sion coefficient of each variable with the seedling density.

Discussion

The results of our study show that seedlings regenerated very well close to 

the edge between burned and unburned areas. Seedling establishment was 

explained by the presence of seed sources close by and by the burned soil 

conditions characteristic of moderately burned areas where scorched needles 

are still present in the trees after the fire. Seedlings also established better in 

areas where the competitive pressure from other species was lowest. Burned 

ground alone didn’t appear to be a favorable environment for seedling 

establishment, whereas scorched litter on top of burned soil was one of the 

factors explaining seedling distribution. The area along the edge between 

the burned and unburned areas and extending around 30 m into the burned 

area constitutes the best condition, because of the short distance of seed 

dispersal, favorable seedbed conditions, presence of scorched trees, and 

lower competition pressure. It is possible that the presence of scorched trees 

also provided shade to the seedlings, which are moderately shade tolerant.

Thanks to the quantification of environmental variables along the tran

-

sects, we can explain the spatial distribution of the seedlings: (1) from -36 

to -6 m, seed sources are abundant but soil conditions are not optimal and 

competition pressure is high; (2) from 0 to 24 m, the seed sources are close 

enough to provide seeds, canopy and soil conditions are optimal, and com

-

petition pressure is lowered; (3) from 30 to 60 m, foreseeable diminution of 

seed arrival increased by the unfavorable seedbed conditions; (4) 66 m and 

farther, the seed dispersal is probably responsible for the decrease in seedling 

establishment compared to the area included between 30 and 60 m from the 

edge, the other conditions staying pretty similar between those two areas.

This study allowed us to give a spatial dimension to the regeneration suc

-

cess of ponderosa pine after fire in the Black Hills. According to our results, 

areas located farther than 30 m from the unburned areas, even if they still 

receive good quantity of seeds from the seed sources, should constitute an 

issue for seedling regeneration. This means that we can expect slower natural 

forest recovery in burned patches larger than 60 m of diameter and that 

artificial regeneration may be needed in those areas. Seedling establishment 

in the area included between the edge and 30 m should be very good and 

no salvage operations are necessary to favor regeneration in such areas or in 

small burned patches in order to preserve the re-establishment of ponderosa 

pine in burned areas.

Figures 3 a,b,c show the distribution of this area of good seedling estab

-

lishment within three different burned patches (small patch, large patch, 

large patch after salvage). The small patch has a high percentage of good 

conditions for regeneration. The large patch without salvage has a small 

percentage of good conditions for regeneration. Using the same definition 

of good conditions (area located close to the edge, close to seed sources, 

with abundant scorched litter on top of burned ground and lower floristic 

richness and cover), the large patch after salvage does not present good con

-

ditions for regeneration, because the scorched trees have been cut down and 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 99

Figure 3c—Large burned patch 

after salvage and representation 

of burned, unburned, and edge 

conditions.

Figure 3a—Small burned patch 

and representation of burned, 

unburned, and edge conditions.

Figure 3b—Large burned patch 

and representation of burned, 

unburned, and edge conditions.
100 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

taken away. The preservation of a strip of scorched trees providing good soil 

conditions and moderate shade for seedlings at the beginning of the burned 

area would have preserved those good seedling establishment conditions.

Most of the previous post-fire vegetation assessments aimed to look at the 

influence of one component of the fire regime on plant regeneration. Fire 

intensity, fire frequency, and fire season have often been the main subjects 

of interest (Bond and van Wilgen 1996). However, some authors are now 

interested in showing the effects of spatial characteristics of the disturbance 

on post-fire regeneration (Turner and others 1997, Bonnet and others 

2002). The effect of the size of the burned patch on ecological gradients 

can be assessed by the use of transects (Whittaker 1960). The originality of 

our study was to use a transect approach in order to quantify and explain 

the regeneration as a function of the distance from the edge. This approach 

used the multiple components of the post-fire environment to explain the 

spatial patterns of the regeneration. It does not assume a priori the role 

of fire severity but instead decomposes the environmental conditions into 

basic components and quantifies the role of each of them to explain the 

regeneration patterns. The approach we used in this paper to determine the 

conditions of regeneration for ponderosa pine and their spatial distribution 

within burned areas can provide information for foresters in making decisions related to post-fire logging.

References

Barrett, J. W. 1966. A record of ponderosa pine seed flight. Res. Note PNW-38. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Forest and Range Experiment Station.

Biswell, H. H. 1973. Fire ecology in ponderosa pine-grassland. In: Proc. Tall 

Timbers Fire Ecol. Conf. n°12; 1972 June 8-9; Lubbock, TX: Edited by Tall 

Timbers Research Station. Tallahassee, FL. 69-96.

Bond, W. J.; van Wilgen, B. W. 1996. Fire and plants. London: Chapman & Hall. 

88-122.

Bonnet, V. H.; Schoettle, A. W.; Shepperd, W. D. 2004 (submitted). Post-fire 

environmental conditions influence the spatial pattern of regeneration for Pinus 

ponderosa Dougl. ex Laws.

Bonnet, V.; Dutoit, T.; Tatoni, T. 2002. Spatial gradients of vegetation and soil in 

the calcareous Provence (France). In: Fire and Biological Processes. Trabaud L. 

& Prodon R., eds. Leiden: Backhuys Publishers. 303-314.

Driscoll, D. G.; Hamade, G. R.; Kenner, S. J. 2000. Summary of precipitation data 

for the Black Hills are of South Dakota, water years 1931-1998. USGS. Open file 

report 00-329.

Elliott, K. J.; White, A. S. 1987. Competitive effects of various grasses and forbs on 

Ponderosa pine seedlings. Forest Science. 33: 356-366.

Harrington, M. G.; Kelsey, R. G. 1979. Influence of some environmental factors on 

initial establishment and growth of ponderosa pine seedlings. Res. Pap. INT-230. 

Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain 

Forest and Range Experiment Station. 26 p.

Larson, M. M.; Shubert, G. H. 1969. Root competition between ponderosa pine 

seedlings and grass. Res. Pap. RM-54. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment 

Station.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 101

Oliver, W. W.; Ryker, R. A. 1990. Ponderosa pine. In: Burns, R. M.; Honkala, 

B. H.; tech. coords. Silvic of North America: 1. Conifers. Agric. Handb. 654. 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 413-424.

Shepperd, W. D.; Battaglia, M. A. 2002. Ecology, silviculture, and management 

of Black Hills ponderosa pine. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-97. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 112 p.

Turner, M. G.; Romme, W. H.; Gardner, R. H.; Hargrove, W. W. 1997. Effects of 

fire size and pattern on early succession in Yellowstone National Park. Ecological 

Monographs. 67: 411-433.

Vander Wall, S. B.; Joyner, J. W. 1997. Secondary dispersal by the wind of winged 

pine seeds across the ground surface. American Midland Naturalist. 139: 365-

373.

Vlamis, J.; Biswell, H. H.; Schultz, A. M. 1955. Effects of prescribed burning on 

soil fertility in second growth ponderosa pine. Journal of Forestry. 53: 905-909.

Weaver, H. 1967. Fire and its relationship to ponderosa pine. In: Proc. Tall Timbers 

Fire Ecol. Conf. n°7. Thallahassee, FL. Edited by Tall Timbers Research Station. 

Thallahassee, FL. 127-149.

Weaver, H. 1974. Effects of fire on temperate forests: Western United States. In: 

Fire and ecosystems. Kozlowski, T. T., ed. New York: Academic Press. 279-317.

Whittaker, R. H. 1960. Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and 

California. Ecological Monographs. 30: 279-338.
102 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Abstract—Effi ciency of harvest, overstory regrowth, and regeneration establishment 

are compared among 12 even- and uneven-aged regeneration cuttings installed 

in 1984 in subalpine Engelmann spruce and lodgepole pine forests on the Fraser 

Experimental Forest in central Colorado. Individual tree selection and overstory 

removal prescriptions were much less effi cient to log than two- or three-step shelterwood cuts, clearcuts, or group selection cuts. Considerable overstory growth has 

occurred in all treatments, but most noticeably in the spruce-fi r shelterwood and 

lodgepole pine uneven-aged treatments. Abundant regeneration was present in all 

treatments, but subalpine fi r dominated in partial harvest treatments, illustrating the 

need for precommercial thinning in subalpine forests.

Background

The complexities of finding ways to manage subalpine forests to satisfy 

the variety of challenging resource issues in special places requires a full suite 

of silviculture tools and techniques. A study was established on the Fraser 

Experimental Forest in 1983 to provide on-the-ground examples of all 

even- and uneven-aged cutting methods applicable to spruce-fi r (Engelmann 

spruce [Picea engelmanii] and subalpine fir [Abies lasiocarpa]) and lodgepole 

pine (Pinus contorta ) forests in the central Rocky Mountains. It also served 

as a case study to compare the relative effi ciency of harvesting these silviculture prescriptions under controlled conditions and continues to provide 

valuable information on subsequent tree survival, growth, and regeneration.

Twelve plots were established in mature spruce-fi r and lodgepole pine 

stands (six plots in each forest type) on the Fraser Experimental Forest in 

Central Colorado. All plots were located on slopes less than 15 percent that 

adjoined existing roads, and all but one were one acre in size (because of existing stand structure, the lodgepole pine group selection plot was 4 acres in 

size). Silvicultural prescriptions based on recommended practice (Alexander 

1987, Shepperd and Alexander 1983) were developed for each plot based 

on existing stand conditions and included both even-aged and uneven-aged 

management goals. Pre-harvest stand structure varied from plot to plot and 

was strongly infl uenced by settlement-era logging that occurred in the early 

20th century. Overstory trees left after the initial harvests were generally from 

12 to 20+ inches DBH and from 120-300+ years of age prior to this study. 

Some plots were relatively undisturbed by the earlier harvests and others 

contained understories of smaller trees that had been initiated by the earlier 

harvests.

The Cutting Methods Demonstration 

Study at Fraser Experimental Forest

Wayne D. Shepperd1, Lance A. Asherin1, Stephen A. Mata1, 

and Douglas L. McClain1

1 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 103

Treatments

Even-aged treatments were clearcutting (CC), the first entry of a two- and 

three-step shelterwood (SW2 and SW3), and overstory removal (OR). The 

latter treatment consisted of the removal of a mature overstory growing 

over a fully stocked sapling and pole-sized understory. Uneven-aged harvests 

were individual tree and group selection. Each treatment was duplicated in 

spruce-fir and lodgepole pine forest types. The BDQ method (Alexander and 

Edminster 1977) was used to regulate stocking in the uneven-aged prescriptions. A Q factor (the ratio of stem/acre in one DBH class to that of the next 

smaller class) of 1.3 (using 1-inch DBH classes) was used in spruce-fir with 

DBH classes ranging from 4 to 24 inches, the maximum retained diameter. 

Residual basal area targets after cutting were 80 ft2/acre in the uneven-aged 

treatments. The same Q factor BDQ prescription was chosen for the unevenaged lodgepole pine treatments, except the upper DBH limit was 18 inches. 

These uneven-aged configurations were selected because they (1) closely 

matched the distribution of growing stock on the sites, (2) removed sufficient 

growing stock to expect new regeneration, and (3) allowed the residual forest 

to remain at low risk to windthrow.

All areas were logged during one season by the same contract logger using 

chainsaw felling and bucking and a rubber tired cable skidder to remove and 

deck logs. The logger was free to log the plots as he saw fit but had to remove 

all marked stems, use designated skid trails, and not damage residual stems. 

Researchers observed all logging and kept detailed notes on the amount of 

time spent in felling, skidding, decking, and cleanup of each harvest unit. 

Every log was scaled and the number of pieces removed in each skidder turn 

was recorded.

Logging efficiencies for each one-acre harvest treatment unit were 

estimated by calculating the cubic feet of wood removed divided by the total 

hours of effort required by all members of the logging crew to complete the 

unit, resulting in a person-hour/ft3 production rate. Data for the four-acre 

lodgepole pine group selection unit were adjusted to a per-acre basis.

Results

Post-Harvest

Specific pre- and post-treatment stocking data are listed in table 1. The 

seed cuts removed 60 percent and 65 percent of the pretreatment growing stock from the spruce-fir and lodgepole two-step shelterwood plots, 

respectively. The preparatory three-step shelterwood cuts removed 40 percent 

and 30 percent of the stocking from the spruce-fir and lodgepole pine plots, 

respectively. All of the growing stock above 3.5 inches DBH was removed 

from the overstory removal and clearcut treatments. The individual tree and 

group selection treatments removed 28 to 55 percent of the pretreatment 

growing stock distributed as closely as possible to the target diameter class 

stocking curves. All visible pre-existing seedlings and saplings were removed 

from shelterwood and clearcut treatments to facilitate observation of the 

regeneration response to these treatments. Some windthrow occurred in 

both the spruce and lodgepole shelterwood treatments, as might be expected 

(Alexander 1987, Shepperd and Alexander 1983).
104 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Efficiency of Harvest

Logging activities are presented on a person-hour and cubic volume 

basis in table 2. Harvest efficiency expressed in terms of person-hours/ft3 is 

compared by prescription and species in figure 1. Production rates did not 

vary substantially, except that individual tree selection and overstory removal 

prescriptions were much less efficient to log, due to the necessity of avoiding 

existing seedlings and saplings in these treatments. Pieces of all sizes were 

removed from all plots (table 2), reflecting the irregular structure of the preexisting forest. However, the larger piece sizes in group selection treatments 

was a consequence of harvesting predominately mature groups of trees in 

those stands.

Conditions in 2003

Nineteen years after the 1984 harvests, all of the 12 treatment plots are 

fully stocked and remain in healthy condition. Considerable overstory basal 

area growth has occurred in group and individual-tree selection treatments, 

but windthrow losses have affected growth in shelterwood treatments (table 

1). However, Scribner volumes (board feet/acre) increased most noticeably in 

the spruce-fir shelterwood (figure 2) and in lodgepole pine uneven-aged treatments (figure 3). Scribner volumes in the latter treatments have nearly grown 

back to pre-harvest levels (figure 3). Current diameter distributions of all 

uneven-aged treatments (figures 4, 5) show stocking surpluses are greatest in 

the smaller diameter classes. Sufficient surpluses exist in larger diameter classes 

in both spruce-fir and lodgepole individual tree selection treatments (figure 5) 

to currently support another commercial entry cycle (figure 3).

All treatment plots are currently stocked with regeneration well in excess of 

regional guidelines (USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region 

Table 1—Conditions existing pre- and post-treatment and in 2003 by forest type and harvest treatment: overstory basal area per acre 

(BA); trees per acre (TPA); and quadratic average stand diameter (DQ). Treatment codes: SW3 = three-step shelterwood. SW2 = 

two-step shelterwood. ITS = individual tree selection. CC = clearcut. OR = overstory removal. GS = group selection.

Engelmann Spruce – Subalpine Fir

Treat- Pre Pre Pre BA % BA TPA Post Post Post 2003 2003 2003 BA

 ment BA TPA DQ cut cut cut BA TPA DQ BA TPA DQ change

SW3 205 229 12.8 82 40 85 102 78 15.4 77.1 46 17.5 ® -24.1

SW2 220 160 15.8 132 60 185 88 65 11.8 97.6 57 17.7 ® 9.6

ITS 176 285 10.6 97 55 229 * 79 199 8.5 136.2 347 8.5 57.2

CC 136 200 11.2 136 100 241 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

OR 160 341 9.3 160 100 426 + 0 0 0 40.4 268 5.3 40.4

GS 165 223 11.6 69 31 53 95.7 155 10.6 124.6 199 7.7 28.9

Lodgepole Pine

Treat- Pre Pre Pre BA % BA TPA Post Post Post 2003 2003 2003 BA 

 ment BA TPA DQ cut cut cut BA TPA DQ BA TPA DQ change 

SW3 156 232 11.1 47 30 151 110.6 147 11.7 94.6 112 12.4 ® -16.0

SW2 220 285 11.9 143 65 95 75.3 100 11.8 68.8 74 13.0 ® -1.3

ITS 145 481 7.4 65 45 86 79.0 252 7.6 136.2 432 7.2 57.2

CC 180 241 11.7 180 100 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

OR 98 426 7.1 97 100 341 0 0 0 4.4 32 5.0 4.4

GS 100 334 7.4 28 28 68 67.5 281 6.7 108.4 364 7.3 40.9

* Marked to 80 BA, 5 stems lost due to logging.

+ Understory not included.

® Reduced due to windthrow losses.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 105

Table 2—Comparison of harvest activities by silviculture treatment.

Engelmann Spruce

 Felling and bucking ---------------------Skidding --------------------

Treat- ft3/ No. Logs/ ft3/ ft3/ Cleanup Total ft3/

 ment Hours hour Hours turns turn piece hour hours Other * hours hour Total ft3

SW3 51.2 178.9 34.0 86.1 4.3 25.0 269.8 24.5 0.0 109.7 83.5 9161.0

SW2 37.1 148.2 21.6 56.1 4.4 22.2 254.5 12.8 0.5 72.0 76.4 5498.0

ITS 45.4 91.5 84.7 52.1 4.0 19.9 49.1 27.0 0.0 157.1 26.4 4154.0

CC 22.3 311.4 14.6 56.1 4.4 28.4 474.9 37.5 0.0 74.4 93.3 6939.0

OR 79.7 57.3 59.1 91.1 3.9 12.7 77.3 9.5 0.0 148.3 30.8 4570.0

GS 21.2 290.3 20.2 44.0 3.8 37.0 304.4 22.8 0.8 64.9 94.6 6142.0

Engelmann spruce averages 58.2 36464.0

Lodgepole Pine

 Felling and bucking ---------------------Skidding-------------------

Treat- ft3/ No. Logs/ ft3/ ft3/ Cleanup Total ft3/

 ment Hours hour Hours turns turn piece hour hours Other * hours hour Total ft3

SW2 25.5 198.3 32.7 74.0 5.0 13.7 154.5 4.0 0.6 62.8 80.5 5056.0

SW3 19.8 235.1 24.0 56.0 4.8 17.2 194.2 5.0 0.9 49.7 93.7 4657.0

ITS 25.3 96.6 13.8 31.0 4.6 17.4 177.0 17.0 0.0 56.2 43.6 2448.0

CC 36.0 217.1 28.7 73.1 4.8 22.3 272.3 6.8 0.0 70.7 110.6 7817.0

OR 32.2 68.3 58.5 32.0 5.1 13.5 37.6 6.0 0.0 96.7 22.7 2197.0

GS 24.8 238.3 28.6 49.1 4.9 24.4 206.0 12.0 1.1 66.5 88.7 5897.0

Lodgepole pine averages 69.7 28072.0

* Includes repair, skid trail construction, etc.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

CC SW3 GS SW2 ITS OR

Spruce-fir

Lodgepole pine

ft /hr 3

Figure 1—Harvest production rates 

in cubic feet per person-hour 

by forest type for clearcut (CC), 

three-step shelterwood (SW3), 

group selection (GS), two-step 

shelterwood (SW2), individual 

tree selection (ITS), and overstory 

removal (OR) cutting methods.

Reforestation Handbook) for spruce-fir and lodgepole pine forests (table 

3). The abundance of small seedlings indicates that new trees are still being 

recruited into these areas. The predominance of subalpine fir in all spruce-fir 

treatments is also noteworthy. Fir will obviously dominate the future stocking in all of the spruce-fir treatment plots, but especially so in the individual 

tree selection and three-step shelterwood treatments.
106 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Lodgepole pine

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

SW3 SW2 ITS CC OR GS

1983

1984

2003

Scribner fbm/ac

Spruce-fir

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

SW3 SW2 ITS CC OR GS

1983

1984

2003

Scribner fbm/ac

Figure 2—Pre-harvest, post-harvest, and 2003 board foot Scribner volumes in spruce-fir units 

by silviculture treatment.

Figure 3—Pre-harvest, post-harvest, and 2003 board foot Scribner volumes in lodgepole pine 

units by silviculture treatment.

Discussion

These demonstration areas on the Fraser Experimental Forest provide an 

opportunity to view and compare a variety of management options in one 

readily accessible location. All of these treatments have been successful in that 

they resulted in the establishment of new regeneration, successfully prepared 

the forest for subsequent entries without excessive windthrow, or have 

demonstrated the applicability of both even-aged and especially uneven-aged 

regeneration methods in both spruce-fir and lodgepole pine forest types.

The production data collected during the 1984 harvests clearly show that 

conventional handfelling and tractor skidding was possible in all treatments. 

Although the overstory removals in the overstory removal treatments were 

least efficient, performing these operations while regeneration was still in 

the seedling stage would lessen damage from equipment and tree falling and 

substantially increase harvest efficiency. Using new mechanical harvesting 

equipment available since this study was harvested would probably increase 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 107

the harvest efficiency in all treatments, but the ranking of treatments would 

likely not change, since it was closely related to the number of pieces that 

needed to be moved.

Both the appearance and the current stocking of these plots indicate that 

additional silviculture activities are needed in all of these treatments. Sufficient 

growth and regeneration have occurred in the two-step shelterwood plots 

that overstory removals could now be done. Adequate wind firmness and 

advanced regeneration exist in the three-step shelterwood treatments so that 

seed cuts could now be completed. Stocking has increased in the uneven-aged 

treatments to the point that growing stock should once again be reduced to 

desired levels by another cutting cycle harvest.

A more critical concern with regard to the future composition of these 

forests would be the need to precommercially thin excessive subalpine fir 

stocking from both the spruce-fir and lodgepole pine plots. Subalpine fir 

comprises the majority of seedling and sapling stocking in the spruce-fir 

individual tree selection, group selection, overstory removal, and three-step 

shelterwood treatments. Subalpine fir also accounts for over 30 percent of 

the regeneration in the lodgepole pine individual tree selection and overEngelmann spruce group selection

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

DBH

2003 Q 1.2, BA=85 

Trees / acre

Lodgepole pine group selection

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

DBH

LP03 ES-SF03 Q 1.3, BA=80 

Trees / acre

Figure 4—Comparison of 2003 

stocking by diameter class with 

target stocking guidelines for 

spruce-fir and lodgepole pine 

group selection treatments. The 

LP03 and ES-SF03 labels indicate 

2003 stocking of lodgepole pine, 

spruce, and fir in the lodgepole 

group selection treatment.
108 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Engelmann spruce individual tree selection

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

DBH

2003 Q 1.3 BA=80 

Lodgepole pine individual tree selection

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

DBH

LP03 ES-SF03 Q 1.3, BA=80

Trees / acre Trees / acre

Figure 5—Comparison of 2003 stocking by diameter class with target stocking guidelines for 

spruce-fir and lodgepole pine individual tree selection treatments. The LP03 and ES-SF03 

labels indicate 2003 stocking of lodgepole pine, spruce, and fir in the lodgepole individualtree selection treatment.

story removal treatments. Subalpine fir is much more shade tolerant than 

either spruce or lodgepole pine and can persist very well under these other 

species. As the fir trees grow larger, the dense shade cast by their full crowns 

will strongly inhibit the ability of lodgepole pine and spruce to successfully 

establish. The result will be a type-shift to fir dominated forests rather than 

the spruce and lodgepole forests that we intended to regenerate.

In many ways these demonstration plots represent conditions and trends 

that are present in many special places throughout the central and southern 

Rocky Mountains. This study clearly illustrates that forest conditions are 

not static but dynamically change over time in response to disturbance. If 

that disturbance is a program of silviculture treatments intended to improve 

the condition of the forest, we are obligated to continue management to 

either ultimately replace the forest or maintain it in a desired condition. The 

natural advantage that shade-tolerant subalpine fir has in establishing under 

overstory canopies ensures that management goals for any partial cutting 

silviculture treatment in subalpine forest types cannot be accomplished unless precommercial thinning is an integral part of the silvicultural system.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 109

Literature Cited

Alexander, Robert R. 1987. Ecology, silviculture, and management of the 

Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir type in the central and southern Rocky 

Mountains. Agric. Handb. 659. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service. 144 p.

Alexander, Robert R.; Edminster, Carleton B. 1977. Regulation and control of cut 

under uneven-aged management. Res. Pap. RM-182. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 

7 p.

Shepperd, Wayne D.; Alexander, Robert R. 1983. Silviculture of lodgepole pine 

in the central Rocky Mountains. Publication RMTT-3. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 36 p.

Table 3—Number of seedlings and saplings (<3.5 inches DBH) per acre in 2003 by harvest treatment, species, and size class.

Engelmann Spruce

Tree species Size class

Engelmann Lodgepole Subalpine Less than 1.5 to 4.5 ft. to 1 to 3.5 in. Percent 

 Treatment spruce pine fir Total 1.5 ft. 4.5 ft ht. 1 in. DBH DBH stocking

 OR 780 180 2010 2970 750 990 750 480 100

 CC 720 240 480 1440 540 240 360 300 80

 SW2 1230 150 720 2100 990 540 450 120 100

 SW3 330 0 930 1260 480 360 300 120 80

 ITS 2053 0 3130 5183 1440 2340 900 503 100

 GS1 429 0 2210 2639 510 900 720 509 90

 Average 924 95 1580 2599 785 895 580 339 92

Lodgepole Pine

Tree species Size class

Engelmann Lodgepole Subalpine Less than 1.5 to 4.5 ft. to 1 to 3.5 in. Percent 

 Treatment spruce pine fir Total 1.5 ft. 4.5 ft ht. 1 in. DBH DBH stocking

 OR 80 550 550 1180 250 150 280 500 100

 CC 30 2520 120 2670 180 420 780 1290 80

 SW2 150 3300 630 4080 2370 900 570 240 100

 SW3 150 3660 840 4650 3090 1050 390 120 90

 ITS 307 1538 1061 2906 1650 570 240 446 100

 GS1 334 2733 429 3496 1350 870 510 766 95

 Average 175 2384 605 3164 1482 660 462 560 94

1 Group selection (GS) treatments include regeneration in group openings and intervening forest.
110 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Abstract—The long history of deer overabundance in Pennsylvania is associated 

with very high reforestation costs and substantial threats to diversity and sustainability. In response to this legacy, several landowners and agency personnel formed 

the Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative (KQDC) in partnership with the Sand County 

Foundation. This Cooperative focuses on about 74,000 acres in the northeast corner 

of the Allegheny National Forest (ANF), the setting for the Sugar Run Project under 

planning by the ANF at present. The goals of the KQDC are to develop a quality 

deer herd in quality habitat through cooperation with local sportsmen and sportswomen. In this paper, we discuss the actions proposed in the Sugar Run project to 

use improved hunter access and hunter success as silvicultural tools, given a defi nition of silviculture as “controlling the establishment, growth, competition, health, 

and quality of forests.” These include the scheduling of regeneration activities to 

provide a stable level of forage production, increases in road quality, layout and 

development of skid trails as hunter access trails, creation of viewing pull-outs to 

stimulate hunter interest, and development of a demonstration of the use of silviculture and the interaction of deer and silviculture in shaping habitat.

Introduction

In his 1996 textbook, Ralph Nyland (1996) defi nes silviculture as “establishing and maintaining communities of trees and other vegetation that 

have value to people.” The Society of American Foresters (1998) provides 

a similar defi nition, used by Russ Graham in this proceedings, saying that 

silviculture is “the art and science of controlling the establishment, growth, 

competition, health, and quality of forests and woodlands” for an ever-widening array of management objectives. Thus, practicing silviculture grows 

more diverse and complex with every new understanding that we develop 

of the growth and establishment of forests. In this paper we tell the story of 

increasing cooperation with hunters as a silvicultural tool in order to achieve 

objectives of forest regeneration and renewal—establishing and growing 

diverse communities of trees and other vegetation—in one corner of the 

Allegheny National Forest (ANF) where white-tailed deer (Odocoileus

virginianus) have been overabundant for more than 70 years. The area 

in question is about 74,000 acres in the northeast corner of the National 

Forest, a landscape owned by a municipal watershed, a timber investment 

management organization, two different timber companies, and the 

American people. These landowners and managers have been cooperating for decades to change deer management in Pennsylvania and are now 

cooperating to engage hunters to achieve healthy deer in a healthy habitat. 

The name of both the shared landscape and the cooperative efforts to 

Silviculture in Cooperation With Hunters: 

The Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative

Scott Reitz1, Andrea Hille1, and Susan Stout2

1 USDA Forest Service, Allegheny 

National Forest, Bradford Ranger 

District, Bradford, PA.

2 USDA Forest Service, Northeastern 

Forest Experiment Station Laboratory, 

Irvine, PA.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 111

restore both habitat and herd quality is the Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative (KQDC) (figure 1). Within the area, managers on the ANF have been 

cooperating with the public in planning a project for the Sugar Run Analysis 

Area, the only management project likely to occur on National Forest land 

within the KQDC during the current decade.

Figure 1—A map of the Kinzua Quality 

Deer Cooperative. The Sugar Run 

Project Area is outlined near the 

narrowest portion of the KQDC.
112 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

The activities described in this paper are designed to change forest regeneration and renewal at the landscape level. The intent is to alter responses 

to more familiar stand-level silvicultural activities by changing the context 

within which they occur. Those who believe that silviculture occurs strictly 

at the single stand level may question whether activities like cooperating 

with hunters to reduce deer impact are silviculture. Surely if deer impact is 

reduced in one stand, it is also reduced in adjacent stands. Those people who 

believe that all silviculture occurs strictly at the stand level suggest that these 

activities should more accurately be described as “forest management” rather 

than silviculture. Similarly, those who believe that silvicultural activities lend 

themselves to precise quantification are likely to be disappointed at the imprecision with which hunters change silvicultural outcomes. Our contention 

is that the intent of these activities is to change stand-level responses related 

to the “establishment, growth, competition, health, and quality of forests 

and woodlands,” and that they are, therefore, “silviculture.” We hope that 

this paper will advance the discussion of whether and which activities that 

occur at scales larger than the stand are still appropriately characterized as 

silviculture.

History of Deer Impacts on the Allegheny 

Plateau

The Northern Unglaciated Allegheny Plateau Section (Keys and others 

1995) of Pennsylvania has long been notorious for the heavy deer impacts 

borne by its plant and wildlife communities (Hough 1965; Leopold 1943; 

Redding 1995; Marquis 1981; Marquis and Brenneman 1981; Tilghman 

1989; deCalesta 1994; Rooney 1997; Horsley and others 2003). Estimates 

of deer densities during the period when the region was occupied only 

by Native Americans range from 8-15 deer per square mile (McCabe and 

McCabe 1997). As European settlers moved into the region, hunting 

pressure, including hunting for urban markets, increased substantially. 

After near extirpation of the Pennsylvania herd in the late 19th Century, the 

Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) was established in 1895 in large 

part to protect what was perceived as a precious and scarce resource--the 

white-tailed deer. With strict regulation of hunting seasons, early prohibitions against harvesting does, and small-scale reintroductions from Michigan 

and Virginia coinciding with the creation, statewide, of nearly perfect deer 

habitat through heavy forest harvesting3

, herd size sky-rocketed. By the 

early 1920s, farmers sought relief from overabundant deer in some parts 

of the state, and against protests by hunters, doe seasons were launched 

in selected agricultural counties. By the late 1920s, foresters, too, were 

noticing the negative consequences of local overabundance, including on 

the territory of the newly created ANF, and the first statewide doe harvest 

was scheduled in 1928. The idea was met with stiff opposition from hunting 

clubs, local newspapers, and politically active hunters, but went forward 

(Kosack 1995). By 1943, after a visit to Pennsylvania, Aldo Leopold (1943) 

warned of an impending crisis in Pennsylvania deer management. Through 

the intervening years, there have been periodic reductions in average deer 

density. These usually occurred when a PGC policy change to reduce herd 

density coincided with two bad winters in a row, as in the early 1940s and 

the late 1970s (figure 2). Often these reductions have resulted in politically 

effective backlash from hunters and sportsmen, and initiatives to control 

3

Marquis (1975) describes the harvests 

that occurred at this time: “Between 

1890 and 1920, the virgin and partially 

cut forests were almost completely 

clearcut in what must have been the 

highest degree of forest utilization 

that the world has ever seen in any 

commercial lumbering area.”
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 113

overabundance have failed. In general, until recent years, spokespeople for 

hunting organizations have sought to have deer managed for maximum 

huntable numbers, while foresters and farmers have lobbied for reductions in 

herd numbers. Both groups turned primarily to the semi-independent PGC 

as the arbiter of this profound and long-standing dispute. Data collected 

over the years in the Northern Unglaciated Allegheny Plateau Section suggest that the deer herd has not been at levels now established by the Game 

Commission as compatible with multiple-use management (18-21 deer per 

square mile) in this region for most of the last 60 years (Redding 1995).

Ecological Consequences of Deer Abundance

The ecological consequences of this overabundance are many. Detailed 

research concerning the impact of white-tailed deer on forest resources has 

also been a hallmark of this region. Early researchers noticed the loss of 

shrubs, especially the once-common hobblebush (Viburnum alnifolium) 

(Hough 1965, Kosack 1995) from both old-growth and second-growth 

forests. Marquis (1981) studied the many factors that would influence the 

outcome of regeneration harvest treatments on the ANF. Deer browsing 

explained 87 percent of the regeneration failures that occurred in the 

study, and the presence of abundant advance regeneration, even very small 

seedlings, was the single factor that best predicted which areas were likely 

to succeed (Marquis 1981). Later studies showed that the dynamics of 

vegetation development differed sharply at different deer densities. Species 

diversity, height growth, and stocking of trees and raspberry bushes decreased as deer density increased; stocking with ferns and grasses increased. 

So did the dominance of a single tree species relatively less preferred by deer: 

black cherry (Prunus serotina) (Tilghman 1989, Horsley and others 2003). 

Forest structure varied with deer density as well; in thinned stands in the 

lowest deer density enclosures, a midstory formed that housed a community 

of birds absent at higher deer densities (deCalesta 1994). Finally, the study 

also showed that the impact of deer on vegetation in managed forests was 

a joint function of their density and the forage available in the landscape 

surrounding a management area (figure 3) (Marquis and others 1992, 

deCalesta and Stout 1997). One implication of this study is that there is no 

universally “right” number of deer.

Figure 2—Deer densities through the 20th century 

in the four-county area of the Allegheny 

National Forest (from Redding 1995). Circles 

represent actual data points from studies 

conducted on the ANF. Bad winters occurred 

in sequence in the early 1940s and in the 

late 1970s. The PGC initiated habitat-based 

population goals in 1979.
114 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

The cumulative effects of such pressures on vegetation dynamics, 

sustained over 60 years, can be seen everywhere in the landscape. When a 

1985 tornado blew over 800 acres of remnant old growth in the Tionesta 

Scenic and Research Natural Areas, advance regeneration was dominated by 

the browse-resilient American beech (Fagus grandifolia) and striped maple 

(Acer pennsylvanicum). The moderately preferred birches (Betula lenta

and B. alleghaniensis) blew in, established on the exposed mineral soil, and 

became the most numerous seedlings; eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), 

a preferred winter food, benefited from the exposed mineral soil, but only 

those seedlings that became established near the top of tip-up mounds, 

where deer could not reach them, persisted (Peterson and Pickett 1995, 

Long and others 1998). A 1991 study of the most intensive timber management zone on the ANF showed that 46 percent of that area had interfering 

levels of fern in the understory. The same survey showed that black cherry 

seedlings were the most common tree seedling, representing 47 percent 

of all seedlings measured in the survey (Allegheny National Forest 1995), 

even though black cherry represented only 28 percent of the overstory. The 

statewide 1989 Forest Inventory and Analysis survey of Pennsylvania forests 

found that more than 30 percent of analyzed plots statewide had fern cover 

at or above the level that interferes with the establishment and growth of 

seedlings, while only 4.2 percent of the analyzed samples had sufficient tree 

seedlings to ensure reforestation after a disturbance at high deer density 

(McWilliams and others 1995). The first vegetation survey in the KQDC 

area, conducted during the summer of 2001, revealed that 43 percent of the 

sampled plots had interfering levels of fern, 71 percent had beech or striped 

maple taller than other understory plants, and 88 percent of the understory 

sample plots had interfering levels of beech, striped maple, fern, or both (unpublished data on file at the Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Irvine, PA).

History of Deer Hunting in the KQDC Area 

and Beyond

For the last 40 years, Pennsylvania deer hunting seasons have included a 

two-week antlered deer season, followed by a three-day antlerless season. 

Figure 3—Conceptual framework showing 

that the impact of deer on the outcome of 

silvicultural regeneration harvests is a joint 

function of the density of deer and the amount 

of forage found on the surrounding landscape 

(from Marquis and others 1992).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 115

Up through the mid 1980s, many hunters utilizing lands that are now 

included in the KQDC came from areas where the deer population was low, 

particularly western Ohio and southwest and central Pennsylvania. Because 

of the distance many hunters traveled, they often hunted for long periods 

of time and stayed for a week or more in local hunting camps, as well as 

large tent camps on the National Forest. Many hunters stayed for two weeks 

and hunted through the antlerless season. In the last 10 to 15 years, deer 

numbers have increased in other parts of the state and the east, and many 

hunters who formerly hunted on the KQDC now hunt in other areas, closer 

to home. Cultural changes—dual career couples, loss of jobs with extended 

vacation benefits—have also had an impact. Many out of area hunters only 

stay for the first two days of deer season, and based on roadside vehicle 

counts (unpublished data on file at the Bradford Ranger District, ANF), 

hunter use has declined by 50 percent in the KQDC area since 1993.

Although the overall trend in deer abundance in many parts of the state 

throughout the 20th century was up, there were localized reductions in 

deer abundance on the Allegheny Plateau after 1980. Antlerless permits 

were periodically increased, and where hunter access was good, this led to 

reductions. The continued use of a three-day antlerless season coming after 

the two-week buck season limited the effectiveness of the increased antler

-

less permits. Where access was poor, however, decreased hunter use was 

observed. This situation was confounded on the Allegheny National Forest 

by reductions in timber harvesting as a result of appeals and litigation, with 

an associated reduction in forage supply.

In an effort to increase the doe harvest, encourage hunter use, balance 

the herd’s sex ratio and increase overall hunter success, the PGC has been 

issuing large numbers of antlerless permits, added early season rifle hunts for 

junior and senior hunters, and, starting in 2001, changed from the separate 

antlered and antlerless seasons to a 2 week concurrent rifle hunt, during 

which either sex can be harvested.

During the same period, many forest landowners in northwestern Penn

-

sylvania became aware of the work of the Sand County Foundation (SCF), a 

Madison, Wisconsin, foundation dedicated to promotion of Aldo Leopold’s 

land ethic and focused on issues on which Leopold had worked during his 

career (http://www.sandcounty.org/). One SCF program is Quality Hunt

-

ing Ecology. The philosophy underlying Quality Hunting Ecology is that 

management of deer herds and deer habitats must be coordinated to ensure 

the long-term health of both. The landowners who initiated the KQDC 

effort, in partnership with SCF, recognized that collaborative efforts to 

interest, engage, and increase the effectiveness of hunters through a Quality 

Hunting Ecology program in the KQDC area could be a valuable tool for 

restoring these forests.

The average deer density for the KQDC is 28.3 deer per square mile. 

The deer impact study described above (Tilghman 1989; deCalesta 1994; 

Horsley and others 2003) suggested that in managed forests like KQDC, 

a deer density of about 18 deer per square mile would be compatible 

with management objectives to sustain diverse mixed forests. For the fall 

2003 hunting seasons, the PGC launched a Deer Management Assistance 

Program for landowners and public lands whose property is open to public 

hunting. Through this program, landowners can make additional antlerless 

licenses available to hunters for use on properties with an approved Deer 

Management Plan, and the KQDC Leadership Team requested, received, 

and has distributed coupons for 5,000 additional antlerless licenses. With 

decreasing numbers of hunters, legacies of overabundant deer such as high 
116 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

fern cover across the landscape, and deer numbers about 50 percent above 

those compatible with diverse regeneration of Allegheny Plateau forests, the 

efforts of the KQDC Leadership Team and the silvicultural efforts of forest 

managers across the area are an important complement to additional licenses 

in the effort to promote healthy deer and healthy habitat.

The Landscape of the Kinzua Quality Deer 

Cooperative

The 74,350 acres of the KQDC are special not because they are different 

from the surrounding landscape, but because they are very similar. Lessons 

learned about hunter involvement, about silvicultural strategies that increase 

hunter access and success, and about forest restoration, can be applied to the 

larger landscape.

The landowners and managers of the KQDC share a commitment to 

sustainable management of this forest, although the management emphases 

vary. The National Forest lands within the KQDC fall primarily into two 

management zones. One emphasizes production of high-value sawtimber, 

management for compatible wildlife species including deer, and dispersed, 

roaded recreational opportunities like hunting and scenic driving. The 

other zone features management for species that prefer primarily high forest 

cover, like turkey and bear, and mature forest conditions. The KQDC and 

surrounding area provides habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive 

species including the Indiana bat and bald eagle. An unroaded 10,000 

acre Congressionally designated National Recreation Area is adjacent to 

the northern half of the KQDC. Three of the private landowners have a 

major focus on production of high-value sawtimber products, and two of 

these have achieved third party verified certification, through the Forest 

Stewardship Council and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative. The municipal 

watershed is managed by a consultant that is also third-party certified, and 

its management objectives include a primary focus on watershed protection, 

with a secondary emphasis on income from timber production.

All KQDC landowners and land managers are interested in improving the 

balance of age classes on their respective ownerships, and they are actively 

working to regenerate diverse forests within the KQDC area. All use a vari

-

ety of expensive techniques to overcome the impacts of overabundant deer 

in reaching management objectives. These frequently include broadcast her

-

bicide treatment of interfering fern, beech and striped maple, erection and 

maintenance for 3 to 10 years of 8-foot woven wire fencing in conjunction 

with either shelterwood seed cuts or removal cuts, and sometimes broadcast 

application of nitrogen and phosphorous fertilizer to speed the growth of 

seedlings out of the reach of deer. All have found that even-age silvicultural 

systems are the only ones sustainable in the face of high deer herds – the 

slower growth of seedlings in uneven-aged systems dooms them to failure 

(Marquis and Gearhart 1983). Per acre expenditures to achieve successful 

regeneration using these techniques can easily run to $800. These landown

-

ers have tried a variety of approaches for encouraging hunter use and success 

on their KQDC and other lands, ranging from encouraging public hunting 

and open access with road plowing and other services through lease-hunting 

arrangements that require the lessees to harvest specific numbers of does in 

order to retain the lease. All are eager to reduce the expense associated with 

successful regeneration of diverse species.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 117

The Sugar Run Project

At present, the ANF is cooperating with its publics to plan projects for 

the 11,604-acre Sugar Run Management Area, the only projects likely to 

occur on National Forest land within the KQDC area during the current 

decade. As part of the Sugar Run Project analysis and public involvement, 

a special mailing soliciting input and comments was sent to hunters who 

have participated in KQDC activities, and ANF managers have also given 

special thought to silvicultural and other strategies to ease hunter access and 

improve hunter success as part of the Sugar Run Project.

The Sugar Run Project Area is broadly similar to the entire KQDC 

landscape, and as this paper focuses on the silvicultural and management 

strategies to be applied to improve hunter access and success within this 

project area, we will present details about its landscape characteristics. The 

project area is covered by second growth forests that originated after very 

heavy timber harvesting at the turn of the 19th century. Four major forest 

types dominate the project area—Allegheny hardwoods, mixed upland hardwoods, northern hardwoods, and red maple—which together occupy 89 

percent of the project area. Tree species commonly found in the project area 

include black cherry, white ash (Fraxinus americana), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), red and sugar maple (Acer rubrum and saccharum), black 

birch, American beech, oaks (Quercus spp.), and hemlock. Table 1 displays 

the vegetation types and age-class distribution of National Forest System 

lands currently within the Sugar Run project area.

Almost all (98 percent) of the project area consists of forest cover. 

Permanent openings, including pipelines, roads, and openings for wells, 

make up about 2 percent of the National Forest area and generally consist of 

lowland shrubs, upland shrubs, sparsely stocked riparian bottoms, or ferns 

and grasses. Roughly 78 percent of the Sugar Run project contains stands 

that are 51 to 110 years old. Stands that have been recently regenerated, 

between 0 to 10 years old, account for 3 percent of the National Forest land 

in the project area.

Stands in the Sugar Run project area have experienced a variety of forest 

health challenges in recent decades. The project area was defoliated by 

insects, on average, two to three times between 1984 and 1998. Portions 

of the project area were defoliated as many as 5 times during this same time 

period (Morin and others 2001). Insects include both natives and exotics. 

Outbreaks of cherry scallopshell moth, elm spanworm, forest tent caterpillar, 

oak leaftier, gypsy moth, and beech bark disease have all occurred on the 

ANF and have affected the project area. There have also been six years 

Table 1—Distribution of forest types and age classes within the Sugar Run Project Area.

Age class (acres)

 % of total USFS 

Forest type 0-10 11-20 21-50 51-110 111+ Total acres ownership

Other 19 95 963 13 1090 10

Northern hardwoods 52 6 161 2,839 434 3,492 30

Allegheny hardwoods 363 560 305 2,173 123 3,524 30

Red maple 1,118 28 1,146 10

Mixed upland hardwoods 11 161 2,106 74 2,352 20

Total FS lands 415 596 722 9,199 672 11,604 100

% of total USFS land 3 5 6 78 6
118 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

with drought conditions for a portion of the year during this time period. 

Disturbances such as defoliation episodes, particularly when concurrent 

with droughts, may cause mortality that otherwise would not be expected 

(Morin and others 2001). Recent forest health monitoring completed across 

the ANF indicated that among the shade-tolerant species, 18.2 percent of 

the standing sugar maple basal area and 7.3 percent of the beech basal area 

are dead. Of particular concern is the fact that nearly half of the large beech 

trees (greater than 20 inches diameter) measured were dead, most likely 

due to the impacts of beech bark disease complex. Among the more shadeintolerant or shade mid-tolerant species, black cherry was found to have 6 

percent, and red maple 7.1 percent, of the standing basal area dead (Morin 

and others 2001). Among the five most abundant tree species on the ANF, 

dead trees are proportionally greatest for sugar maple (Morin and others

2001).

In the absence of deer overabundance, this mortality would stimulate the 

development of diverse advance regeneration, but in the Sugar Run Project 

Area, it has instead stimulated the development of dense layers of understory 

plants less preferred by deer or resilient to deer browsing. Approximately 72 

percent of the stands considered for treatment, and 75 percent of forested 

stands in the project area as a whole have interfering understory vegetation 

of some type.

Deer in the Sugar Run Project Area

Deer are a landscape level species whose distribution is affected by the 

availability of forage, thermal and hiding cover conditions and seasonal mast 

availability. As a result, deer use and density varies spatially and seasonally 

across the project area. In order to better characterize and assess deer and 

deer related impacts, the project area was broken down into three sub-analysis areas (figure 4). Since deer numbers and impacts are largely determined 

by hunting and forage availability, existing deer habitat is addressed by 

looking at a combination of deer density, estimated forage production, and 

hunter access.

Figure 4—The Sugar Run Project 

Area and its sub-analysis areas.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 119

Deer Density

An estimate of deer density was collected from 24 transects across the 

KQDC in 2002 and 2003. The PGC deer density goal for McKean Co is 

20 deer per square mile but the northern half of the KQDC (including the 

Sugar Run project areas) had winter deer densities of 23.9 and 25.1 deer 

per square mile respectively in 2001 and 2002, including several “hot spots” 

ranging from 33 to 41 deer per square mile. Six of the KQDC transects were 

located in the Sugar Run project area, including three in the Schoolhouse 

Analysis Area and three in the Bucklick Analysis Area (table 2). Between 

2002 and 2003, deer densities in the Schoolhouse area have increased by 

70 percent and decreased by 12 percent in the Bucklick Area. During both 

years, both areas had hot spots, or areas of deer density in excess of 30 deer 

per square mile. While no deer density measurements were taken in the 

Hammond Run Area, the lack of tree regeneration, combined with browsing 

of beech and striped maple indicate high deer density there.

Road Density and Access

The Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative lands are divided into a north and 

south zone by a state highway. The northern zone (about 52,000 acres) 

is about 70 percent National Forest System lands and includes the Sugar 

Run Project Area. Total road density is 2.5 miles per square mile, including 

2.8 miles per square mile on private land and 1.7 miles per square mile on 

National Forest System lands. Compared to the southern zone, the northern 

zone has better access from State Highways and paved roads, is larger, and 

has lower overall road densities on both private and National Forest System 

lands. Also, 66 percent of the Forest System roads are built to a lower 

standard and are not open to the public during the late fall/early winter 

deer seasons (October 1 to January 25). Over 50 percent of National Forest 

System lands within the north zone are more than 1⁄4 mile from an open 

road; present road management is not considered adequate to effectively 

disperse deer hunters.

Forage Availability

Marquis (1987) suggested an index of relative forage availability based 

on the proportion of forested area in a few broad forage production classes. 

Marquis (1987) suggested that seedling stands (those 0 to 10 years of age) 

should be assigned an index value of 10, representing an average forage production of 1000 pounds per acre; thinned stands of older classes (> 50 years) 

should be assigned an index value of 2.25, representing an average forage 

production of 225 pounds per acre; and unthinned mature stands should be 

assigned an index value of 1, representing an average forage production of 

Table 2—Winter deer densities in Sugar Run Project Area analysis units. Each estimate 

is based on three early spring pellet group counts, each conducted over five mile-long 

transects within a randomly selected mile-square unit.

2002 winter deer 2003 winter deer 

Analysis area density (deer/mi2) density (deer/mi2)

Bucklick Run Average = 28.7 Average = 23.3

(6173 NF acres) Range = 13.3-37.5 Range= 12.5-37.9

Schoolhouse Run Average = 20.1 Average = 34.5

(2702 NF acres) Range = 13.0-32.4 Range = 30.8-41.7
120 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

100 pounds per acre. Sapling and pole stands (ages 10 to 49) are undergoing stem exclusion and produce little forage so are assigned index values of 

0 as are fenced stands. Using these indices and site-specific estimates of the 

past, current, and future age and treatment class within the project area, we 

can estimate changes in relative forage availability (table 3).

By looking at changes in forage availability over time, this information can 

also be used to help predict potential deer impacts to understory vegetation 

within the project area. Table 3 displays past and present forage production 

resulting from silvicultural activities within each of the sub-analysis areas, 

as well as reductions in remote areas (>.25 miles from open road) that will 

result from proposed road management changes.

While available forage in the Schoolhouse and Hammond Run areas have 

not changed signficantly in the last decade, available forage in the Bucklick 

area has decreased 40 to 50 percent during the last two decades as a result 

of fencing new regeneration treatments and growth of previous regeneration 

units. Considering the present deer density, the reduction in available forage within the Bucklick area, and documented deer impacts, management 

recommendations included maintaining or improving available deer forage 

within all three analysis areas, as well as providing strategies to more effectively manage hunters and improve hunter success. This combination of 

increased hunting success and increased landscape forage should reduce deer 

impact.

Proposed Actions in the Sugar Run Project

The treatments listed here may raise some eyebrows in a proceedings 

focused on silviculture. The focus provided by the KQDC project helped 

planners for the Sugar Run project recognize that many activities not 

traditionally considered to fall within the “silviculture” toolkit are, in fact, 

essential to “controlling the establishment, growth, competition, health, and 

quality of forests” (Society of American Foresters 1998) in this area so heavily affected by deer overabundance. If these activities succeed in reducing 

deer impact across the project area, they will change the outcome of other 

silvicultural activities stand-by-stand.

Road Management Changes

Road management changes proposed include (1) opening an additional 

8.5 miles of existing Forest System road in the Bucklick and Schoolhouse 

Table 3—Recent past, present, and projected future carrying capacity and proportion remote area. 

Carrying capacity is calculated according to Marquis (1987) as an index of forage production based 

on stand age class.

Index of carrying capacity % remote area

Analysis area 1993 2003 2013 2018 2003 2005

Bucklick 12,570 7274 (-43%)1

 8841 (+22%)2 7018 (-4%)2 42% 23%

Schoolhouse 3,728 3989 (+7%)1 5483 (+15%)2 3884 (-3%)2 84% 39%

Hammond 2,747 2930 (+7%)1 3517 (+20%)2 3144 (+7%)2 52% 26%

1

 % change from 1993

2

 % change from 2003
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 121

Analysis Areas and (2) construction of approximately 1 mile of new road 

into the Hammond Run Area. These activities will reduce the amount of 

National Forest System land greater than 1⁄4 mile from a road open to hunt

-

ers. Changes by Analysis Area are shown in table 3.

Silvicultural Prescriptions

The concept of deer impact as a joint function of forage availability and 

deer density (figure 3) suggests that both increases in forage availability and 

decreases in deer density will result in reductions in deer impact. That is, 

silvicultural treatments that stimulate advance seedling growth simultane

-

ously increase forage on the landscape and provide advance growth for 

future regeneration treatments. Because increased forage availability has 

been shown to increase recruitment into the deer herd, it is possible to 

initiate a vicious cycle. A key assumption of the KQDC leadership team is 

that forage production increases will be accompanied by increases in hunting 

pressure and success, resulting in an accelerated reduction in deer impact 

and development of desirable vegetative communities.

Silvicultural treatments proposed in the Sugar Run project area emphasize 

even-aged silvicultural systems, a continuing supply of early-successional 

habitat, and hunter access for the project area to meet KQDC goals. Shelter

-

wood regeneration harvests have several advantages during the transitional 

effort to increase hunter success while reducing deer impact. Stands that 

have received the seed cut of a shelterwood sequence have good visibility 

for hunters, as well as skid trails available to ease hunter movement. Use of 

shelterwood sequences allows managers to spread forage production over 

an extended period, using the high forage production capacity of stands 

that have received removal cuts to reduce deer pressure on stands that are 

in the seed cut stage of the sequence. Initially, new even-aged regeneration 

treatments are proposed in the northwestern portion of the project area. 

Others would be delayed in the eastern portion of the project area to pro

-

vide a more continuous supply of seedling habitat over a longer time. The 

delayed shelterwood seed cut treatments would occur when second entry 

shelterwood removal cuts occur. The second entry shelterwood removal 

cuts would increase available forage throughout the area, thus reducing deer 

impacts on the delayed shelterwood treatments, enhancing diverse seedling 

and herbaceous vegetation development. Reforestation activities needed 

to ensure the successful establishment of seedlings in both even-aged and 

uneven-aged treatment areas are also proposed. In addition to the even-aged 

regeneration treatments, some intermediate thinning treatments, unevenaged management, non-commercial thinning, and oak and conifer release 

are proposed.

One contrast between the silvicultural treatments proposed for the KQDC 

area and silvicultural treatments typically proposed in ANF projects with 

similar management objectives is restrained use of fencing. While fencing can 

eliminate deer impact in stands that are directly protected, fencing in large 

proportions of a forest region has the unintended consequence of increas

-

ing deer impact on the unfenced portion of the forest, by reducing the 

effective, high-forage-producing-area through which a deer can search for 

forage within its home range. Within the KQDC, managers will try to use 

well-timed seed and removal cuts with increased hunter access and success to 

reduce deer impact across the study area.

Under the alternative discussed here, 25 acres would be converted to per

-

manent non-forested openings. Later, when deer impact has been reduced, 
122 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

regeneration systems such as single-tree and group selection that have been 

shown to fail under high deer impact may be able to succeed.

Table 4 displays the acres of regeneration proposed and the amount of 

these treatments that consist of followup on previously initiated regeneration 

sequences. Changes in forage availabilty and remote area resulting from 

proposed silvicultural activities are displayed in table 3.

Footbridge Across Sugar Run

State Route 321N forms the northern boundary of the Hammond Run 

area and serves as a primary hunter access. Sugar Run, a large stream that 

parallels SR 321, presently restricts hunter access into this analysis area. In 

order to provide better hunter access from the north, a footbridge across 

Sugar Run and associated hunter parking lot on SR 321 are proposed. This 

is expected to facilitate hunter access into many of the lower slopes in the 

central portion of the analysis area and complement existing crossings to the 

east and west.

Provide Hunter Access Trails

While SR 59 provides good vehicle access along the southern boundary 

of the Hammond Run analysis area, there is a nearly impenetrable wall of 

mountain laurel along SR 59 that makes access by foot very difficult. Additionally, experience on the ANF has shown that hunters will walk farther 

if they have an old road or trail to follow. As a result, all skid trails from 

proposed thinnings in Hammond Run will be seeded and laid out in a manner to facilitate hunter movement through the laurel and to provide better 

access onto the plateau tops north of SR 59.

Develop Openings Along Open Roads for Hunters 

to View Deer

A total of 25 acres of savannah and opening construction are proposed on 

nine sites across the project area. All of these areas will provide cool season 

grasses and legumes and seasonal forage for deer. While six of these sites will 

be constructed away from existing roads, three acres on two sites will be 

constructed along open Forest Roads that provide primary access into the 

Bucklick Area. These sites are being constructed close to roads in order to 

provide hunters with an opportunity to view deer that are attracted to these 

openings. Local experience has shown that hunters are more likely to use or 

hunt in an area where they have seen deer (John Dzemyan, PGC, personal 

communication). Since many hunters will drive prospective areas throughout 

the summer and fall in an effort to locate an area that contains deer, these 

Table 4—Acres proposed for regeneration.

Treatment areas (acres)1

Previously initiated even-aged regeneration sequence 220

New even-aged regeneration initiated 312

Total acres proposed for even-aged regeneration 532

Previously initiated uneven-aged regeneration 61

New uneven-aged regeneration initiated 32

Total acres proposed for uneven-aged regeneration 93

Total acres proposed for regeneration 625

1 Does not include 5 acres proposed for regeneration as part of KQDC Demonstration Area.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 123

openings are expected to attract deer that currently use the area, so that 

hunters can view them. This validation that deer are in the area is expected 

to increase hunter use within the Bucklick Area

Hunter and Harvest Map

Many non-local hunters don’t scout the area prior to season and frequently ask about potential areas to hunt as well as local information on deer 

densities and access. For the last 10 years, the ANF has made a hunter map 

available that identifies roads, areas of recent timber harvest, campgrounds, 

and areas of higher deer density.

In order to make hunters more effective at harvesting deer, the KQDC is 

preparing a deer hunter map. While the present forest map provides general 

information about the area, the KQDC map will provide very site-specific 

information that will aid hunters. Information provided on the map will 

include specific deer density estimates, roads open to hunting in the area and 

the location of foot access trails, the locations of seasonal food sources such 

as apple orchards and areas with oak and hickory, openings, and the location 

of fences (often hunted by muzzleloaders). In addition to the hunting 

map, a deer harvest map will also be made available that provides the exact 

locations in which deer were harvested on the KQDC in the past. Like the 

openings that permit hunters to view deer, a harvest map serves as a “validation” that deer are in the area and can significantly help to generate interest 

in the area.

Demonstration Area

KQDC was identified as a priority interpretive site in the Master Interpretive Plan recently completed for the ANF4. The KQDC was recognized as 

including federal and private industrial landowners working together to 

implement a comprehensive management program to improve deer quality, 

hunter satisfaction, forest ecosystem health, and deer habitat through quality 

hunting ecology. The KQDC Interpretive site focuses on the hunter and 

public education role in effective deer management. The overall theme 

of the KQDC site is “Lands That Everybody Wants—Managing Multiple 

Uses” and focuses on the topic of deer herd management in relationship to 

sustainable forest ecosystems. The audience is the general public and hunters. The objectives of this interpretive site are for visitors to:

• Understand the connection between maintaining healthy deer populations 

and native plant and animal diversity.

• Gain an appreciation of the importance of special hunting regulations to 

regulate deer herds.

• Understand that managing the deer population is important to meeting 

ANF stewardship and management objectives.

The Demonstration Area provides easy public access off a state highway, 

and is located directly across from the Bradford Ranger District. Activities 

to demonstrate both even-aged (three acres) and uneven-aged (two acres) 

management including various combinations of associated reforestation 

treatments are proposed. Specific features associated with the KQDC Demonstration Area include a trail, a parking area/bus turn-around, a brochure, 

an interpretive kiosk, and signs to identify nine alternative treatments applied 

to one-acre plots that show the interaction of deer impact and silviculture in 

sustaining quality deer habitat. The treatments include single-tree selection 

4

USDA Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Region, Center for Design 

& Interpretation. 2001. Master 

Interpretive Plan for the Allegheny 

National Forest. Available from the 

Allegheny National Forest.
124 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

cuts, shelterwood seed cuts, shelterwood removal cuts, and areas with no 

cutting. Associated treatments include site preparation, herbicide application, fertilization, shelterwood removal cuts, and, in most cases, a contrast 

between a fenced and an unfenced example of each treatment.

Summary and Management Implications

The success of these silvicultural initiatives in the Sugar Run Project Area 

will only be known after they’ve been implemented, and still only if the PGC 

sustains its current direction of facilitating landowner/hunter coalitions to 

develop healthy local deer herds in healthy local habitats. But while we wait 

for the overall outcomes of the KQDC project from an ecological perspective, there are some lessons for silviculture.

First, partnerships represent a good stimulus for creative interdisciplinary thinking about silviculture. In the KQDC project, we benefit from 

landowner and interagency cooperation at the project level, and from 

interdisciplinary and land manager-hunter cooperation at the planning and 

implementation level. Many nontraditional tools, from skid trails through 

laurel to the concept of creating a “sustained” supply of forage producing 

condition on the landscape, have emerged from these partnerships.

Second, managing deer impact on silvicultural outcomes is complex 

and includes a number of tradeoffs, some of which are poorly understood. 

Fencing, a frequently used silvicultural tool for managing deer impact, gives 

relatively precise control, but has negative consequences for the condition 

of the unmanaged forest. A combination of timing the availability of highforage producing stands with increasing hunter pressure has fewer negative 

consequences on the landscape but provides much less control to the 

silviculturist. The reduced costs of using timed forage production and hunting, compared to fencing, to achieve regeneration objectives is an important 

benefit of this approach, but the risk of failure—hunters aren’t interested in 

the area, PGC policies change—are high.

On balance, we believe that the opportunities to try “new silviculture” 

and to demonstrate the interaction of deer impact and silviculture to the 

public are important benefits of the Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative--a 

special place.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the contributions of other people and agencies 

working on the Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative and the contributions of 

other members of the Sugar Run Interdisciplinary Team.

The Authors

Scott Reitz is a Wildlife Biologist on the Bradford Ranger District of the 

Allegheny National Forest, where he has worked since 1986. He serves on 

the Leadership Team of the Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative and has conducted data collection related to deer density and hunter use in the area of 

the Kinzua Quality Deer Cooperative since coming to the Bradford Ranger 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 125

District. His experience prior to coming to the Allegheny National Forest 

included the Custer and Manti-LaSal National Forests. His education was at 

Utah State University.

Andrea Hille is a Certified Silviculturist working on the Bradford Ranger 

District of the Allegheny National Forest where she has worked since 1993. 

She is especially interested in early stand development and followup on 

regeneration treatments. Prior to coming to the Allegheny, Andrea worked 

on the Sequoia, Tongass, and Gila National Forests. Her education was at 

Colorado State University.

Susan Stout is a Research Silviculturist and Project Leader in the 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station Laboratory at Irvine, PA, where 

she has worked since 1981. She is also a member of the Kinzua Quality Deer 

Cooperative Leadership Team and has extensive research experience on the 

impacts of deer on forest ecosystems. She was educated at Radcliffe, the 

State University of New York, and Yale School of Forestry and Environmen

-

tal Studies.

References

Allegheny National Forest. 1995. Analysis of Timber Harvest Capability 1995 

through 2005. Warren, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Allegheny National Forest. 53 p. and 17 appendices.

deCalesta, David S. 1994. Effect of white-tailed deer on songbirds within managed 

forests in Pennsylvania. Journal of Wildlife Management. 58(4): 711-718.

deCalesta, David S.; Stout, Susan L. 1997. Relative deer density and sustainability: 

a conceptual framework for integrating deer management with ecosystem 

management. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 25(2): 252-258.

Horsley, S. B.; Stout, S. L.; deCalesta, D. S. 2003. White-tailed deer impact on the 

vegetation dynamics of a northern hardwood forest. Ecological Applications. 

13(1): 98-118.

Hough, A. F. 1965. A twenty-year record of understory vegetation change in a 

virgin Pennsylvania forest. Ecology. 46:370-373.

Keys, Jr., J.; Carpenter, C.; Hooks, S.; Koenig, F.; McNab, W. H.; Russell, 

W.; Smith, M. L. 1995. Ecological units of the Eastern United States - first 

approximation (map and booklet of map unit tables). Atlanta, GA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.

Kosack, Joe. 1995. The Pennsylvania Game Commission 1895-1995: 100 Years of 

Wildlife Conservation. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Game Commission. 233 p.

Leopold, Aldo. 1943. Deer irruptions. Wisconsin Conservation Bulletin. 8(8): 3-13.

Long, Zachary T.; Carson, Walter P.; Peterson, Chris J. 1998. The use of treefall 

mounds by regenerating hemlock following a catastrophic blowdown in an oldgrowth hemlock-northern hardwoods forest. Journal of the Torrey Botanical 

Society. 125(2): 165-168.

Marquis, David A. 1975. The Allegheny hardwood forests of Pennsylvania. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NE-15. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 32 p.

Marquis, D. A. 1981. The effect of deer browsing on timber production in 

Allegheny hardwood forests of northwestern Pennsylvania. Res. Pap. NE-475. 

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

Forest Experiment Station. 10 p.

Marquis, David A. 1987. Silvicultural techniques for circumventing deer damage. 

Proceedings: Deer, Forestry, and Agriculture: Interactions and strategies for 

management. 15-17 June, 1987. Warren, PA. Warren, PA: Plateau and Northern 

Hardwood Chapters, Society of American Foresters. 125-136.
126 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Marquis, David A.; Brenneman, Ronnie. 1981. The impact of deer on forest 

vegetation in Pennsylvania. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-65. Broomall, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment 

Station. 7 p.

Marquis, David A.; Gearhart, Porter. 1983. Cherry-maple In: Burns, Russell M., tech. 

comp. Silvicultural Systems for the Major Forest Types of the United States. Agric. 

Handb. 445. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 

137-140.

Marquis, David A.; Ernst, Richard L.; Stout, Susan L. 1992. Prescribing silvicultural 

treatments in hardwood stands of the Alleghenies. General Technical Report 

NE-96 (revised). Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 101 p.

McCabe, T. R.; McCabe, R. E. 1997. Recounting white-tails past. In: McShea, W. 

J.; Underwood, H. B.; Rappole, J. H., eds. The science of overabundance: deer 

ecology and population management. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution 

Press. 11-26.

McWilliams, W. H.; Stout, S. L.; Bowersox, T. W.; McCormick, L. H. 1995. 

Adequacy of advance tree-seedling regeneration in Pennsylvania’s Forests. 

Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 12(4): 187-192.

Morin, R. S.; Liebhold, A. M.; Gottschalk, K. W.; Twardus, D. B.; Acciavatti, R. 

E.; White, R. L.; Horsley, S. B.; Smith, W. D.; Luzador, E. R. 2001. Forest 

health conditions on the Allegheny National Forest (1989-1999): analysis of 

forest health monitoring surveys. NA-TP-04-01. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Area, State and Private 

Forestry. 68 p.

Nyland, R. D. 1996. Silviculture: Concepts and applications. New York: McGraw 

Hill. 633 p.

Peterson, C. J.; Pickett, S. T. A. 1995. Forest reorganization: a case study in an oldgrowth forests catastrophic blowdown. Ecology. 76: 763-774.

Redding, Jim. 1995. History of deer population trends and forest cutting on 

the Allegheny National Forest. In: Gottschalk, Kurt W.; Fosbroke, Sandra L. 

C., eds. Proceedings, 10th Central Hardwoods Conference; 1995, March 5-8; 

Morgantown, WV. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-197. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 214-224.

Rooney, Thomas P. 1997. Escaping herbivory: refuge effects on the morphology 

and shoot demography of the clonal forest herb Maianthemum canadense. 

Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society. 124(4): 280-285.

Tilghman, Nancy G. 1989. Impacts of white-tailed deer on forest regeneration in 

northwestern Pennsylvania. Journal of Wildlife Management. 53(3): 524-532.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 127

Abstract—Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) ecosystems once occupied 90 million acres in the southern United States’ coastal plain. Restoration of longleaf pine 

ecosystems has been diffi cult because reestablishment of the species by either 

natural or artifi cial means has been problematic. The application of container seedling technology to longleaf pine markedly improves reforestation success. It allows 

nursery managers and silviculturists to more effectively deal with the inherent seed 

and seedling characteristics that make longleaf establishment so diffi cult. Improved 

seed collecting and processing and seedling cultural techniques have resulted in 

planting stock that can be successfully established in the fi eld. As a result, a 10-fold 

increase in longleaf pine seedling production has occurred in the last few years to 

meet restoration needs across the South.

Introduction

Restoration of the longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) ecosystem in the 

southern United States is receiving a great deal of attention (Landers and 

others 1995, Noss 1989). Longleaf pine ecosystems once occupied over 90 

million acres from southern Virginia to central Florida and west to eastern 

Texas (Frost 1993). These fi re-dependent ecosystems dominated a wide 

array of sites within the region. Today, less than 4 million acres remain (Kelly 

and Bechtold 1990), with much of this in an unhealthy state. This extensive 

ecosystem that once contained tremendous timber resources, wide ecological 

diversity, and essential habitat for many unique plant and animal communities has nearly vanished. Restoration of the ecosystem is an objective on most 

southern coastal plain National Forests. It, too, is a desired condition on 

other federal and state lands, as well as on lands of many private landowners. 

However, until recently, regeneration of the longleaf pine ecosystem has 

been problematic due to lack of an adequate seed supply, reduction in use 

of fi re that controls competition, poor establishment success with bareroot 

seedling stock, and seedlings that require several years to initiate height 

growth.

The success in restoration of the ecosystem is largely the result of recent 

improvements in the technology to artifi cially regenerate longleaf pine. This 

improved technology is based on a better understanding of the ecology of 

this species. The objectives of this paper are to describe the nature of the 

longleaf pine ecosystem and its ecological and economic values, and to 

review the development of the container seedling technology that facilitates 

the restoration of the species.

Restoring the Longleaf Pine Ecosystem: 

The Role of Container Seedling Technology

James P. Barnett1

1 USDA Forest Service, Southern 

Research Station, Pineville, LA.
128 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem

The natural range of longleaf pine covers most of the Atlantic and Gulf 

Coastal Plains with extensions into in the Piedmont and mountains of 

north Alabama and northwest Georgia. The species occurs on a wide variety 

of sites, from wet, poorly drained flatwoods near the coast to dry, rocky 

mountain ridges (Boyer 1990). It is a long-lived tree, potentially reaching an 

age of several hundred years; but longleaf pine forests are often exposed to 

catastrophic hazards such as tropical storms and to continuing attrition from 

lightning strikes that cause tree mortality and shorten possible rotation ages 

(Landers and others 1995).

Longleaf pine is a very intolerant pioneer species and the seedlings go 

through a stemless grass stage that is usually broken when the young stand 

and grass is burned in a low intensity ground fire. If competition is severe, 

they may remain in this grass stage for years. The ecosystem is distinguished 

by open, park-like stands with a grassy understory, which are composed 

of even-aged and multi-aged mosaics of forests, woodlands, and savannas, 

with a diverse groundcover dominated by bunch grasses and usually free of 

understory hardwoods and brush (Landers and others 1995). The diversity 

of understory plants per unit of area places longleaf pine ecosystems among 

the most species-rich plant communities outside the tropics (Peet and Allard 

1993). Although the forests are known for persistence and diversity, they 

often occur on infertile soils. The ecological persistence of these areas is a 

product of long-term interactions among climate, fire, and traits of the key 

plants.

Fire was an essential component of the original longleaf pine ecosystems. 

Longleaf pine and bunch grasses (e.g., wiregrass and certain bluestems) 

possess traits that facilitate the ignition and spread of fire during the humid 

growing seasons (Landers 1991). Frequent fire was largely responsible for 

the competitive success of longleaf pine and its associated grasses. These 

keystone species exhibit pronounced fire tolerance, longevity, and nutrient-water retention that reinforce their dominance and restrict the scale of 

vegetation change following disturbance. Fires that were ignited by Native 

Americans or that resulted from thunderstorms with frequent lightning 

prevailed over the region. Many of these fires occurred during the growing 

season and largely prevented species native to other habitats from encroaching into the pine barrens. The chronic fire regime also maintained the soil 

structure and poor nutrient dynamics to which longleaf pine is adapted 

(McKee 1982). These fire effects tended to make longleaf pine sites more 

favorable to resident species than those indigenous to more nutrient-rich 

habitats.

Decline of the Longleaf Pine Ecosystem

The depletion of the longleaf ecosystem resulted from its many desirable 

attributes that have caused it to be exploited since the settlement of the 

nation by Europeans (Croker 1979). However, it was the event of railroad 

harvesting in the late 1800s and early 1900s that provided access to and 

depleted the vast remaining longleaf timberland. Cutting proceeded from 

the Atlantic states west through the Gulf Coast Region with increasing 

intensity of use with time. Longleaf pine logging reached a peak in 1907, 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 129

when an estimated 13 billion board feet were cut (Wahlenberg 1946). The 

longleaf pine ecosystem now occupies only a small part (less than 5 percent) 

of its original area. This habitat reduction is the reason for the precarious 

state of at least 191 taxa of vascular plants (Hardin and White 1989, Walker 

1993) and key wildlife species such as the red-cockaded woodpecker, gopher 

tortoise, and southern fox squirrel (Landers and others 1995).

Regeneration of longleaf pine was limited because of a combination 

of circumstances. The completeness of the harvest left little seed source 

for natural regeneration and much of the harvested land was cleared for 

cropland or pasture. Longleaf pine does not successfully invade open land 

in competition with more aggressive pine or grass species. Regeneration 

sometimes succeeded the removed old-growth when periodic fires provided 

a seedbed and controlled woody competition, and when wild hogs did not 

reach a density high enough to destroy established seedlings (Wahlenberg 

1946). The disruption of natural fire regimes, resulting in part from forest 

fire protection policies implemented during the 1920s, allowed invasion of 

longleaf sites by hardwoods and more aggressive pine species. Regeneration, 

both naturally and artificially, is more difficult than for any other southern 

pine due to the delay in stem elongation (the grass stage) that is a genetic 

trait of the species. Also, survival of planted bareroot nursery stock is gener

-

ally poor and established seedlings in the grass stage are very sensitive to 

competition.

Restoring the Ecosystem

A key to restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem is to ensure that soci-

ety understands the value of the species and its habitat. Without economic 

benefits, long-term conservation projects usually do not succeed (Oliver 

1992). Longleaf pine forests have high economic value due to the quality of 

solid-wood products produced. Harvesting or forest management need not 

be eliminated or restricted to restore and maintain longleaf pine ecosystems, 

as evidenced by the fact that logging at the turn of the century apparently 

had little effect on groundcover diversity (Noss 1989). Restrictions on 

harvest would be a disincentive to many landowners and could result in the 

elimination of much of the remaining longleaf pine on private lands.

Restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem is achievable since pockets of 

longleaf pine occur across much of its former range. It should be feasible 

to gradually expand longleaf pine acreage through education, research, and 

commitment on the part of resource managers. Restoration is now a goal on 

much of the public land in the southern United States, where longleaf pine 

remains as a component of the forest. In fact, much of the current acreage of 

the ecosystem occurs on public lands.

A number of interacting factors will determine whether the restoration of 

the longleaf pine ecosystem can be achieved. These include the capability to 

successfully regenerate longleaf pine on its native sites, to use fire to enhance 

establishment and management of both the overstory and understory 

species, to educate the public and resource managers on the value and 

technology of restoration, and to evaluate restoration success.

Restoration Technology

Utilization of the trees in the original forest was so complete that 

inadequate numbers of seed trees remained to naturally regenerate many 
130 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

of the harvested stands. So, artificial regeneration must be used to restore 

longleaf on many of the appropriate sites where it originally grew. Until 

recently, regeneration success from planting was generally unacceptable due 

to problems related to severe competing vegetation, delayed stem elonga

-

tion, and poor storability of bareroot seedlings. We now have the knowledge 

and technology to reestablish longleaf pine by planting bareroot stock. The 

keys to successful establishment are: well-prepared, competition-free sites; 

healthy, top-quality, fresh planting stock; meticulous care of stock from 

lifting to planting; precision planting; and proper post-planting care (Barnett 

1992). Failure to implement a single step in the regeneration chain of events 

can doom a plantation. Bareroot stock is very sensitive to damage during 

lifting, handling and planting, increasing the chance of poor performance 

when planted in the field.

Merits of Container Technology

Planting of container stock is now accepted as the most successful method 

of regenerating longleaf pine (Barnett and McGilvray 1997). Production 

of longleaf container seedlings has increased from about 15 million to 85 

million annually in the last five years. This improved survival and growth is 

generally attributed to root systems that remain intact during lifting while 

roots of bareroot plants are severely damaged. Thus, container seedlings 

experience a significantly shorter period of transplant shock or adjustment 

than bareroot stock. However, using container stock does not eliminate the 

critical need for controlling competition during the first growing season after 

planting.

The establishment of a facility to produce contain seedlings is simple, and 

can be done at a fraction of the cost of establishing a bareroot nursery. A 

container nursery facility does not require any special attention to soil type 

or soil health, since seedlings are grown in potting medium in containers 

rather than in the soil were the nursery is located. Two elements of physical 

infrastructure are needed for the container nursery—an adequate supply of 

water for timely irrigation of seedlings, and some means to deploy netting 

over the seedlings as germination occurs to minimize predation of seeds 

from birds (Barnett and McGilvray 1997, Barnett and others 2002).

Essentials for Container Production

Availability of high quality seeds currently limits production of longleaf 

pine container seedlings. Recently guidelines for producing quality longleaf 

pine seeds have been published that improve both germination and yield of 

plantable stock (Barnett and McGilvray 2002a). An important aspect of this 

increased performance is the reduction of seed coat pathogens that nega

-

tively affect germination and seedling establishment (Barnett and McGilvray 

2002b).

Prompt and uniform germination is important in seedling production. 

Once germination has occurred, it is critical to follow established protocols 

for growing the seedling crop (Barnett and McGilvray 1997). Normally 

crops are sown in April and are ready to be outplanted in October or No

-

vember—whenever soil moisture will allow.

Determining Stock Quality

Until recently, broadly recognized standard specifications for container 

longleaf seedlings were lacking. Establishing standards based on research 

has been difficult because “substandard” container stock will survive in 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 131

years when rainfall is abundant, but early development will be behind that 

of a good seedling. Developing seedling grades requires outplanting and 

performance evaluation of seedlings with a range of physiological and morphological characteristics—tested over a number of years and over a range 

of site conditions. Lacking the resources to conduct the research to establish 

standards, the Longleaf Alliance and two USDA Forest Service units—the 

Cooperative Forestry group in Atlanta and the Southern Research Station 

silviculture unit in Pineville—decided to seek agreement among producers 

and users on acceptable seedling criteria.

A canvassing of those who produce and use longleaf pine container stock 

for their recommendations revealed that available information was insufficient to develop three different seedling grades similar to those for bareroot 

stock (Wakeley 1954). So, we decided to develop only two, “preferred” and 

“non acceptable.” These guidelines (figure 1) are now used across the South 

(Barnett and others 2002).

Application of Container Technology

Because of difficulty in obtaining consistent field survival with bareroot 

stock, about 85 percent of longleaf pines now planted are container grown 

seedlings. The ability to plant container stock early in the fall also improves 

field survival and early height growth on many sites. The ability of fall 

planted seedlings to establish a root system during the winter months usually 

results in earlier initiation of height grown.

The Role of Fire

Fire is an essential component of the restoration and management of the 

longleaf pine ecosystem. Long-term studies show that the frequent use of 

Figure 1—Interim specifications for longleaf pine container seedling

Characteristics Preferred Not Acceptable

Needles

Length if not top clipped 8 to 12 inches <4 inches

Length if top clipped 6 to 10 inches <4 inches

Fascicles Many present None present

Color Medium to dark green Yellow or brown

Roots

Root collar diametera ≥1⁄4 inch <3/16 inch

Color Light brown with white tips Black (diseased)

Mycorrhizae Present (the more the better)

Evidence of disease None present Any present

Root spiraling None present Any noticeable amount

Buds

Present Present on 90 percent of crop

Color Green to brown Yellow or chlorotic

Container size (per plant)

Diameter ≥1.5 inches <1 inch

Length ≥4.5 inches <3.5 inches

Volume ≥6 cubic inches <5.5 cubic inches

Other important attributes

Firmness: Plug stays intact when extracted and during handling; no loss of potting medium.

Moisture: Root plug is always moist, never dry.

Pests: No competing weeds or insects are present.

Sonderegger: Buyer specifies whether to cull Sonderegger seedlings.

a

 At base of needles
132 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

fire hastens initiation of height growth by reducing undesirable competing 

vegetation and foliage that is infected with brown-spot needle blight (Mycosphaerella dearnessii Barr.) (Siggers 1934). Longleaf pine seedlings that are 

in grass stage are resistant to injury by fire because the buds are protected by 

a rosette of needles (Walker and Wiatt 1966). Prescribed fire also stimulates 

growth and development of species that are an essential component of the 

understory. Seasonal burning studies show that late spring burns are much 

more effective in the restoration process than the typical winter burns that 

are usually favored by other pine species because they are hotter and more 

effective in reducing competing woody vegetation (Grelen 1978, Haywood 

and others 2001). Fire is an important element in establishing the species 

and is a critical component for achieving and maintaining the biologically 

diverse understory that is characteristic of the ecosystem.

Education and Commitment

Education of the public regarding the current status of the longleaf pine 

ecosystem, its potential economic value, its outstanding biodiversity, and the 

role of fire in maintaining the system is an initial step in securing support for 

restoration (Landers and others 1995). A primary need in this process is to 

promote the use of fire as an ecological force necessary to maintaining this 

fire-dependent ecosystem. Frequent prescribed burning, including use of 

growing-season fires where appropriate, promotes the diversity and stability 

of these communities (Noss 1989). Many private landowners are concerned 

about the environment and will support restoration, if through the process 

they generate income from their land. Longleaf pine can be managed in an 

ecologically sensitive manner that generates income satisfactory to interest a 

landowner in restoration (Landers and others 1990).

Determining Success

One way to measure the success of the restoration process is to determine 

through periodic forest surveys if the area in the longleaf pine type increases. 

Another method is to determine if the production of longleaf pine nursery 

stock increases in relation to the other southern pines. Some would question whether an increase in area of longleaf pine plantations equates to an 

increase in ecosystem restoration. Certainly it takes more than planting trees 

to restore the ecosystem, but it is the critical first step. Recent research indicates that the productivity of an ecosystem is controlled to an overwhelming 

extent by the functional characteristics of the dominant plants (Grime 

1997). So, with reestablishment and appropriate management, including the 

appropriate use of fire, restoration processes that include development of the 

typical diverse understory vegetation will begin.

Conclusions

Restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem is facilitated by planting seedlings produced in containers. Planting of longleaf is required on most sites 

needing restoration because sites normally are being converted from agricultural crops or other pine species. Quality container stock survives better than 

bareroot stock on typical longleaf pine sites and the length of time seedlings 

stay in the grass stage is reduced. Restoration requires more than just planting of longleaf seedlings. Survival and initiation of height growth requires 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 133

the control of competition by fire or other means and careful control of the 

planting “chain of events.” Container stock is not as sensitive to handling 

problems, but still needs good site preparation, care during handling, and 

precision planting. Fire is an important component needed to establish and 

maintain the longleaf ecosystem.

References

Barnett, J. P. 1992. The South’s longleaf pine: It can rise again! Forests and People. 

41(4): 14-17.

Barnett, J. P.; Hainds, M. J.; Hernandez, G. A. 2002. Interim guidelines for 

growing longleaf pine seedlings in containers. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-60. Asheville, 

NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 

[Brochure].

Barnett, J. P.; McGilvray, J. M. 1997. Practical guidelines for producing longleaf 

pine seedlings in containers. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-14. Asheville, NC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 28 p.

Barnett, J. P.; McGilvray, J. M. 2002a. Guidelines for producing quality longleaf 

pine seeds. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-52. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 21 p.

Barnett, J. P.; McGilvray, J. M. 2002b. Improving longleaf pine seedling production 

by controlling seed and seedling pathogens. In: Outcalt, W., ed. Proceedings 

of the eleventh biennial southern silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. SRS-48. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station. 45-46.

Boyer, W. D. 1990. Pinus palustris Mill. Longleaf pine. In: Burns, R. M.; Honkala, 

B. H., tech. coord. Silvics of North America. Vol. 1, Conifers. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.

Croker, W. D. 1979. The longleaf pine story. Journal of Forest History. 23: 32-43.

Frost, C. C. 1993. Four centuries of changing landscape patterns in the longleaf 

pine ecosystem. In: Proceedings Tall Timbers fire ecology conference 18. 

Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers.

Grelen, H. E. 1978. May burns stimulate growth of longleaf pine seedlings. Res. 

Note SO-234. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 5 p.

Grime, J. P. 1997. Biodiversity and ecosystem function: the debate deepens. Science. 

227(5330): 1260-1261.

Harden, E. D.; White, D. L. 1989. Rare vascular plant taxa associated with wiregrass (Aristida stricta) in the southeastern United States. Natural Areas Journal. 

9: 234-245.

Haywood, J. D.; Harris, F. L.; Grelen, H. E., Peason, H. A. 2001. Vegetative 

response to 37 years of seasonal burning on a Louisiana longleaf pine stand. 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 25(3): 122-130.

Kelly, J. F.; Bechtold, W. A. 1990. The longleaf pine resource. In: Farrar, R. M., Jr., 

ed. Proceedings of the symposium on the management of longleaf pine. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. SO-75. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station.

Landers, J. L. 1991. Disturbance influences on pine traits in the southeastern 

United States. In: Proceedings Tall Timbers fire ecology conference 17. 

Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers.

Landers, J. L.; van Leer, D. H.; Boyer, W. D. 1995. The longleaf pine forests of the 

Southeast: Requiem or renaissance? Journal of Forestry. 93: 39-44.

Landers, J. L.; Byrd, N. A.; Komarek, R. 1990. A holistic approach to managing 

longleaf pine communities. In: Farrar, R. M., Jr., ed. Proceedings of the 

symposium on the management of longleaf pine. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-75. New 
134 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

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

Experiment Station.

McKee, W. H. 1982. Changes in soil fertility following prescribed burning on 

Coastal Plains pine sites. Res. Pap. SE-234. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station.

Noss, R. F. 1989. Longleaf pine and wiregrass: Keystone components of an 

endangered ecosystem. Natural Areas Journal. 9: 234-235.

Oliver, C. D. 1992. Achieving and maintaining biodiversity and economic 

productivity. Journal of Forestry. 90: 20-25.

Peet, R. K.; Allard, D. J. 1993. Longleaf pine-dominated vegetation of the southern 

Atlantic and eastern Gulf Coast region, USA. In: Proceedings Tall Timbers fire 

ecology conference 18. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers.

Siggers, P. V. 1934. Observations on the influence of fire on the brown-spot needle 

blight of longleaf pine seedlings. Journal of Forestry. 32: 556-562.

Wakeley, P. C. 1954. Planting of southern pines. Agric. Handb. 18. Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 233 p.

Wahlenberg, W. G. 1946. Longleaf pine: Its use, ecology, regeneration, protection, 

growth, and management. Washington, DC: Charles Lathrop Pack Forestry 

Foundation. 429 p.

Walker, L. C.; Wiatt, H. V., Jr. 1966. Silviculture of longleaf pine. Bulletin 11. 

Nacogdoches, TX: Stephen F. Austin State College, School of Forestry. 105 p.

Walker, J. L. 1993. Rare vascular plant taxa associated with the longleaf pine 

ecosystem. In: Proceedings Tall Timbers fire ecology conference 18. Tallahassee, 

FL: Tall Timbers.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 135

Abstract—In areas considered high hazard for blister rust in the northern Lake 

States, six white pine plantings were established between 1989 and 1999 to: (1) 

evaluate the impacts of blister rust, white pine weevil, browsing, and competition 

stress on tree growth and survival, and (2) evaluate the effectiveness of genetic and 

silvicultural strategies to minimize damage. The effectiveness of a genetic approach 

is being examined by evaluating seedlings from selected rust-free source trees (seed 

orchard collected seed) vs. non-selected nursery seedlings (fi eld collected seed). 

The silvicultural approach is being examined by comparing pruned vs. unpruned 

trees, and shelterwood vs. clearcut treatments. Early results based on data collected 

through 2003 are summarized in this paper. Deer and hare browsing have caused 

widespread mortality at two sites. Competition has been intense on many of the 

sites, especially in the open-grown (clearcut) treatments, severely affecting growth 

and survival. The incidence of tree mortality caused by blister rust has been relatively minor, with Armillaria root disease killing more trees than blister rust. Results are 

too preliminary to fully evaluate the long-term effectiveness of pruning, shelterwood 

treatment, or planting selected stock in reducing blister rust incidence.

Introduction

Prior to the mid-1800s, eastern white pine, Pinus strobus L., played 

a dominant role in many of the forest ecosystems in the Lake States of 

Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Gevorkiantz (1930) estimated that 

Wisconsin alone had over 7.3 million ha that included a signifi cant white 

pine component. Logging of the Lake States pinery occurred throughout 

the mid and late 1800s, almost eliminating the mature white pine resource. 

Between 1850 and 1930, over 104 billion board feet of white pine lumber 

was removed from northern Wisconsin (Gevorkiantz 1930). Widespread 

harvesting created conditions conducive to destructive fi res that killed white 

pine regeneration and many of the remaining large white pines. Thus, future 

seed sources were removed from many areas. By the early 1900s the white 

pine resource was signifi cantly reduced from its status 100 years earlier. 

Recovery has been very slow. Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) survey 

data from Michigan (1980), Minnesota (1990) and Wisconsin (1983) 

revealed the area of timberland in the white pine type to be only 203,564 ha 

(Spencer and others 1992).

Damaging Agents

There are a number of reasons why there has been limited success in 

efforts to restore eastern white pine. These include the introduction of the 

blister rust fungus Cronartium ribicola J.C. Fischer ex. Rabenh., a lack of 

Restoration and Management of Eastern 

White Pine Within High Blister Rust Hazard 

Zones in the Lake States

S. A. Katovich1, J. G. O’Brien1, M. E. Mielke1, and M. E. Ostry2 

1 USDA Forest Service, Northeastern 

Area, Forest Health Protection, St. Paul, 

MN.

2 USDA Forest Service, North Central 

Research Station, St. Paul, MN.
136 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

seed trees in many locations, outbreaks of white pine weevil Pissodes strobi

Peck, and high white-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus Zimmermann populations. These limitations have given white pine a reputation as a difficult 

species to manage with some forest managers (Marty 1986, Jones 1992), 

resulting in reduced planting and decreasing the likelihood of a significant 

recovery of the species.

Blister Rust Hazard Zones

White pine blister rust was first detected in Wisconsin in 1913, Minnesota 

in 1914, and Michigan in 1917 (Benedict 1981). The fungus produces 

spore stages on white pine and its alternate host, species of Ribes. The Lake 

States region’s cool moist weather patterns in the late summer and fall, 

prevalence of many lakes and wetlands, and abundant Ribes populations 

created ideal conditions for blister rust.

Climatic blister rust hazard zone maps for the region were developed in 

the 1960s (Van Arsdel 1961a, 1964). Much of the northern Lake States 

region was in zones 3 and 4, indicating moderate to high hazard of blister 

rust incidence (figure 1).

Figure 1—Climatic hazard zones of blister rust infection potential. Van Arsdel (1964) described the zones as follows: 

Zones 1 and 2—enough pines survive to give a commercial stand without controls. Zones 3 and 4—recommended 

controls included maintaining an overstory of thin-crowned species over young trees, pruning, avoiding small 

openings, and maintaining a closed white pine canopy when white pine is open-grown. In addition, in blister rust 

hazard zone 4, Van Arsdel recommended planting rust-resistant seedlings. Research/demonstration sites are H1 on the 

Hiawatha National Forest, C1 on the Chippewa National Forest, and S1-S4 on the Superior National Forest.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 137

In the Lake States, rust incidence varies greatly across each zone, 

dependent upon local topography and vegetation. It is not uncommon for 

trees in areas within the highest hazard zones to have a low rust incidence. 

Substantial local variation was recognized at the time of the development 

of the broad climatic hazard zone maps (Van Arsdel 1961b, 1972). Several 

surveys have confirmed that the incidence of rust varies in the high hazard 

zones. Robbins and others (1988) surveyed stands in the Upper Peninsula 

of Michigan and reported that only 1.5 percent of the sampled trees were 

diseased. In northern Wisconsin rust incidence in pole-sized stands was 

only 7.2 percent, and varied from 0 to 28.6 percent (Dahir and Cummings 

Carlson 2001).

Refinement of the climatic hazard maps to identify areas of low rust 

incidence may provide more opportunities for successful white pine 

restoration. White and others (2002) created a high-resolution map for a 

portion of northern Minnesota using geographical information system (GIS) 

techniques. Their map illustrated that there were significant acreages of “low 

hazard” in areas previously identified as zone 4, the area of highest risk for 

blister rust.

Despite the constraints in managing white pine mentioned earlier, there 

is growing interest in the restoration of white pine in the Lake States (Stine 

and Baughman 1992). However, refinements of existing management 

recommendations for establishing white pine across a regional landscape are 

needed to identify areas where restoration is likely to be successful.

To address this need, we established six white pine plantings between 

1989 and 1999 in the northern Lake States to evaluate the impacts of blister 

rust, white pine weevil, browsing, and competition on tree survival and 

growth and to compare silvicultural and genetic strategies to minimize dam

-

age. These plantings are managed by USDA Forest Service Ranger Districts, 

following local management guidelines. In this paper, we present and discuss 

early results on survival and growth of selected and non-selected seedling 

stock in relation to browsing, blister rust, competition and other mortality 

agents.

Material and Methods

Seedling Stock

Seedlings of the “selected” source trees were grown at the USDA Forest 

Service Toumey Nursery in Michigan. Seed for these trees was collected at 

the USDA Forest Service Oconto River Seed Orchard (ORSO) in Wiscon

-

sin. ORSO trees originated from source trees selected in the 1960s for good 

tree form and freedom from blister rust in stands with a high rust incidence. 

At one site, Superior 1, trees were derived from an additional selected seed 

source originally obtained by the Minnesota Quetico-Superior Wilderness 

Research Center (WRC) and grown by a private greenhouse to provide 

containerized planting stock. The non-selected seedlings were obtained from 

a variety of field collected seed sources, most of unknown parentage.

Treatments

Various treatments were imposed on replicated, randomized 25-tree plots. 

Trees were planted at 3 x 3 m spacing. Treatments were: (1) nursery grown 

seedlings from selected rust-free source trees vs. nursery grown non-selected 
138 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

seedlings, (2) pruned vs. unpruned trees, and (3) trees planted under a 

shelterwood vs. trees planted in clearcuts. All of the study sites included 

selected vs. non-selected seedlings. Not all of the sites included the shelter-

wood vs. clearcut treatments and trees have not yet been pruned at some of 

the locations. Pruning was planned to be initiated five years after planting, 

depending upon growth rates.

Data Collection and Analyses

Tree survival, tree size, incidence of browse, blister rust, white pine wee-

vil, and other damaging agents were recorded annually through 2003. Tree 

size was measured using tree height for the initial 10 years and diameter 

at breast height thereafter. Tree size was analyzed using ANOVA and pair 

wise comparisons were made using Tukey’s HSD comparisons. Logistic 

regression was used to compare tree survival, the prevalence of blister rust, 

Armillaria root rot, and white pine weevil attacks among planting stock 

types. Backward stepwise regression and the software Arc (Cook and Weis

-

berg 1999) were used to test variables in the analyses.

Study Site Descriptions

All of the plantings are within blister rust hazard zones 3 and 4, the two 

highest climatic hazard zones proposed by Van Arsdel (1964). Sites are located 

on USDA Forest Service National Forest lands and are all within the Lauren

-

tian mixed forest. Each site is described in detail below and study locations 

are shown in figure 1. Sites are placed into Sections as defined by the National 

Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units (McNab and Avers 1994).

Hiawatha 1 (H1), established in 1989, was located on the Munising 

Ranger District, Hiawatha National Forest, within Section 212H, Northern 

Great Lakes. Northern hardwoods occupied the site prior to plot establish

-

ment. Treatments included planting trees under a shelterwood vs. planting 

in a clearcut, selected vs. non-selected seedlings, and pruned trees vs. 

unpruned trees. Non-selected trees came from seed collected locally on the 

Hiawatha National Forest. A total of 1,200 trees were planted in 48 plots 

across six treatment blocks. Pruning was initiated in 1994.

Chippewa 1 (C1) was located on the Cass Lake Ranger District, Chip-

pewa National Forest, within Section 212N, Northern Minnesota Drift and 

Lake Plains. Plots were established in 1998 within a series of small (0.04 to 

0.27 ha) harvest units resulting in a series of small clearcuts. The local forest 

type was a mix of aspen Populus tremuloides Michx., paper birch Betula pa-

pyrifera Marsh., red pine P. resinosa Ait., jack pine P. banksiana Lamb. and a 

few scattered large white pine. Treatments included selected vs. non-selected 

seedlings, and pruned vs. unpruned trees. There was no shelterwood treat

-

ment on this site. Non-selected seedlings came from the State of Minnesota, 

Willow River Nursery. A total of 600 trees were planted in six replicated 

blocks that included the four treatments. Pruning was initiated in 2001.

Superior 1 (S1) was located on the LaCroix Ranger District, Superior 

National Forest, within Section 212L, Northern Superior Uplands. The 

clearcut site was occupied by a two-year-old aspen stand when planted in 

spring 1997. Treatments included two selected seedling sources (ORSO 

and WRC) vs. non-selected seedlings, and pruned vs. unpruned trees. 

Non-selected trees came from the State of Minnesota, Willow River Nursery. 

There was no shelterwood treatment on this site. A total of 900 trees were 

planted in six replicated blocks that included the six treatments. Pruning has 

not been initiated.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 139

Superior 2 (S2) was located on the Gunflint Ranger District, Superior 

National Forest, within Section 212L, Northern Superior Uplands. This 

site was occupied by a mature paper birch stand with harvest treatments 

completed in 1996 and planting in the spring of 1997. Treatments included 

planting trees under a shelterwood vs. planting in a clearcut, and selected 

vs. non-selected seedlings. The shelterwood was established as narrow strips 

(15.2 m) cut through a mature paper birch stand that was adjacent to the 

clearcut unit. Non-selected trees came from the State of Minnesota, Willow 

River Nursery. A total of 1,200 trees were planted in 12 replicated blocks 

that included the four treatments. This site was replanted in 1998 because of 

heavy browse damage. Pruning has not been initiated.

Superior 3 (S3) was located on the Gunflint Ranger District, Superior 

National Forest, within Section 212L, Northern Superior Uplands. The 

stand was mature red and white pine. A seed tree harvest was completed 

in 1998 and the site was planted in 1999. Treatments included selected vs. 

non-selected seedlings, and pruned vs. unpruned trees. No shelterwood or 

clearcut treatments were applied. Non-selected trees came from the State of 

Minnesota, Willow River Nursery. A total of 600 trees were planted in six 

replicated blocks that included the four treatments. Pruning was initiated in 

2003.

Superior 4 (S4) was located on the Tofte Ranger District, Superior 

National Forest, within Section 212L, Northern Superior Uplands. The 

stand was mature red and white pine. A seed tree harvest was completed 

in 1998 and the site was planted in 1999. Treatments included selected vs. 

non-selected seedlings, and pruned vs. unpruned trees. No shelterwood or 

clearcut treatments were applied. Non-selected trees came from the State of 

Minnesota, Willow River Nursery. A total of 600 trees were planted in six 

replicated blocks that included the four treatments. Pruning has not been 

initiated.

Mechanical release of seedlings from competing vegetation has been done 

on the plots on an as-needed basis. Control of animal browsing was done on 

sites C1 and S2 using paper terminal bud caps. The chemical animal deter

-

rent (Plantskydd®) was used at C1.

Results

Hiawatha 1

In 2003 survival of non-selected and selected trees was similar, 55 and 56 

percent respectively (p = 0.91). Survival was lower in the clearcut treatment 

compared with trees in the shelterwood, 51 vs. 63 percent (p <0.01). Much 

of the early mortality was caused by Armillaria root disease and unknown 

causes.

Blister rust incidence was less on the selected trees (3 percent) compared 

with non-selected trees (7 percent) (p = 0.03). Blister rust incidence on all 

trees was greater in the shelterwood treatment (7 percent) compared with 

the clearcut treatment (2 percent) (p <0.01).

The incidence of white pine weevil attack on surviving trees was greater in 

the clearcut treatment (56 percent) than in the shelterwood treatment (41 

percent) (p <0.01).

Tree diameter was greater in the clearcut than in the shelterwood, 7.7 cm 

(SE 0.144) vs. 4.2 cm (SE 0.134) (p < 0.01). In the clearcut plots, competi

-

tion from sprouting hardwood stumps has affected growth of some trees. 
140 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Deer or hare browse has not occurred on this site. Diameter of selected trees 

(6.5 cm) (SE 0.163) was greater than non-selected trees (5.2 cm) 

(SE 0.165) (p <0.01). The diameter of pruned trees (5.6 cm) (SE 0.170) 

was less than unpruned trees (6.1 cm) (SE 0.164) (p = 0.03).

Chippewa 1

In 2003 there was no significant difference in tree survival between nonselected (66 percent) and selected trees (69 percent) (p = 0.43). Selected 

trees were taller (1.3 m) (SE 0.035) than non-selected trees (1.2 m) 

(SE 0.034) (p = 0.01).

Damaging agents have had minor impacts thus far. Armillaria root disease 

killed 27 trees between 2000 and 2003. This disease has probably killed 

additional trees, but this could not be confirmed. In 2003, blister rust 

incidence was still low: three trees were killed and nine additional trees were 

diseased. Blister rust incidence was similar on selected trees (three diseased, 

two killed) and on non-selected trees (six diseased, one killed). Browse 

damage on trees at this site has been minor. Competition from woody and 

herbaceous vegetation, overtopping the young pine, has been severe.

Superior 1

Browse damage and competition were major contributing factors to tree 

mortality on this site. In 2003, overall survival was 56 percent. Survival 

was greater in non-selected trees (66 percent) than in selected ORSO (53 

percent) and selected WRC (49 percent) trees (p <0.01). Deer and snowshoe 

hares have caused extensive browse damage. In 2002 more than 85 percent of 

the trees had been browsed to near ground level. Competition stress from aspen suckers along with other woody and herbaceous growth has been heavy.

After six growing seasons, mean tree height was less than 1.0 m, largely due 

to browsing and competition. The non-selected trees were taller (0.7 m) (SE 

0.021) than either the selected WRC (0.5 m) (SE 0.025) or selected ORSO 

(0.5 m) (SE 0.024) trees (p <0.01). There have been no weevil attacks.

There were no significant differences in blister rust incidence among 

selected and non-selected trees (p = 0.91). A total of 21 trees (six killed) 

have blister rust cankers: eight non-selected trees, six selected ORSO trees, 

and seven selected WRC trees.

Superior 2

In 2002, tree survival of the non-selected and selected seedlings was 29 

and 24 percent respectively. This site was replanted in 1998 after the original 

1997 planting failed because of extensive browsing and competition stress. 

In 2002, over 97 percent of the surviving trees were browsed. This was 

despite the use of paper bud caps used as browse protection. Further, the 

use of paper bud caps on the small trees caused trees to bend and become 

deformed under snow.

Superior 3

In 2003, overall tree survival was 80 percent. Survival between non-selected and selected trees was 78 percent and 83 percent, respectively 

(p = 0.22). In 2003, non-selected trees (1.1 m) (SE 0.023) were taller than 

selected trees (1.0 m) (SE 0.023) (p <0.01).

Damage to trees by disease and herbivory has been minimal thus far. 

Armillaria root disease was confirmed on 15 trees that died between 2001 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 141

and 2003. Blister rust incidence has been relatively low; 14 trees have been 

killed (eight selected, six non-selected) by blister rust through 2003 with 20 

additional diseased trees seven selected, 13 non-selected). Competition from 

woody and herbaceous vegetation has been minimal.

Superior 4

In 2003, overall tree survival was 56 percent. Recent tree mortality was 

caused by equipment used for salvage logging in the area in spring 2003. 

Because tree injury was extensive in four plots, these plots were removed 

from the data analyses. In the remaining plots survival was 67 percent. Differences in survival between non-selected and selected trees were minimal, 

66 percent and 69 percent respectively (p = 0.42). Mean tree heights for 

non-selected trees were (1.1 m) (SE 0.027) and selected trees (1.0 m) 

(SE 0.014) (p= 0.13).

Pest incidence and severity has been low. Armillaria root disease was 

confirmed on 14 trees that died between 2001 and 2003. Blister rust has 

affected only six selected trees (two dead) and one non-selected tree. The incidence of browse damage has been low; however, competition from woody 

and herbaceous vegetation overtopping the young pine has been severe.

Combined Results Across Sites

Overall, tree survival of the non-selected trees (67 percent) was greater 

than the ORSO selected trees (62 percent) (p = 0.01). More non-selected 

trees (4.1 percent) were infected by C. ribicola than ORSO trees (2.6 percent) (p = 0.04). However, there was no significant difference in the number 

of non-selected selected trees (1.1 percent) killed by blister rust compared to 

the ORSO trees (1.4 percent) (p = 0.50).

Discussion

Deer and hare browsing and competition stress have been strong contributors to tree mortality on several of the sites, especially Superior 1 and 

2. Many trees were browsed to the ground line. Trees on other sites, e.g., 

Superior 3 and 4, had little browsing damage. In a recent Minnesota study, 

Krueger and Puettmann (in press) concluded that herbivory was more likely 

to cause plantation failure than insect or disease incidence. White pine is a 

winter food source (January through March) for white-tailed deer (Rogers 

and others 1981). The intensity of browse on white pine occurring at the local level can be influenced by over-wintering deer populations and the local 

availability of more preferred food sources (Hamerstrom and Blake 1939). 

High incidence of feeding damage can occur in one area while in other areas 

little damage may occur. In addition to deer and snowshoe hares, moose also 

browse white pine (Pastor 1992).

The use of paper bud caps for protection against deer browsing has been 

widely recommended in Minnesota. However, in our experience, the bud 

caps themselves may be an impediment to the growth of young trees. The 

paper bud caps restricted terminal growth on many of the smaller seedlings 

(<10 cm tall) and often distorted the terminals while under snow cover. Bud 

caps should probably not be used until trees reach a height of 50 cm.

Though woody and herbaceous competition has not been quantitatively 

measured, it is evident that growth and survival of pine on several sites has 
142 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

been severely affected by heavy cover. This has been especially evident in the 

clearcut treatments at the Superior 1 and 2 and Chippewa 1 sites and on the 

nutrient rich, mesic sites.

Mechanical removal of competing woody vegetation was done at the Supe-

rior 1, Chippewa 1, and Hiawatha 1 sites. However, within a year resprouting, 

young pine was again overwhelmed by woody vegetation. Grass and other 

herbaceous vegetation often smothered young pines after heavy snowfalls.

Van Arsdel (1964) recommended planting rust resistant seedlings in 

hazard zone 4 as the most effective control measure for that zone. Early data 

from Hiawatha 1 (Ostry 2000) indicated that the ORSO selected stock had 

significantly lower blister rust incidence than non-selected stock. Although 

these data reported here are preliminary, this trend has continued on the 

Hiawatha 1 site; but across all sites no significant difference was detected in 

the number of trees killed among selected and non-selected trees.

Most fatal blister rust cankers occur in the lower portions of trees, thus 

pruning of lower branches can significantly reduce the likelihood of lethal 

cankers (Weber 1964; Lehrer 1982; Hunt 1991). Van Arsdel (1964) recom

-

mended that pruning be initiated as early as two years after planting. At that 

time it also may be advisable to remove needles on the main stem because 

we have documented that stem cankers on the lower stem can originate from 

these infected needles.

An existing overstory can reduce blister rust incidence by promoting 

dew formation in the upper canopy (Van Arsdel 1961b) rather than on the 

seedlings growing in the understory. Microclimatic conditions are crucial in 

the movement of fungal spores and infection of pines (Van Arsdel 1967). 

However, at the Hiawatha 1 site, infection of trees has occurred despite the 

shelterwood treatment. These trees were closest to a local population of 

Ribes. This supports the recommendation to eliminate Ribes in proximity to 

pine. On this site the presence of Ribes adjacent to trees in the shelterwood 

treatment is apparently making the overstory protection ineffective.

There was an intensive effort to eradicate Ribes plants in many forested 

areas beginning in the early 1900s. This effort lasted over 50 years and 

represented the largest tree disease control program ever undertaken in the 

United States (Benedict 1981). The program was eventually largely aban

-

doned and viewed as not effective in many parts of the country. However, 

it was deemed partially effective in the East (Benedict 1981, Maloy 1997) 

and has been shown to be effective in local areas (Van Arsdel 1972, Stewart 

1957). Ostrofsky and others (1988) reported that in Maine, where Ribes 

eradication efforts had been ongoing for over 70 years, incidence of blister 

rust was reduced by over 50 percent in treated areas.

White pine weevil attacks do not kill trees but can lead to stem deformity 

and significant value loss in wood products (Brace 1971). To date, trees have 

been damaged by white pine weevil only at the Hiawatha 1 site, the oldest 

planting. The weevil attacks were more prevalent on trees in the clearcut 

treatment. Weevil populations are expected to increase at all sites as the trees 

reach 10-20 years of age. White pine weevil preferentially attacks the largest, 

most vigorous trees in a stand (Kreibel 1954), and open-grown white pine 

are more heavily attacked by this weevil than trees grown in shade (Graham 

1918). Management recommendations for reducing weevil impacts have 

largely been based on growing trees under an existing canopy. However, 

shade reduces growth rates, especially diameter growth (Borman 1965). 

Pubanz and others (1999) observed that in 30-80 year-old open-grown 

plantations of white pine in Wisconsin, sufficient numbers of “crop-trees” 

did develop even though weevil attacks were prevalent. They concluded that 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 143

weevil impacts were often over-stated and recommended that management strategies stress pruning, maintaining unsuppressed crown position 

(open-grown), and full stocking. Our study should allow further evaluation 

of the differences in the incidence of weevil attacks on trees growing in the 

clearcuts vs. shelterwood and pruned vs. unpruned treatments.

Management Implications

While white pine blister rust is a serious disease, it is only one of several 

damaging agents affecting early tree survival and growth. Factors such as 

woody and herbaceous competition, browsing, and Armillaria root disease 

may be more significant threats to the survival of young white pine.

Local variation in rust incidence within the northern Lake States is 

recognized. Potential planting sites should be evaluated based on local 

microclimatic and topography risk factors previously described by Van Arsdel 

(1961b). Rust incidence is influenced by proximity of Ribes to white pine. 

Therefore, managers should avoid planting in areas that harbor abundant 

Ribes populations. Local eradication of Ribes in blister rust hazard zones 3 

and 4 has been shown to be effective in reducing the incidence of blister rust 

and may be a viable management strategy.

Although pruning has been shown to be effective in reducing the incidence of blister rust (Hunt 1991; Lehrer 1982; Weber 1964), early results 

from this study cannot yet validate those results.

Prior to planting, managers should evaluate local herbivore populations, 

especially in the winter and early spring. Potential planting sites with high 

deer or hare populations should be avoided unless effective browse protection is provided. Slow growth rates and browse damage to trees on many of 

our sites have delayed tree pruning and may eventually increase their risk to 

infection by blister rust.

Krueger and Puettmann (in press) concluded that competition, especially 

from woody plants, can severely impact white pine establishment. Our 

results support those conclusions. Without adequate weed control, planting 

failures are likely, especially in clearcut areas and on mesic, nutrient rich sites.

Acknowledgments

We thank Mike Lanasa, Alan Saberniak, Dave Upgren, Phil Kinney, Linda 

Haugen, John Murphy, Dave Worel, Don Potter, and Don Peterson for their 

assistance in the establishment and maintenance of the study plots.

References

Benedict, W. V. 1981. History of white pine blister rust control—a personal 

account. FS-355, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 47 p.

Borman, F. H. 1965. Changes in growth pattern of white pine undergoing 

suppression. Ecology. 46: 269-277.

Brace, L. G. 1971. Effects of white pine weevil damage on tree height, volume, 

lumber recovery, and lumber value in eastern white pine. Publ. No. 1303, 

Canadian Forest Service, Petawawa Forest Experiment Station. 33 p.
144 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Cook, R. D.; Weisberg, S. 1999. Applied regression including computing and 

graphics. 1999. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Dahir, S. E.; Cummings Carlson, J. E. 2001. Incidence of white pine blister rust in 

a high-hazard region of Wisconsin. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 18: 

81-86.

Gevorkiantz, S. A. 1930. Second growth white pine in Wisconsin: its growth, yield, 

and commercial possibilities. Wisconsin Research Bulletin. 98. 

Graham, S. A. 1918. The white-pine weevil and its relation to second-growth white 

pine. Journal of Forestry. 16: 192-202.

Hamerstrom, F. N.; Blake, J. 1939. Winter movements and winter foods of whitetailed deer in central Wisconsin. Journal of Mammology. 20: 206-215.

Hunt, R. S. 1991. Operational control of white pine blister rust by removal of lower 

branches. The Forestry Chronicle. 67: 284-287.

Jones, Alan C. 1992. The problem with white pine. In: Stine, Robert; Baughman, 

Melvin J., eds. White pine symposium proceedings, 1992 September 16-18; 

Duluth, MN. NR-BU-6044-S. St. Paul, MN: Department of Forest Resources, 

University of Minnesota. 64-72.

Kreibel, H. B. 1954. Bark thickness as a factor in resistance to white pine weevil 

injury. Journal of Forestry. 52: 842-845. 

Krueger, J. A.; Puettmann, K. J. (In press). Growth and injury patterns of eastern 

white pine (Pinus strobes L.) seedlings as affected by hardwood overstory density 

and weeding treatments. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry.

Lehrer, G. F. 1982. Pathological pruning: a useful tool in white pine blister rust 

control. Plant Disease. 66: 1138-1139.

Maloy, O. C. 1997. White pine blister rust control in North America: a case history. 

Annual Review of Phytopathology. 35: 87-109.

Marty, Robert. 1986. The trouble with white pine. In: Funk, David T., comp. 

Eastern white pine: today and tomorrow symposium proceedings, 1985 June 12-

14; Durham, New Hampshire. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-51. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 7-9.

McNab, W. H.; Avers, P. E. 1994. Ecological subregions of the United States: 

section descriptions. WO-WSA-5. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service. 267 p. 

Ostrofsky, W. D.; Rumpfe, T.; Struble, D.; Bradbury, R. 1988. Incidence of white 

pine blister rust in Maine after 70 years of a Ribes eradication program. Plant 

Disease. 72: 967-970.

Ostry, M. E. 2000. Restoration of white pine in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and 

Michigan. HortTechnology. 10: 542-543.

Pastor, John. 1992. Browsing damage to white pine. In: Stine, Robert; Baughman, 

Melvin J., eds. 1992. White pine symposium proceedings, 1992 September 

16-18; Duluth, MN. NR-BU-6044-S. St. Paul, MN: Department of Forest 

Resources, University of Minnesota. 137-144.

Pubanz, D. M.; Williams, R. L.; Congos, D. L.; Pecore, M. 1999. Effects of 

the white pine weevil in well-stocked eastern white pine stands in Wisconsin. 

Northern Journal of Forestry. 16: 185-190.

Robbins, K.; Jackson, W. A., McRoberts, R. E. 1988. White pine blister rust in the 

eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 5: 

263-264.

Rogers, L. L.; Mooty, J. J.; Dawson, D. 1981. Foods of the white-tailed deer in the 

Upper Great Lakes Region – a survey. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-65. U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 24 p.

Spencer, John S.; Leatherberry, Earl C.; Hansen, Mark H. 1992. The problem with 

white pine. In: Stine, Robert; Baughman, Melvin J., eds. White pine symposium 

proceedings, 1992 September 16-18; Duluth, MN. NR-BU-6044-S. St. Paul, 

MN: Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota. 54-63.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 145

Stewart, D. M. 1957. Factors affecting local control of white pine blister rust in 

Minnesota. Journal of Forestry. 55: 832-837.

Stine, Robert A.; Baughman, Melvin J., eds.1992. White pine symposium 

proceedings, 1992 September 16-18; Duluth, MN. NR-BU-6044-S. St. Paul, 

MN: Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota.

Van Arsdel, E. P. 1961a. Growing white pine in the lake states to avoid blister rust. 

Sta. Pap. 92. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Lake States Forest 

Experiment Station. 11 p.

Van Arsdel, E. P. 1961b. The climatic distribution of blister rust on white pine in 

Wisconsin. Sta. Pap. 87. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Lake 

States Forest Experiment Station. 34 p.

Van Arsdel, E. P. 1964. Growing white pines to avoid blister rust-new information 

for 1964. Res. Note LS-42. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Lake 

States Forest Experiment Station. 4 p.

Van Arsdel, E. P. 1967. The nocturnal diffusion and transport of spores. 

Phytopathology. 57:1221-1229.

Van Arsdel, E. P. 1972. Environment in relation to white pine blister rust infection. 

In: Bingham, R. T.; Hoff, R. J.; McDonald, G. I., prog. coords. 1972. Biology 

of rust resistance in forest trees: proceedings of a NATO-IUFRO advanced study 

institute; 1969 August 17-24; Moscow, ID. Misc. Publ. No. 1221. Washington, 

D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 479-493.

Weber, R. 1964. Early pruning reduces blister rust mortality in white pine 

plantations. 1964. Res. Note LS-38. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Lake States Forest Experiment Station. 2 p.

White, M. A.; Brown, T. N.; Host, H. G. 2002. Landscape analysis of risk factors 

for white pine blister rust in the mixed forest province of Minnesota, U.S.A. 

Canadian Journal Forest Research. 32: 1639-1650.
146 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Abstract—Limber pine and Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine are currently threatened by the non-native pathogen white pine blister rust (WPBR). Limber pine is experiencing mortality in the Northern Rocky Mountains and the infection front continues to move southward. The fi rst report of WPBR on Rocky Mountain bristlecone 

pine was made in 2003 (Blodgett and Sullivan 2004), at a site that is more than 220 

miles away from the former infection front. No mortality has been observed in this 

recently infected area but the species is highly susceptible. There are no ecological 

reasons to suspect that WPBR on bristlecone and the southern distribution of limber 

pine will not expand over time. Learning from experiences in impacted ecosystems 

will facilitate the development of proactive measures to mitigate impacts in these 

southern populations in the future. If no action is taken, and the pathogen takes 

its course, we risk losses of aesthetic landscapes; impacts to ecosystem boundaries, successional pathways, and watershed processes; and shifts from forested to 

treeless sites at some landscape positions. This paper introduces an interdisciplinary 

approach to developing proactive management options for limber and bristlecone 

pines in the southern Rocky Mountains. Managers, researchers, operational professionals and interested public groups will have to work together and share their 

knowledge and perspectives to sustain these ecosystems for future generations.

Introduction

Limber pine (Pinus fl exilis James) and Rocky Mountain bristlecone (Pinus 

aristata Engelm.) are white pines (subgenus Strobus) yet limber pine is in 

section Strobus, subsection Strobi and Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine is 

in subgenus Parrya, subsection Balfournianae (Lanner 1990). They both 

have 5-needles per fascicle. Limber pine and bristlecone pines can grow 

as erect trees, clusters of erect trees and as wind-sculpted wedge-shaped 

shrubs (krummholz). Limber pine has a very broad elevational distribution 

ranging from the grassland treeline to the alpine treeline as well as a broad 

latitudinal distribution from Canada southward into New Mexico (Schoettle 

and Rochelle 2000). Bristlecone has a narrower distribution, primarily occupying higher elevation sites in central and southern Colorado with a small 

distribution into North New Mexico and a peripheral population in the San 

Francisco Peaks of Arizona. Their often bushy growth form and slow growth 

rate combined with the inaccessibility of the rocky sites that they dominate 

make them poor timber species and ones that have long been overlooked by 

the forestry community. The most basic ecological information has not been 

quantifi ed for these species (Schoettle 2004).

Limber pine and bristlecone pine are currently threatened by the nonnative pathogen white pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola J. C. Fisch.). 

The impact of white pine blister rust on commercial North American white 

Developing Proactive Management Options 

to Sustain Bristlecone and Limber Pine 

Ecosystems in the Presence of a 

Non-Native Pathogen

A. W. Schoettle1

1 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 147

pines has been a focus of attention since its introduction from Europe in 

the early 1900s. In the mid-1980s, the focus expanded to impacts of the 

disease to the non-commercial whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis Engelm.) as 

forest practices shifted toward management of ecosystems. White pine blister 

rust’s threat to whitebark pine and the resultant impacts to the habitat of 

the endangered grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) have brought whitebark 

pine ecosystems into view by the management and research community 

(e.g., Schmidt and McDonald 1990, Tomback and others 2001). Limber 

pine has been infected in the Northern Rocky Mountains for decades and 

the infection front continues to move southward; infections in Colorado 

were found in 1998 (Johnson and Jacobi 2000). White pine blister rust 

was first reported on Rocky 

Mountain bristlecone pine in 

2003 (Blodgett and Sullivan 

2004). This new infection 

site supports infected limber 

pine and bristlecone pine and 

appears disjunct from the more 

continuous infection front 

more than 200 miles to the 

north. The disease appears to 

have jumped over a near continuous corridor of limber pine 

from the infection front to the 

bristlecone/limber pine forests 

(figure 1). Introduction of the 

rust into the southern ecosystems may have occurred from 

infected nursery stock planted 

in the growing communities of 

the urban-wildland interface or 

long-distance transport of rust 

spores from California or other 

infected areas.

Figure 1—A map of the distribution 

of forest at risk in western North 

America for white pine blister 

rust impacts (light shading) and 

the distribution of limber pine 

(medium shading) and Rocky 

Mountain bristlecone pine (dark 

shading). Forests at risk are all 

those containing the 5-needle 

pine species that are susceptible 

to the rust. The dark line denotes 

the current white pine blister rust 

infection front; not all stands are 

infected within the lined areas but 

the rust has been documented on 

the pines in those areas.

Forests at risk

Current infection front

Limber pine

Rocky Mountain

Bristlecone pine
148 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Screening studies reveal that all of the North American 5-needle white 

pines are highly susceptible to the rust. It is estimated that less than 5 per-

cent of the population of each species has any genetic resistance to the rust. 

Heavily infected areas have experienced almost complete mortality of the 

white pine component of the forest and the replacement forest communities 

are more prone to epidemics of native pests and pathogens. Despite signifi-

cant efforts to contain the pathogen after its introduction in the early 1900s, 

this fungus continues to spread. Blister rust is now a permanent resident of 

North America affecting even the high elevation and drier forest ecosystems 

once thought to escape infection.

The early studies of rust susceptibility for RM bristlecone pine are con-

founded by taxonomic confusion associated with the species. The bristlecone 

pines throughout the western United States were thought to be one species (P. aristata) until 1970 when Bailey (1970) distinguished the populations 

into two species. The populations in Colorado, northern New Mexico and 

the isolated population in Arizona were designated Rocky Mountain bristle

-

cone pine and retained the name of P. aristata and the populations in Utah, 

Nevada and California were called Great Basin bristlecone pine and newly 

named P. longaeva. The results from the rust-screening studies of Hoff 

and others (1980) and Bingham (1972) are confounded by the combining 

of seed collections from the two bristlecone pine species. Only the Childs 

and Bedwell (1948) study explicitly sampled a Colorado population (RM 

bristlecone pine) and shows that while this species is susceptible to the rust, 

it appears to have slighter greater resistance than western white pine or sugar 

pine. Although these early studies were conducted with bulk seed lots, they 

suggest that sustaining bristlecone pine forests through management may be 

more successful than other species.

Taking advantage of learning from experiences in impacted ecosystems 

and using the time to develop and instigate proactive measures to help 

prepare the bristlecone pine and southern limber pine ecosystems for the 

pathogen provide the opportunity to attempt to mitigate impacts in the 

future. This paper will discuss the reasons for developing information and 

management options now, even in these early stages of pathogen infection, 

and introduce an interdisciplinary approach to developing a proactive 

management strategy for limber pine and Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine 

in the central Rocky Mountains.

The White Pine Blister Rust Threat:

The Situation

White pine blister rust has a complex life cycle that requires two obligate 

hosts: the 5-needle white pine and the currant or gooseberry species (Ribes

ssp.) (figure 2). Infection of the Ribes occurs in the spring through wind 

transport of aeciospores released from cankers on the pines. Several spore 

stages are completed on the Ribes leaves until finally the basidiospores are 

released in late summer or early fall. The fungus is confined to the leaves of 

the Ribes plants where it completes it life stages. Ribes are deciduous and 

shed their leaves and the fungal infection each year. As a result the fungus 

does not cause mortality of the Ribes plant. In contrast, once infected the 

fungus is persistent, perennial, and invasive within the pine. The white pine 

blister rust basidiospores enter pine needles through stomatal openings and 

the fungus grows into the twig (McDonald and Hoff 2001). Aecia (which 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 149

release the aeciospores) erupt through the bark of the twig and form the telltail canker. The fungus continues to grow into the branch and ultimately the 

main stem of the tree. Cankers girdle the infected branch or stem killing the 

distal tissue. Branch cankers often will not kill the tree until the reduction in 

leaf area is so great that the tree cannot survive or the canker grows to affect 

the main stem. The contribution of rust-caused branch mortality to reduced 

cone production and an increase in sensitivity of the tree to other stresses 

such as drought, competition, and bark beetle attacks deserves research 

attention to fully assess the impacts of the disease. Cankers on the main stem 

of a tree cause top-kill and will usually kill the individual. White pine blister 

rust exerts strong selective pressure at the seedling-sapling stage and can 

cause high rates of seedling mortality within several years of infection. Very 

old trees that have significant partial cambial dieback, such that all of the 

tree’s surviving foliage is supported on a few branches, may be rapidly killed 

by white pine blister rust once infected (Schoettle 2004).

White pine blister rust has its own set of environmental constraints as 

influenced by the tolerances of its biology as well as the distribution of its 

two hosts, the five-needle white pines and Ribes ssp. The degree of overlap 

between the rust’s potential habitat with that of limber pine and bristlecone 

pine’s distributions has not been fully defined. While the selective pressure 

exerted by the rust on these five-needle pines will not be uniform across 

their distribution, existing information on Ribes distributions suggests that 

it may be extensive; three-fourths of the limber pine sites sampled along the 

elevation gradient of Colorado’s Front Range contained Ribes ssp. (8 of 12 

stands; Schoettle and Rochelle 2000) and more than half of the bristlecone 

pine sites evaluated by Ranne and others (1997) contained Ribes ssp. (27 

of 50 stands). Long-range transport of rust spores may be possible (Mielke 

1943) but may not be necessary for the rust to spread through these 

ecosystems. The suitability of different Ribes species to host the rust varies 

(Van Arsdel and others 1998) but unfortunately, those species that support 

Figure 2—Simplified schematic of the life cycle of white pine blister rust.
150 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

good rust spore production are present throughout the range of both 

bristlecone and limber pine (Kearns and others, in press).

Consequences of Non-intervention

Bristlecone and limber pine ecosystems are unique and valued. The effects 

of blister rust-caused mortality in these systems will be greater than the loss 

of the individual trees. In addition to their ecological roles, which will be 

discussed below, these species are appreciated by people for their artistic 

forms and extreme longevity (e.g., Cohen 1998). Bristlecone pine and lim-

ber pine are often used as symbols of perseverance and tolerance. In central 

Colorado, over 100,000 people a year pay an entrance fee to visit an ancient 

bristlecone pine forest in a Research National Area. Also, because these spe-

cies occupy ridge tops they are often the species that surround forest visitors 

as they enjoy the mountain vistas at their hike’s destination. The loss of these 

species to a non-native pathogen would be a national loss.

Ecologically, bristlecone and limber pines species play critical roles in 

maintaining the resilience and integrity of many Rocky Mountain ecosys-

tems. Wildlife relies on these species for food. Limber pine has large wingless 

(or near wingless) seeds and has a mutualistic relationship with corvid spe

-

cies (e.g., Clark’s nutcracker, Nucifraga columbiana Wilson) such that the 

corvids feed on the seed and serve to disperse the seeds (Lanner and Vander 

Wall 1980, Tomback and Kramer 1980). As for whitebark pine, seeds of lim

-

ber pine are also an important food source for black and grizzly bears (Ursus 

ssp.; Kendell 1983, McCutchen 1996), red squirrels (Tamaisciurus hudsoni-

cus; Hutchins and Lanner 1982) and other small rodents. For the grizzly 

bear it is known that during years of low whitebark pine seed production the 

fecundity of bears is reduced and they depend more heavily on limber pine 

seed to fulfill their nutritional needs. Low limber pine seed production likely 

affects squirrel populations and the carnivore species that depend on them, 

including possibly the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis).

Bristlecone and limber pines have a suite of structural and physiologi

-

cal traits that enable them to be very stress tolerant and occupy sites that 

other species cannot (Schoettle 2004). Mortality caused by the rust in these 

harsh sites will transition these forested sites to treeless areas affecting slope 

stability, snow retention and watershed hydrology. While these rocky ridges 

are the most obvious habitat occupied by bristlecone and limber pine, 

scattered occurrence of these species throughout the high-elevation forested 

region of the Colorado is typical (Schoettle 2004). On these more mesic 

sites, limber pine’s early post-disturbance dominance succeeds over time 

to other conifer species (Rebertus and others 1991). Limber pine acts as a 

nurse tree, mitigating the harsh open environment after disturbances and 

facilitating the establishment of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir in the 

subalpine (Rebertus and others 1991, Donnegan and Rebertus 1999) and 

of Douglas-fir at the lower treeline (Baumeister 2002). Engelmann spruce 

and subalpine fir are able to become established in the lee of bristlecone 

pine at the alpine treeline at elevations where they cannot become estab

-

lished alone (personal observations). The loss of limber and bristlecone 

pines in these more mesic areas would alter successional trajectories and 

future forest composition.

The ecological trade-off of the traits that confer stress tolerance is slow 

growth and poor competitive ability. These species have long tree and 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 151

leaf lifespans (see Schoettle 1994). Both limber and bristlecone pine have 

delayed reproduction such that it takes more than 50 years for a seedling to 

mature to become cone-bearing. As a result, after a disturbance, there is a 

long lag before the reforested site is ecologically functional with respect to 

seed production and the species and processes that depend on them. This 

posed a compelling reason for attempting to establish rust-resistant seedlings 

of these species as soon as possible to minimize this lag period and accelerate 

the natural production and dispersal of rust-resistant seeds.

The effects of white pine blister rust on five-needle pines will interact with 

the changing fire regimes in the Rocky Mountains. As fire regimes get more 

frequent and unpredictable due to past fire suppression and forest practices, 

large wildfires may jeopardize the usually less-flammable five-needle pine 

ecosystems on dry sites. In addition, branch and tree mortality caused by 

white pine blister rust may contribute to fuel loading in white pine stands, 

increasing the susceptibility of these stands to sustain and be consumed by 

fire. In the event of larger fires, especially those covering a larger area than 

cannot be seeded effectively by wind dispersal mechanisms, the loss of birddispersed pines as colonizers may be especially pronounced.

In summary, these species and their ecosystems provide aesthetic and 

spiritual experiences for forest visitors and diet and habitat for wildlife. In 

addition, they have unique structural and physiological traits that lead to 

unique ecological functions on the landscape including post-fire recovery 

and facilitating succession. These species are, however, very slow growing 

and the ecosystems are slow to recover after disturbance. The mortality and 

reduced cone production caused by the non-native pathogen white pine blister rust will further slow the post-disturbance recovery of these ecosystems. 

Observations of effects caused by this pathogen in the northern Rockies 

shows that the impacts can be devastating and far reaching (Tomback and 

others 2001). Learning from experiences in other ecosystems and initiating 

proactive measures provides the opportunity to help sustain these ecosystems 

during their pending persistent assault by white pine blister rust. There is no 

ecological reason to suspect that WPBR won’t continue to spread through 

bristlecone and limber pine ecosystems in the southern Rocky Mountains. 

If no action is taken, and the pathogen takes its course, we risk losses of 

aesthetic landscapes, impacts to ecosystem boundaries and successional pathways, and shifts from forested to treeless sites at some landscape positions 

causing changes in slope stability and watershed hydrology.

Developing Management Options

The Need for an Interdisciplinary Approach

Development of strategies for sustaining limber pine and bristlecone 

pine ecosystems in the presence of the non-native pathogen requires an 

interdisciplinary approach (figure 3). Information is very limited for these 

non-timber species and ecosystems. Information and integration is needed in 

the areas of (1) pathology, including etiology and epidemiology, (2) genetics 

of both hosts and the genetics of resistance mechanisms, and (3) ecology of 

both hosts and the fungus as well as the interactive effects of the disease on 

ecosystem function. The integration of existing information and the gathering of new information in each of these areas will help the development of 

management options to sustain white pine ecosystem function and maintain 

the species’ existing distribution. The goal of this effort is to provide 

Figure 3—The need for an 

interdisciplinary approach in 

developing management options 

to sustain white pine ecosystem 

function in the presence of the 

non-native pathogen white pine 

blister rust.
152 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

managers with the ability to (1) create regeneration opportunities for limber 

and bristlecone pines, (2) accelerate the establishment of rust resistant individuals, (3) prioritize stands for management intervention and assess some 

management options for those stands, and (4) sustain the functioning and 

resilience of these forest ecosystems for the future.

The goal is to accelerate the establishment of white pine blister rust 

resistant genotypes of limber pine and bristlecone pine across the landscape. 

Exploring the use of natural processes in addition to tree-planting approaches 

deserves attention with these species (figure 4). Protecting seed source stands 

and creating nearby regeneration opportunities to provide for rapid selection 

of rust-resistant genotypes in the presence of the rust may be an option. 

The susceptibility of trees to rust infection is not constant with age; young 

susceptible trees are killed rapidly by the rust while some older trees appear to 

develop resistance over time (ontogenetic resistance). Ontogenetic resistance 

can be significant in sugar pine yet the degree this occurs in bristlecone and 

limber pine is not known. If present, the older stand may be less impacted by 

the rust yet the progeny of those ontogenetically resistant trees are susceptible 

to infection by the rust. Therefore in the event of a disturbance such as a fire 

these older stands may not ensure the recovery of the area in the presence 

of the pathogen. Because ontogenetic resistance does not contribute to true 

genetic rust resistance it may serve to retain trees on the landscape for a generation but does not ensure future landscape sustainability over longer time 

scales. As a result, to accelerate the establishment of rust-resistant seedlings, it 

will be important to provide an opportunity in portions of the landscape for 

rust-resistant selection of reproductive seed trees and regeneration of their 

progeny. Creating a mosaic of mixed age classes and regeneration opportunities across the landscape before the pathogen is present may retain bristlecone 

and limber pine attributes in the area while rust-resistant selection occurs 

rapidly in the young stands and slowly in the older stands. This approach 

may sustain the present and future resiliency of the ecosystem in the presence 

of the pathogen.

 Figure 4—Schematic of potential 

effects of white pine blister rust 

on limber pine and bristlecone 

pine populations. The rust may 

cause extinction of some stands 

and isolation of others. After 

the rust has impacted an area, 

creating a colonization site may 

promote establishment of rustresistant individuals if seeds are 

available. Artificial seed transfer, 

via outplanting of rust resistant 

seedlings, may accelerate the 

establishment of rust-resistant 

seedlings in the colonization site. 

Creating small regeneration sites 

before the rust arrives will result in 

young stands on the landscape for 

efficient rust-resistance selection 

upon invasion.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 153

Alternatively, selecting rust resistant genotypes through research studies 

and outplanting is another approach. Identifying resistant individuals can 

be done, as has been done for other white pines, by field assessment in 

areas already challenged by white pine blister rust or by screening seedlings 

in nursery trials with artificial inoculations. This more active management 

approach also requires sufficient knowledge to generate seed transfer 

guidelines to avoid outplanting resistant individuals that are maladapted to 

the site. This process will take time. A combination of approaches may be 

useful: prepare the landscape before infection by creating a diverse age class 

structure; promote natural regeneration from resistant trees after infection; 

and augment, if needed, with artificial regeneration of selected genotypes.

Proposed Strategy

Achieving the integrated interdisciplinary approach to sustain white 

pine ecosystems requires the cooperation of diverse partners and expertise. 

Developing the necessary knowledge to create regeneration opportunities to 

accelerate the selection for and establishment of a rust-resistant population 

will require information on the colonization dynamics of both the pines 

and Ribes, the geographic pattern of local adaptation of both hosts and the 

pathogen, and the identification of rust-resistance mechanisms and their 

distributions in the pine populations (figure 5).

Programs within Region 2 Forest Health Management, Colorado State 

University, and Rocky Mountain Research Station have begun to tackle this 

problem. Ongoing studies in the area of geographic patterns of local adaptation suggest that local differentiation among bristlecone pine populations is 

sufficient to warrant the definition of seed transfer zones. Studies have also 

begun to screen bristlecone for rust-resistance to identify possible resistant 

individuals and assess the possibility of differential distribution of resistance 

among populations. Extensive monitoring of rust infection, meteorological 

conditions, and host distributions are being used to generate rust hazard 

models for southern Wyoming and Colorado. Studies of the regeneration 

dynamics of bristlecone and limber pine show that they establish well after 

Figure 5—Schematic of a strategy to develop management options to sustain 

white pine ecosystem function in the presence of the non-native pathogen 

white pine blister rust.
154 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

fire and are able to colonize the interior of large burned areas. However, 

Ribes densities are greatly increased after fire (Schoettle 2003), elevating the 

risk of rust in the area. Therefore fire can be used to generate colonization 

sites for bristlecone and limber pines but prior to its use in an area one 

should consider whether Ribes is also likely to proliferate.

Ongoing Needs

The program to develop restoration options for high-elevation white pines 

will take time and time is running short. Gathering, integrating, and synthesizing information is critical for the development of management options in a 

timely manner to help sustain bristlecone and limber pine ecosystem function 

and resilience. Increasing awareness of the threat to these valued ecosystems 

will stimulate work to fill the information gaps. In addition, education to 

encourage recognition of the hosts and the symptoms of the disease will facilitate efforts to learn the extent of the disease and to restrict the transplanting 

of infected horticultural stock. Other ecosystems that have been affected by 

the non-native rust for longer periods offer learning opportunities. While 

information may not be directly transferable among ecosystems, insights 

from past experiences in other systems regarding what restoration treatments 

might work in bristlecone and limber pine ecosystems may be valuable. 

Information from the uninfected ecosystems can provide baselines to help 

managers in infected areas better assess the effectiveness of restoration treatments in their areas. Finally, managers, researchers, operational professionals 

and interested public groups must work together and share their knowledge 

and perspectives to develop and implement effective management options to 

sustain and restore these ecosystems for future generations.

References

Bailey, D. K. 1970. Phytogeography and taxonomy of Pinus subsection 

Balfourianae. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden. 57: 210-249.

Baumeister, D. A. 2002. Effects of Pinus flexilis on the dynamics and structure 

of plant communities on the northern Rocky Mountain Front. Missoula, MT: 

Division of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, PhD Dissertation.

Bingham, R. T. 1972. Taxonomy, crossability, and relative blister rust resistance of 

5-needled pines. Biology of rust resistance in forest trees. Proceedings: NATOIUFRO Advanced Study Institute. Misc. Publ. # 1221. Moscow, ID: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 271-280.

Blodgett, J. T.; Sullivan, K. F. 2004. First report of white pine blister rust on Rocky 

Mountain Bristlecone pine. Plant Disease. 88: 311.

Childs, T. W.; Bedwell, J. L. 1948. Susceptibility of some white pine species to 

Cronartium ribicola in the Pacific Northwest. Journal of Forestry. 46: 595-599.

Cohen, M. P. 1998. A garden of bristlecones – tales of change in the Great Basin. 

Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. 308 p.

Donnegen, J. A.; Rebertus, A. J. 1999. Rates and mechanisms of subalpine forest 

succession along an environmental gradient. Ecology. 80: 1370-1384.

Hoff, R. J.; Bingham, R. T.; McDonald, G. I. 1980. Relative blister rust resistance 

of white pines. European Journal of Forest Pathology. 10: 307-316.

Hutchins, H. E.; Lanner, R. M. 1982. The central role of Clark’s nutcracker in the 

dispersal and establishment of whitebark pine. Oecologia. 55: 192-201.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 155

Johnson, D. W.; Jacobi, W. R . 2000. First report of white pine blister rust in 

Colorado. Plant Disease. 84: 595.

Kearns, H. S. J.; Jacobi, W. R.; Sullivan, K. F.; Geils, B. W. In press. Is the alternate 

host for white pine blister rust in Colorado? In: B. W. Geils, comp. 2004. 

Proceedings of the 51st Western International Forest Disease Work Conference; 

2003 August 18–22; Grants Pass, OR. Flagstaff, AZ: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Kendell, K. C. 1983. Use of pine nuts by black and grizzly bears in the Yellowstone 

area. International Conference on Bear Research and Management. 5: 166-173.

Lanner, R. M. 1990. Biology, taxonomy, evolution, and geography of stone pines of 

the world. Proceedings: Symposium on whitebark pine ecosystems: Ecology and 

management of a high-mountain resource. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-270. Ogden, 

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research 

Station. 14-24. 

Lanner, R. M.; Vander Wall, S. B. 1980. Dispersal of limber pine seed by Clark’s 

nutcracker. Journal of Forestry. 78: 637-639.

McCutchen, H. E. 1996. Limber pine and bears. Great Basin Naturalist. 56(1): 90-92.

McDonald, G. I.; Hoff, R. J. 2001. Blister rust: an introduced plaque. In: 

Whitebark Pine Communities, edited by D. F. Tomback, S. F. Arno, and R. E. 

Keane. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. 193-220.

Mielke, J. L. 1943. White pine blister rust in Western North America. New Haven, 

CT: Yale University School of Forestry Bulletin. 52.

Ranne, B. M.; Baker, W. L.; Andrews, T.; Ryan, M. G. 1997. Natural variability of 

vegetation, soils and physiography in the bristlecone pine forests of the Rocky 

Mountains. Great Basin Naturalist. 57: 21-37.

Rebertus, A. J.; Burns, B. R.; and Veblen, T. T. 1991. Stand dynamics of Pinus 

flexilis-dominated subalpine forests in the Colorado Front Range. Journal of 

Vegetation Science. 2: 445-458.

Schmidt, W. C.; McDonald, K. J., comps. 1990. Proceedings: Symposium on 

whitebark pine ecosystems: Ecology and management of a high-mountain 

resource. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-270. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station.

Schoettle, A. W. 1994. Influence of tree size on shoot structure and physiology of 

Pinus contorta and Pinus aristata. Tree Physiology 14: 1055-1068.

Schoettle, A. W. 2004. Ecological roles of five-needle pine in Colorado: potential 

consequences of their loss, p. 124-135. In: Sniezko, Richard A.; Samman, Safiya; 

Schlarbaum, Scott E.; Kriebel, Howard B., eds. 2004. Breeding and genetic 

resources of five-needle pines: growth, adaptability, and pest resistance; 2001 

July 23-27; Medford, OR, USA. IUFRO Working Party 2.02.15. Proceedings 

RMRS-P-32. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Research Station. 259 p.

Schoettle, A. W.; Berger, C. A.; Bonnet, V. H. 2003. Proactive conservation options 

for bristlecone pine forests in the presence of an exotic pathogen – use of fire? In: 

Abstracts – The Ecological Society of America 88th Annual Meeting, August 3-8 

2003, Savannah, GA. Washington, D.C.: The Ecological Society of America. 301.

Schoettle, A. W.; Rochelle, S. G. 2000. Morphological variation of Pinus flexilis

(Pinaceae), a bird-dispersed pine, across a range of elevation. American Journal of 

Botany. 87: 1797-1806.

Tomback, D. F.; Kramer, K. A. 1980. Limber pine seed harvest by Clark’s nutcracker 

in the Sierra Nevada: timing and foraging behavior. Condor. 82: 467-468.

Tomback, D. F.; Arno, S. F.; Keane, R. E., eds. 2001. Whitebark pine communities. 

Washington, D.C.: Island Press. 440 p.

Van Arsdel, E. P.; Conklin, D. A.; Popp, J. B.; Geils, B. W. 1998. The distribution 

of white pine blister rust in the Sacramento Mountains of New Mexico. Finnish 

Forest Research Institute Research Papers. 712: 275-283.
156 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Abstract—A pilot watershed analysis along with the Davis Late Successional 

Reserve analysis in the range of the northern spotted owl identifi ed potential loss of 

suitable habitat, reduction in the numbers of large trees, and lack of replacements 

for large trees. A variety of silvicultural thinning techniques has been used to address these important issues and to move toward a sustainable mix of stand conditions on the landscape.

Introduction

In 1993 President Clinton ordered that a resolution be found to the gridlock between the needs of wildlife associated with late- and old-structured 

stands (LOS) and the need to thin timbered stands in the Pacifi c Northwest 

and northern California areas. He put together a commission, which met in 

April 1993, to reach consensus on how to conserve the wildlife species that 

require Late and Old Structure (LOS) within the range of the northern spotted owl. It also purposed to provide a steady flow of timber products from the 

same landscapes. This resulted in the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP), or the 

President’s plan as it is commonly referred to, signed April 13, 1994.

The NWFP applied to the whole range of the northern spotted owl. The 

bulk of the range of the northern spotted owl is west of the crest of the 

Cascade Mountains in California, Oregon, and Washington. Portions of the 

range extend to the east side of the Cascades. In the Pacifi c Northwest, this 

area is commonly referred to as the east side.

As a result of the decision from the NWFP, a network of late successional 

reserves (LSR) was identifi ed to provide for old growth dependent species. 

Davis LSR is one of the east side LSRs nestled mostly in Odell Creek and 

Moore Creek subwatersheds (fi gure 1). Along with accompanying standards 

and guidelines, watershed level analysis at the sixth level watersheds was initiated in certain key areas called pilot areas.

One of the 15 key areas selected as a pilot watershed to assess was the 

Odell subwatershed on the Crescent Ranger District. This subwatershed 

grouped the Moore Creek, the Odell Lake, and the Odell Creek subwatersheds for a total assessment area of 74,933 acres. The Odell Pilot Watershed 

Assessment identifi ed key processes and fl ows in and through the area in the 

physical, biological, and social realms. Vegetative condition was common to 

most of the processes and fl ows in the subwatershed. From the Odell Pilot 

analysis, certain items were chosen as key items of concern. One of the key 

items of concern was the loss of large trees and the lack of replacements for 

the large trees in the area. Most of the mixed conifer stands currently have 

overstories of fi re-resistant species, primarily ponderosa pine and Douglas-fi r. 

Long-Term Sustainability in Davis Late 

Successional Reserve

Jim Stone1 and Joan Kittrell2

1 Central Oregon Insect and Disease 

Service Center, Bend, OR.

2 Crescent Ranger District, Crescent, 

OR.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 157

Understories are comprised mostly of the true fir species and lodgepole pine, 

so dense that ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir regeneration are few to nonexistent and very poor in form, unable to respond to release.

Teamwork

As the issues became clear, time was taken for members of the interdisciplinary team (IDT) to educate each other on the issues, concerns, and desires 

of their discipline. This was called team teaching. Being able to understand 

and speak each other’s “language” proved to be very effective in communicating with other agencies, administrators, and the general public. Each team 

member could clearly describe the conditions, processes, flows, and needs of 

any of the other disciplines. It was common on “show-me” trips to see the 

wildlife biologist explain the need for silvicultural treatments, the silviculturist 

to explain the need to retain or provide a particular habitat structure, and/or 

a fuels specialist to explain the need for certain snags or down woody material 

for particular wildlife needs.

Figure 1—Distribution of Late Successional Reserves 

(LSRs) and nesting, roosting, and foraging habitat on 

the Deschutes National Forest.
158 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

The cohesiveness of the group and the trust built through this process 

carried over to implementation of the project. This was key in the success of 

the project and providing continuity when integrating new people into the 

project, as all but one of the team members moved away.

Special Place

The 48,890-acre Davis Late Successional Reserve (LSR) (figure 2), one of 

the largest of the LSRs in the system, was analyzed for its ability to continue 

functioning as an ecosystem dominated by late and old seral structural conditions. The LSR lies mostly within the Odell Pilot subwatershed, spans seven 

buttes, and skirts the shores of Davis Lake. It includes lodgepole pine in the flat 

basins, ponderosa pine at the base of the buttes, mixed conifer stands on the 

midslopes of the buttes, and mountain hemlock at the tops. Snags and down 

wood are common from endemic levels of insects, disease, and competitioninduced mortality. The elements of the LSR that make it suitable for the northern spotted owl and bald eagles are the multi-storied mixed conifer stands.

The lodgepole and ponderosa pine stands are not suitable as habitat for 

the northern spotted owl, but each has groups of species associated with its 

old-structured stands. Stands are, however, used for dispersal by the owls, 

since the mixed conifer stands are bisected by the other stands across the 

landscape.

Other animals including deer, elk, coyotes, neotropical migratory birds, 

owls, woodpeckers, and hawks take advantage of the diversity of habitats.

Figure 2—Davis Late Successional Reserve with owl home ranges and eagle use areas.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 159

Home Sweet Home

Davis LSR owl habitat is important to maintain over time. Like other 

LSRs on the east side, Davis LSR is on the edge of the range of the northern 

spotted owl. The owls resident to this area are considered important to the 

genetic base because of their “pioneering” nature; i.e., they go where no owl 

has gone before and survived. This is considered to be an important trait for 

the survival of the species.

Spotted owls generally require mature or old-growth coniferous forest 

with complex structure including multiple canopy layers, large green trees 

and snags, heavy canopy habitat, and coarse woody material on the forest 

floor. A wide variety of forest types are utilized. Nesting, roosting, and 

foraging (NRF) habitat for the northern spotted owl on the Deschutes NF 

includes stands of mixed conifer, ponderosa pine with white fir understory, 

and mountain hemlock with subalpine fir. Suitable nest sites are generally in 

cavities in the boles of either dead or live trees of at least 30 inches DBH. 

Platform nests such as abandoned raptor nests, broken treetops, mistletoe 

brooms, and squirrel nests are used on rare occasions. Relatively heavy 

canopy habitat with a semi-open understory is essential for effective hunting 

and secure movement. Habitat conditions that support good populations 

of northern flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus), western red-backed voles (Clethrionomys californicus), and other nocturnal or crepuscular small mam

-

mals, birds, and insects are essential to supporting spotted owls.

Edge effects from large forest openings may adversely impact the micro

-

habitat conditions necessary for suitable owl habitat as well as contribute to 

increasing the risk to spotted owls imposed by predators or to competition 

from the barred owl (Strix varia). Spotted owls will use younger, managed for

-

ests that have key habitat components available. These younger forests provide 

dispersal habitat for owls and foraging habitat if near nesting or roosting areas.

Hence, complexity of stand structure plays a very important role as 

habitat for the northern spotted owl. This is also a factor for the bald eagle 

habitat in the LSR. The eagles use the dense, multi-storied stands for winter 

roosting. The big, open-grown ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir trees with 

forks in the tops are the preferred sites for nest building. The understory 

development since fire exclusion has created serious competition and ladder 

fuel conditions.

Danger in Paradise

Such complex stand structure in east side forests is a condition that is 

transitory, at best. The historic condition of these stands seems to clearly 

have been mostly open park-like stands dominated by fire-resistant species 

such as the pines and Douglas-fir. Ponderosa pine and, to a lesser extent, 

Douglas-fir, dominate and are the oldest of the overstory trees in the LSR. 

Fire frequencies ranged from five to 30 years on most of the ponderosa and 

mixed conifer stands. Most all of the understory trees have come in since the 

time of fire suppression, about the end of the 18th century. Records of early 

recreationists and settlers in the area indicate they would often fight fires that 

were a threat to their campsites and homes (personal communication, Leroy 

Steece, Archeology Tech).

Since that time, fire intolerant species (lodgepole pine and true firs) have 

developed in the understories at such densities that competition-associated 

mortality of the overstory trees is increasing rapidly at a rate that exceeds 

replacement of those trees. Personal observations of old and newer stumps 

in the area indicate that the first 8-15 decades of the overstory trees were 
160 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

characterized by rapid growth, indicating somewhat open-grown conditions. 

These growth rates certainly exceed those of any overstory replacement trees 

presently growing in untreated stands. Thus, conditions favorable for species 

such as the northern spotted owl and its prey were probably not common on 

the east slopes of the Cascades in much of Central Oregon until the last half 

century or less. Now, with those conditions common on the landscape, the 

concern for large tree retention and for stand replacement fire events is high.

 Building on the foundation of the Odell Pilot WA, one of the key 

concerns in the analysis of the LSR was the long-term sustainability of the 

late-successional stands. Multi-storied stands of the early seral ponderosa 

pine and Douglas-fir overstories with dense true fir and lodgepole pine un-

derstories are highly susceptible to insects, disease and/or fire events at stand 

replacement intensities. These stands developed because of fire suppression 

in the area for the last century. This, combined with limited management 

activities to control densities, has resulted in vegetative structural conditions 

that probably never previously occurred at this level on the landscape.

Risk Reduction or Habitat on a Timeline

The 7 Buttes and 7 Buttes Return analyses were initiated to try to address 

the vegetative condition concerns raised in the Odell Pilot and Davis LSR 

assessments. The purpose and need focused on the key vegetative issues and 

how to approach them from a silvicultural perspective. A variety of silvicultural 

approaches were proposed and planned for the landscape. They included:

1. Regeneration harvest (HSH), 32 acres, leaving an overstory in a shelter-

wood density.

2. Salvage (HSV) or (HSL-SV) of lodgepole pine, 1149 acres, removal of 

excess dead from stands and/or selective removal of lodgepole understory.

3. Light thinning (HTH9M or S) would reduce the post-harvest basal area 

to about 90 percent of the upper management zone (UMZ) and maintain 

a multi-storied stand on 7509 acres or a single-storied stand on 613 acres. 

These treatments usually include precommercial thinning (PCT) to reach 

target basal area. The ponderosa pine plant association groups or mixed 

conifer dry plant association groups with ponderosa pine as the dominant 

species are targeted for single-storied stands.

4. Moderate thinning (HTH5) would reduce the basal area to within 50 

percent to 80 percent of the UMZ and maintain a multi-storied stand on 

226 acres and single-storied stand on 163 acres. These treatments usually 

include precommercial thinning to reach target basal area. The ponderosa 

pine plant association groups or mixed conifer dry plant association 

groups with ponderosa pine as the dominant species are targeted for 

single-storied stands.

5. Single-tree selection (HSL) in three lodgepole pine stands (272 acres), to 

promote development of larger trees with full crowns.

6. Precommercial thinning on 10,000 acres.

The intent of treatments was to “set the clock back” on the successional 

processes going on in the area. This was to be done by retaining most or 

all of the large trees while thinning out the later successional understory 

species and the lodgepole pine. The goal was to get the stands to 90 percent 

of upper management zone (UMZ) or less, as discussed in Cochran’s paper 

(1992). The strategy was to have a commercial entry to generate funds 

that could at least partially offset the costs of thinning the noncommercial 

components of the stands. Generally speaking, in the mixed conifer stands, if 

precommercial thinning was not completed, the stands were not effectively 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 161

treated to the stated objectives of increased resistance to insects, disease, and 

fire and of large tree retention on the landscape.

Most of the stands proposed for treatment with timber sales were considered suitable as nesting, roosting, and foraging habitat, or NRF. Initial 

evaluations of NRF did not include trees less than 8 inches DBH as part of 

the habitat structure. However, as precommercial-thinning projects began to 

emerge, the importance of this component surfaced causing serious concern 

among biologists. Precommercial thinning to a level appropriate for longterm sustainability of the large tree components clearly removed the stands 

from NRF status. Any lesser treatment was not considered adequate to meet 

the long-term goals for the stands. This dilemma prompted field reviews and 

close coordination with USFWS in order to develop some possible treatment 

approaches that could allow both effective treatment and retention of NRF 

at acceptable levels on the landscape. The bottom line is that NRF is not a 

sustainable condition in these stands.

Nuts and Bolts

The silvicultural treatment objectives within the LSR are based on habitat 

conditions rather than the traditional production and yield. They include:

• Increase resistance to insects, disease, and wildfire stand replacement 

events.

• Maintain and/or enhance large tree retention and growth.

• Utilize down dead material in excess of that needed to meet wildlife 

guidelines.

Treatment specifics to meet these guidelines include reduction of density 

to below UMZ using basal area as a surrogate for leaf area estimations. Using 

stand examination information, the stand density index (SDI) was calculated 

Figure 3—7 Buttes and 7 Buttes Return 

vegetative treatment units. The shaded 

area is the Davis LSR.
162 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

for each of the stands as outlined by Cochran (1992). The “allocations” of 

SDI varied between even-aged and uneven-aged stands and were averaged 

among 10-inch diameter classes for uneven-aged stands. In the even-aged 

stands, overstory replacement trees were allowed for by stratifying the stands 

to precommercial size, less than 21 inches and greater than 21 inches trees.

Marking instructions were simplified based on site visits by the silvicultur-

ist and interpretation of the SDI information. On many of the stands, both 

the silviculturist and the wildlife biologist worked with the marking crew 

to help them apply treatment objectives to their marking. The silviculturist 

completed random monitoring of the marking and the results were shared 

with the marking crew in a timely manner.

Harvest activity yielded an average of 6.3 CCF per acre (3.25 MBF per 

acre) from an average of 35 trees per acre removed from the mixed conifer 

stands. Most of the volume removed came from the true firs (79 percent) and 

lodgepole pine (10 percent), with incidental volume from ponderosa pine 

and Douglas-fir. An average one-third of the basal area per acre was removed 

and about 26 percent of the merchantable stems was removed. Most stands 

had from 1000 to 3000 sub-merchantable stems per acre. Precommercial 

thinning dropped those numbers to 190-270 stems per acre or less.

A variety of precommercial treatments were proposed to try to address the 

need to keep multi-storied stands. Guidelines developed for NRF habitat in 

the Davis LSR include 274 trees per acre (12.5-foot spacing) of seedlings, 

saplings, and small poles. This is a density that makes treating the fuels very 

difficult. Since these stands are historically fire associated, the goal is to re

-

introduce fire wherever it is appropriate, based on landscape arrangement of 

treatments and vegetative conditions. But fuel loadings are so high at pres

-

ent that an intermediate treatment is needed prior to use of prescribed fire. 

So most of the stands are machine or hand piled and the piles burned with 

this harvest entry. Then, with the next harvest entry, enough of the true fir 

and lodgepole pine will be removed that fire can successfully be reintroduced 

with underburning techniques.

Precommercially thinning to 274 trees per acre (TPA) as a guideline, 

then, was recognized as a serious concern and alternatives were sought to 

mitigate the problems. A variety of treatment alternatives were developed, 

recognizing each alternative would have a different effect on a given site, but 

would bring the desired conditions across the landscape. In summary, these 

treatments are:

Prescription 1—Maintain the existing specifications as stated (274 TPA) 

but use an average 13-foot spacing between leave trees with an average 

260 TPA of seedling/sapling and pole size trees. This would leave the 

approximate numbers of trees but would still include many trees incapable 

of responding to release in some stands.

Prescription 2—Leave an average 260 TPA of the healthiest understory 

regardless of size or species and that are likely to respond to thinning. 

Spacing would not be a very significant factor with this entry, as long as at 

least 260 trees remained on site.

Prescription 3—Reduce the 274 TPA to approximately 190 TPA averaging 

15-foot spacing to accommodate grapple piling machinery to treat slash 

accumulations, leaving the healthiest trees possible while meeting the 

spacing requirements.

Prescription 4—Leave portions of units unthinned and portions thinned 

with only healthy trees remaining and with a minimum spacing specified.

Prescription 5—Thin leaving only healthy trees that meet standards known 

to effectively respond to thinning with increased growth and vigor. This 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 163

differs from option 5 in that no unthinned portions of the units would be 

left.

A combination of these treatments were applied on two of the sale areas 

and reviewed by the ID team and US Fish and Wildlife Service personnel 

and the PAC (Provincial Advisory Committee). It was agreed that using 

a mix of these treatments across the landscape was probably the best way 

to mitigate the needs to maintain the desired conditions on the landscape. 

This would provide a mix of treated and untreated fuels in stands arranged 

in such a way that different conditions were scattered across the landscape 

with no single condition contiguous across a large area. This helps meet fuels 

objectives for suppressing wildfires and meets wildlife objectives of a diversity 

of structures across the landscape.

Sales successfully moved forward with the various treatments. A second 

analysis, 7 Buttes Return, was completed to treat additional stands at risk 

using the lessons learned from the original 7 Buttes. Once all sales and post 

sale work was completed, 18,000 acres or about 40 percent of the LSR 

would have fuels reduced, large trees with improved health, and replacements well on their way.

Epilogue

On June 28, 2003, a fire started in the LSR and quickly grew to about 

1200 acres by nightfall. The next day, weather conditions were such that 

as the wind picked up, the fire grew to almost 20,000 acres in about four 

hours. This resulted in a stand replacement event on about 24 percent of the 

LSR. Fire conditions were such that the fire spread as a wind-driven plumedominated event with a plume reaching over 20,000 feet high and spotting 

1⁄2 to 1 mile ahead of the leading edge. The intensity of the fire was such 

that very severe fire whorls leveled much of the interior of the fire, burned 

overstory trees to the point that few or no limbs are evident, and totally 

consumed all dead material, standing and down.

Interestingly, some of the units that were treated were used successfully as 

burnout areas effectively stopping the fire. It is not clear, with the weather 

conditions being what they were, if the outcome would have been any different were more of the area treated as prescribed. In this case, the outcome 

probably would have been very similar, since all proposed treatment areas 

were located down wind from where the fire developed its head of steam. 

However, had the fuels been treated at the ignition source (a very large area 

of down dead lodgepole pine) the initial attack might have been effective and 

the large fire may not have happened. The lodgepole pine area at the ignition 

source was slated for fuels treatment sometime in the next two to three years.

References

Cochran, P. H. 1992. Stocking levels and underlying assumptions for unevenaged ponderosa pine stands. Res. Note PNW-RN-509. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 10 p.

Steece, Leroy. 2003. Personal communication. Crescent, OR: Crescent Ranger 

District, Deschutes National Forest.
164 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Abstract—Developing consistent inventory and assessment protocols is important 

to people working on aspen issues in California and Nevada. Efforts have focused on 

identifying key indicators of ecological condition within aspen stands. The protocols 

have incorporated a range of factors that create or affect those indicators. Resulting 

ecological assessments conducted through the protocols describe stand structure, 

indicate unique stand management conditions, and record factors that might be 

putting stands at risk. Protocols for determining ecological condition were developed 

and field-tested by review groups in 2002. To date, units from seven state and federal 

agencies have collected data using the same protocols and field form.

Overview

There has been heightened interest in aspen issues in the Far West as governmental mandates like the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (U.S. 

Forest Service 2001) have increasingly directed land managers to protect the 

biodiversity of native fl ora and fauna. Many sub-units of management agencies have been inventorying, assessing, and treating aspen stands throughout 

their range, but prior to 2002 these efforts were not coordinated (U.S. 

Forest Service, Region 5, Aspen Survey Summary, May 2002).

The Aspen Delineation Project—a collaborative effort of the U.S. Forest 

Service’s Pacifi c Southwest Region, California Department of Fish and 

Game, and the California Offi ce of Bureau of Land Management—has 

began to develop a consistent approach for collecting data about ecological 

condition of aspen stands on agency lands. During workshops and fi eld 

seminars co-sponsored by the Aspen Delineation Project, resource managers 

from multiple agencies and scientifi c disciplines identifi ed the importance 

of developing and integrating consistent inventory, assessment, monitoring, and research protocols. The overriding objectives of this package of 

protocols were threefold: (1) to improve the scientifi c basis of management 

decisions, (2) to share data more easily within and between agencies, and (3) 

to produce more consistent evaluation of management practices, thus resulting in more effective adaptive management.

Because there was no consistency in how agencies were collecting data 

on location and condition of aspen stands, agency biologists and ecologists decided that the Aspen Delineation Project should initially develop a 

standardized protocol for (1) reconnaissance of the location of aspen stands 

and (2) assessment of a stand’s ecological condition. Participants working 

on this project recognized that they would have to work fast due to time 

and budgeting constraints. It was agreed that the information gained using 

this protocol could lay the groundwork for establishing specifi c management 

Development of a Protocol for the 

Ecological Assessment of a Special 

Species

David Burton1

1 Aspen Delineation Project, Penryn, CA.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 165

objectives later on and be used as the foundation for decisions regarding 

more quantitative inventory or monitoring efforts.

A protocol and a data entry program were developed and field-tested by 

review groups during the summer of 2002. To date, sub-units from seven 

state and federal agencies—Forest Service, BLM, California F&G, California 

State Parks, California Tahoe Conservancy, Nevada State Parks, and Tahoe 

Regional Planning Agency—have collected data using the same protocol, 

field form, and data entry program.

Protocol for Establishing the Ecological 

Condition of Aspen Stands

Because the desired condition for aspen habitats across the Western land-

scape has been defined as fully functional, structurally diverse aspen stands 

(U.S. Forest Service 1994, U.S. Forest Service 2001), the principal objective 

of this protocol is to determine whether the age class, structural diversity, 

composition, and cover of individual aspen stands are within the desired 

range of natural variability for the vegetative community.

The range of naturally viable, fully functional aspen ecosystems does 

not express itself in any single simple form. Research has shown that aspen 

naturally expresses itself through the relationships between its reproduction 

processes; clones generating suckers off lateral roots; responses to natural 

environmental events; shade intolerance; growth hormonal balance mecha

-

nism; and disturbance dependency (Schier and others 1985).

However, there are a number of historic and current land management 

factors that have affected the natural viability of Western aspen habitats (Bar

-

tos 2001). The protocols focus on three thoroughly researched processes 

that have been shown to affect the natural viability of aspen: (1) effects of 

increased conifer encroachment caused by prolonged fire suppression, (2) 

failure of successful regeneration stemming from poor livestock management 

or unnatural wildlife stocking numbers, and (3) combinations of these fac-

tors. In order to see how these historic and current factors may have affected 

the current viability of individual stands, the protocol focuses on three key 

indicators of stand condition: overall stand structure, unique stand manage

-

ment issues, and a ranking of factors that might be putting stands at risk.

Stand Structure

The first key indicator in analyzing a stand’s ecological condition is delin-

eating its structure. The protocol’s foundation is the use of a definition of 

“stand” (California Native Plant Society 2001) that calls for separating aspen 

units into units that are compositionally and structurally similar, i.e., if the 

mix of all species within the stand has structural and compositional integrity, 

it meets this definition (figure 1). This delineation of structure should 

establish not only the presence and condition of aspen age cohorts but also 

establish the relationship of those cohorts to the two most significant factors 

affecting stand viability: conifer encroachment and effects of browsing by 

wild and domestic ungulates.

The protocol divides the stand structure into three classes: overstory 

canopy cover (aspens and conifers >8 inches DBH), mid-level canopy cover 

(aspens and conifers 1 inch DBH to 8 inches DBH), and understory (aspens 

and conifers <1 inch DBH). The standard of 8 inches DBH was selected as 
166 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

a candidate for the separation of overstory and mid-level classes after fieldtesting established that stems with 8 inches DBH were consistently shorter 

than the average height of the range of all larger DBH aged cohorts in the 

overstory. The first two classes—overstory and midlevel—focus on the presence or absence of aspen and conifer species and quantify their percentage 

presence and ratio to each other. The third class—understory—focuses on 

aspen regeneration and factors affecting its success. The protocol proceeds 

from class to class establishing a picture of the current structure of a stand 

and factors contributing to its functional condition.

The first step of the protocol is to identify what the actual percent of 

canopy cover is in the overstory and calls for five classes into which that percentage can be placed: 100-85 percent, 84-51 percent, 50-16 percent, 15-1 

percent, and 0 percent. Then, the ratio of conifer:aspen is established within 

the canopy cover that does exist (figures 2, 3, 4). The classes for conifer:

aspen ratio are 10:0, 8:2, 6:4, 5:5, 4:6, 2:8, and 0:10. The ratio establishes 

the dominance or co-dominance relationships between aspen and conifer 

and provides both an indication of current condition of the overstory canopy 

and hints of potential future conditions.

Next, after the actual overstory canopy cover is determined, the protocol 

calls for establishing the presence and condition of the actual mid-level 

canopy cover. As in the overstory, the protocol calls for establishing the 

presence or absence of a mid-level canopy cover (1 inch DBH to 8 inches 

DBH). If present, the actual percent of canopy cover in the mid-level canopy 

and the ratio of conifer:aspen in the mid-level canopy are established using 

the same size classes that were used in evaluating the overstory.

Finally, in the third class—the understory(<1 inch DBH)—the protocol 

calls for establishing the presence or absence of regeneration and identifying 

the presence or absence of browsing. Greater than 500 stems per acre is 

the class size used for signifying the presence of a distinctive regeneration 

stem aspen class. Five hundred stems per acre are used because it is believed 

that fewer stems per acre will not provide enough stems to establish a fully 

stocked stand (Mueggler 1989).

The protocol then calls for indicating the presence of significant browse 

on current year’s terminal growth. Browse of 20 percent of current terminal 

Figure 1—Structurally diverse stand 

with multiple age cohorts.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 167

leader growth was selected because it is the current 

browse standard for woody stem vegetation found in 

the SNFPA (USDA Forest Service 2001) as well as in 

the standard used by the Bureau of Land Management 

in California (BLM—California State Office 2002).

A final note regarding stand structure: the protocol 

has an indicator for establishing the presence of a 

“decadent stand.” Decadent stands are qualitatively 

described in this protocol as stands that have more 

dead or down aspen stems than living stems.

Management Issues

The second key indicator of a stand’s ecological 

condition is delineation of any special stand management issues that provide clues to factors playing a role 

in the current status of the stand, a potential role in 

the future condition of the stand, or a role in potential 

stand management options. Included in the management issues are:

• location of stands within or adjacent to biologically 

sensitive habitats like meadows, riparian corridors, 

or springs;

• location of stands within or adjacent to geological 

refugia—environments conducive to stand 

Figure 2—100-85 percent canopy cover and a ratio of 

conifer:aspen of 0:10. No other aspen or conifer age 

cohorts present.

Figure 3—85-51 percent overstory canopy cover and 

a conifer:aspen ratio of 0:10 present. A midlevel 

canopy cover of 100-85 percent with a ratio of 

conifer:aspen of 10:0.

Figure 4—Two age cohorts with an overstory canopy cover 

of 85-51 percent and a ratio of conifer:aspen of 2:8 with 

an understory age cohort of >500 stems per acre.
168 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

continuation because of protection from browsing pressures or conifer 

encroachment or because of location on a site with particular geological 

characteristics such as lava flow, talus slope, rock outcrop, or moraine 

material;

• indication of significant (>20 percent) insect or disease damage;

• presence of significant human impacts such as regulated or non-regulated 

camping or structures;

• indication of signs of recent wildfires within or adjacent to the stand;

• indication of prior management treatment such as conifer removal within 

a stand or prescribed burns;

• indication of the presence or historic effect of beaver populations.

Risk Loss Analysis

The third key step in indicating a stand’s ecological condition is evaluating 

combinations of factors observed in a stand and rating its potential for being 

lost. This procedure, which appears in the protocol as “Stand Loss Risk Factor,” was initially set forth in a prioritized key for risk factors developed by 

Bob Campbell, Fish Lake NF, and Dale Bartos, RMRS (2001). The process, 

as it appears in the protocol, is the result of adaptation of the Campbell and 

Bartos work by the Eagle Lake Ranger District, Lassen National Forest and 

extensive field-testing of the end product.

Five classes of risk loss are found in the protocol:

Highest: The clone is being lost from above and is not 

being replaced from below (figure 5).

• Conifer crowns have overtopped the aspen crowns, 

(primary risk factor), and conifer species comprise at 

least half the canopy (primary risk factor), and

• Regeneration is absent or unsuccessful because of 

excessive browsing or shading from conifer encroachment (primary risk factor).

High: The clone is being lost from above or is not 

being replaced from below (figure 6).

Moderate: One or more risk factors are present, but 

the clone is not in immediate danger. This class may 

include one or more of the factors below:

• conifer closure >25 percent, but <50 percent (if >50 

percent, rating is High or Highest)

• aspen cover <40 percent

• dominant aspen are decadent

• aspen regeneration 5-15 feet tall is <500 stems per 

acre

• regeneration is excessively shaded by conifers

• browsing is limiting extent and numbers of successful 

(>5 feet tall) regeneration

Figure 5—Risk to stand is “Highest.” This stand is being 

lost from above and not being replaced from below.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 169

Low: The clone is essentially healthy, containing mature trees and/or 

healthy and vigorous regeneration; there are no obvious signs that the 

clone has receded; and <15 percent of the clone is affected by risk factors 

(figure 7).

None: None of the above risk factors are present. Mature trees are vigorous, 

and regeneration 5-15 feet tall >500 stems per acre.

Support Material

To date, the Aspen Delineation Project has developed three support 

programs for facilitating effective and efficient use of the protocol:

• A Data Entry Program to simplify the process of moving hard copy (field 

form) data into GIS shape files as well as providing a vehicle for merging 

interagency aspen data into some centralized data source.

• A field crew training program to help crews understand and interpret 

goals and objectives of the assessment process and develop consistent 

interpretations of stand conditions.

• A CD containing PDF copies of the protocol and field form, a copy of the 

Data Entry Program, and an interactive guide to the protocol.

Figure 7—Risk to stand is “Low.” Multiple age cohorts are 

present and few risk factors (<15 percent) exist.

Figure 6—Risk to stand is “High.” This stand is being 

lost from below through conifer encroachment.
170 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Copies of the CD or details about the protocol and the Aspen Delineation Project’s field crew training program can be obtained by contacting 

peregrines@prodigy.net or the Aspen Delineation Project, P.O. Box 348, 

Penryn, CA 95663.

References

Bartos, Dale L. 2001. Landscape dynamics of aspen and conifer forests. In: 

Shepperd, Wayne D.; Binkley, Dan; Bartos, Dale; Stohlgren, Thomas; 

Eskew, Lane G., comps. Sustaining aspen in western landscapes: Symposium 

proceedings; 13-15 June 2001. Grand Junction. Proceedings RMRS-P-18. Fort 

Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station.

California Native Plant Society. 2001. CNPS Vegetation Rapid Assessment Protocol. 

9 p.

Campbell, Jr., Robert B.; Bartos, Dale L. 2001. Aspen ecosystems: Objectives for 

sustaining biodiversity. In: Shepperd, Wayne D.; Binkley, Dan; Bartos, Dale; 

Stohlgren, Thomas.; Eskew, Lane G., comps. Sustaining aspen in western 

landscapes: Symposium proceedings; 13-15 June 2001. Grand Junction. 

Proceedings RMRS-P-18. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Mueggler, Walter F. 1989. Age distribution and reproduction of intermountain 

aspen stands. Western Journal of Applied Forestry. 4(2): 41-45.

Schier, George A.; Jones, John R.; Winokur, Robert P. 1985.Vegetative 

regeneration. In: Debyle, Norbert V.; Winokur, Robert P., eds. Aspen: Ecology 

and management in the western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-119. Fort 

Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Forest and Range Experiment Station.

USDA Forest Service. 1994. Sustaining our aspen heritage into the twenty-first 

century. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southwestern Region. 7 p.

USDA Forest Service. 2001. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment, Record of 

Decision. Vallejo, CA: Pacific Southwest Region.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 171

Abstract—In the early 1980s, silviculturists with the Northeastern Research Station 

and Monongahela National Forest envisioned that managing some Appalachian 

hardwood stands to promote two-age structures would be part of an effective 

strategy for managing multi-use forests. Two-age stands provided the light and 

seedbed conditions necessary for regenerating numerous desirable hardwood species and maintaining species diversity. The residual overstory trees also served to 

maintain vertical structure, mast production, wildlife habitat, and esthetic quality 

in visually sensitive areas. This paper examines the composition and development 

of approximately 20-year-old reproduction growing beneath 100-year-old residual 

overstory trees in two-age central Appalachian hardwood stands. After 20 years, 

the crowns of the residual overstory trees had expanded by nearly 80 percent and 

collectively covered almost half of the stand area. Desirable shade-intolerant species such as black cherry, northern red oak, and yellow-poplar in the new age class 

had remained competitive only in areas located between the crowns of the residual 

overstory trees. The areas located beneath the residual overstory trees were occupied by tolerant species such as sugar maple, red maple, and American beech. Data 

indicated that the residual overstory trees had a strong infl uence on the development and long-term species composition of reproduction. Practical alternatives for 

planning and implementing two-age management systems are discussed.

Introduction

Clearcut harvesting became a common silvicultural practice in eastern 

hardwoods nearly 40 years ago for several reasons. Some were based on 

the need to facilitate the management of large forested areas, while others 

were based on the need to promote the biological conditions necessary for 

regenerating a wide range of hardwood species. For management objectives, 

clearcut harvesting resulted in new stands with even-aged structures, which 

allowed forest planners to manage mosaics of stands and balance the age distribution of large industrial and public forests, thus sustaining the long-term 

yield of a variety of woodland benefi ts. In addition, simultaneous removal 

of all merchantable stems promoted harvesting and marketing economies of 

scale that were advantageous to both buyer and seller of wood products. For 

biological objectives, the open conditions following removal of the overstory 

created the sunlight and seedbed conditions that led to prolifi c regeneration 

of the full range of native tree species from stored seed, advanced seedlings, 

and sprouts. A diverse mix of highly valuable hardwood species for both 

wildlife and timber developed rapidly as young trees responded to excess 

growing space freed by the harvest operations. Silviculturists understood 

that disturbance patterns greatly affect the regeneration processes among 

tree species. Scientifi c evidence had shown that repeated partial harvests 

Composition and Development of 

Reproduction in Two-Age Appalachian 

Hardwood Stands: 20-Year Results

Gary W. Miller1, James N. Kochenderfer2, and Desta Fekedulegn3

1 USDA Forest Service, Northeastern 

Research Station, Morgantown, WV.

2 USDA Forest Service, Northeastern 

Research Station, Parsons, WV.

3 West Virginia University, Morgantown, 

WV.
172 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

promoted uneven-age stand structures, undesirable shifts in species composi-

tion toward shade-tolerant species, and over time, a general loss of tree 

species diversity (Trimble 1973). Alternatively, clearcut harvesting produced 

new even-age stands that contained numerous tree species, regardless of 

shade tolerance. This response allowed forest managers to achieve the critical 

management objective of replacing harvested trees with young vigorous 

trees of the same species, thus maintaining species diversity. In the 1960s, 

clearcut harvesting became a common harvesting practice because it was an 

effective way to meet multiple management objectives within the biological 

constraints of the hardwood forest.

Along the way, public opposition to the appearance of forest stands im-

mediately after clearcut harvests led forest managers and scientists to seek an 

alternative practice that was equally effective in sustaining desirable species 

composition but less offensive to the eye. The cooperative effort between 

the Monongahela National Forest and the Northeastern Research Station 

to study the effects of two-age stand structures began in the 1970s and 

continues today (Miller and others 1997b).

From 1979 to 1984, a form of deferment cutting (Smith and others 

1989) was applied in mature, second-growth Appalachian hardwood forests 

to create experimental stands with two-aged structures. Deferment cutting 

(also called clearcutting-with-reserves, shelterwood-with-reserves, or irregu

-

lar shelterwood) entails leaving 10 to 20 residual overstory trees per acre and 

cutting all other stems ≥1.0-inch diameter at breast height (DBH) (Smith 

and Miller 1991a). The open conditions following deferment cutting are 

similar to those exhibited after clearcut harvesting, thus providing adequate 

sunlight and seedbed conditions for numerous hardwood species to regener

-

ate naturally (Johnson and others 1998). Several previous reports on the 

experimental two-age stands documented the initial response of the residual 

overstory trees (Smith and Miller 1991b; Smith and others 1994; Miller and 

others 1995; Miller 1996), the early development of reproduction (Miller 

and Schuler 1995; Miller and others 1997a), and the impact of vertical 

structure on insect and songbird habitat (Duguay and others 2000).

Many years have elapsed since the experimental stands were created, and 

there is now an opportunity to further evaluate the interaction of residual 

overstory trees and reproduction in two-age stands. As these stands continue 

to develop, several key silvicultural questions remain. How fast does the 

stand area covered by the crowns of the residual overstory trees expand 

over time? How do residual overstory trees influence the development of 

reproduction? How can silvicultural prescriptions applied to promote twoage stands be improved? Although the results presented here are relatively 

limited in scope, they shed light on important issues that silviculturists 

need to consider when applying two-age management systems in hardwood 

forests.

Study Areas

The four study areas are located on the Monongahela National Forest 

in north-central West Virginia. All stands were on northern red oak site 

index 70 to 80 (base age 50 years). The average soil depth exceeds 3 feet, 

and annual precipitation averages 59 inches distributed throughout the 

year. The soil series for each stand were described as follows: Riffle Creek 

(Berks channery silt loam), Fish Trough (Calvin channery silt loam), Red 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 173

House (Dekalb stony loam), and Shavers Fork (Berks channery silt loam), all 

characteristic of loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic Typic Dystrochrepts (USDA 

Soil Conservation Service 1967; 1982).

When the study began, the study areas were 75- to 80-year-old, secondgrowth Appalachian hardwood stands that became established after heavy 

commercial harvests that occurred in the early 1900s. Periodic fire was 

common throughout the region from 1910 to 1930 as the stands became 

established. Chestnut blight was also a common disturbance during the 

1930s, but no other major disturbances occurred until deferment cutting 

was applied in 1979 to 1984 to begin studying the two-aged management 

system. Stand area ranged from 10 to 15 acres.

Methods

In each stand, deferment cutting (Smith and others 1989) was applied 

to regenerate a new age class of trees and promote the development of a 

two-age stand structure. The boles of merchantable cut-trees were removed, 

while their tops and all non-merchantable cut-trees were left on the site. 

Residual trees were selected with preference for codominant, high-quality 

northern red oak (Quercus rubra) followed by yellow-poplar (Liriodendron 

tulipifera) and black cherry (Prunus serotina). Marking guidelines also called 

for leaving 15 to 20 overstory trees/acre with residual basal area less than 

30 ft

2

/acre, thus promoting suitable light conditions for vigorous natural 

regeneration of a diverse mix of hardwood species. The residual overstory 

trees were tagged for long-term monitoring. DBH, total height, and crown 

radius of residual overstory trees were measured immediately after the log

-

ging operations were completed.

Reproduction data were obtained before logging and at 5-year intervals 

after logging from 170 permanent sample points located along systematic 

grids throughout the four study areas. Small reproduction, defined as woody 

stems ≥12 inches tall and <1.0 inch DBH, was tallied on 0.001-acre circular 

plots. Large reproduction, defined as woody stems 

≥1.0 inch DBH, was 

tallied on 0.01-acre circular plots using the same center points. These plots 

provided a general inventory of stem counts of reproduction over time, but 

they did not indicate how residual overstory trees affected the growth and 

distribution of reproduction within the stand.

In 2001, data were collected on randomly selected northern red oaks 

in the residual overstory and on the reproduction growing adjacent to or 

under their crowns. Measurements on the overstory trees included DBH, 

total height, and crown radius along the 0°, 90°, 180°, and 270° azimuths. 

Reproduction was tallied in four transects that radiated from the bole of the 

residual overstory tree oriented along the same four azimuths. The transect 

length was equal to the crown radius plus 15 feet along each azimuth, and 

the transect width was defined as the area within 5 feet of the centerline, 

for a total width of 10 feet (figure 1). Measurements on the reproduc

-

tion included species, DBH, total height, crown class, and distance to the 

residual overstory tree bole for each stem found within a transect. Crown 

class of the reproduction was based on the status of each stem relative to 

neighboring stems of the same age, without regard for the residual overstory 

trees. Crown classes were defined by Smith (1986). The residual overstory 

tree crown radius minus the distance between a stem and the residual 

overstory tree bole defined the relative position of each stem tallied. Note 
174 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

that trees with relative position <0 were located under the residual overstory 

tree crown, while trees with relative position >0 were located adjacent to or 

beyond the edge of the residual overstory tree crown. Relative position was 

used as a predictor in graphical and regression analyses of DBH and total 

height of reproduction.

The data were analyzed to determine if DBH, total height, basal area per 

acre, and species composition of the reproduction were related to proximity 

to the residual overstory trees. To conduct the analysis, reproduction was 

classified by two location groups and three species groups. Stems located 

within the overstory tree crown radius were classified as under, while stems 

located beyond the overstory tree crown radius were classified as adjacent. 

In addition, species groups were defined by shade tolerance class as defined 

by Trimble (1975). Intolerant stems included yellow-poplar, black cherry, 

and fire cherry (Prunus pensylvanica); mid-tolerant stems included the oaks 

(Quercus spp.), hickories (Carya spp.), white ash (Fraxinus americana), 

cucumbertree (Magnolia acuminata), and sweet birch (Betula lenta); tolerant stems included American beech (Fagus grandifolia), sugar maple (Acer 

saccharum), red maple (Acer rubrum), and basswood (Tilia americana).

Statistical Analyses

Regression analyses using the GLM procedure (SAS 2000) were used to 

relate DBH and total height of codominant reproduction to the position 

of each tree relative to the residual overstory tree crown. The assumption of common slope among the four stands was tested using analysis of 

covariance, which related DBH and height to stand, position, and their 

interaction. Violation of normality and homogeneity of variance assumptions 

required the use of log transformed values.

The basal area per acre of reproduction tallied within a transect by tolerance class (intolerant, mid-tolerant, and tolerant) and location (under versus 

adjacent) relative to a residual overstory tree was compared using a multiple 

Figure 1—Schematic of transects 

used to collect reproduction data 

under and adjacent to residual 

overstory trees.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 175

factor, repeated measures analysis of variance modeled in the MIXED 

procedure (SAS 2000). Class variables included stand, cardinal direction, 

location, and tolerance class, where the latter three variables were repeated 

measures on a given subject residual overstory tree. Preliminary analyses of 

the covariance matrix revealed that the compound symmetry assumption was 

not feasible, so analyses were performed assuming a heterogeneous autoregressive structure. Log transformed values were also used in this analysis to 

account for violation of normality and homogeneity of variance assumptions.

Results

Pre-harvest basal area averaged 138 ft2/acre including poletimber and 

sawtimber, with an additional 5 to 10 ft2/acre in saplings (table 1). The 

initial overstory included over 80 sawtimber-sized trees/acre with an average DBH of 15.8 inches. In general, yellow-poplar and northern red oak 

occupied most of the initial overstory, although black cherry, white oak 

(Quercus alba), sugar maple, and American beech also occupied significant 

proportions of the overstory in individual stands (table 2). Sugar maple and 

American beech were the most prevalent species in the pool of advanced 

reproduction before harvest (table 3).

Basal area in the residual stands averaged 23 ft2

/acre, which included 

14 sawtimber-sized trees/acre with an average DBH of 17.1 inches (table 

1). The composition of residual overstory trees averaged 50 percent yellow-poplar, 30 percent northern red oak, and 20 percent a mixture of other 

commercial species.

Table 1—Summary of stand characteristics before and after harvests in four central Appalachian hardwood 

stands.

Number of trees Basal area Volumeb Average DBH

Stand 6 to 10 in.a ≥12 in. 6 to 10 in. ≥12 in. ≥ 12 in. ≥12 in.

----- no./acre ----- ----- ft2

/acre ----- - Mbf/acre - ---- in. ----

Riffle Creek

Initial 120.2 68.6 41.3 87.7 1 2,932 15.3

Cutc 1979 118.9 57.4 40.6 70.9 10,305 15.0

Residual 1.3 11.2 0.7 16.8 2,627 16.6

Fish Trough

Initial 48.9 72.2 16.5 112.7 20,630 16.9

Cut 1980 48.7 58.1 16.4 88.0 15,697 16.7

Residual 0.2 14.1 0.1 24.7 4,933 17.9

Shavers Fork

Initial 110.6 63.4 34.1 81.9 14,221 15.4

Cut 1981 110.2 50.7 33.9 61.8 10,363 15.0

Residual 0.4 12.7 0.2 20.1 3,858 17.0

Red House

Initial 65.5 120.4 21.9 156.9 27,561 15.5

Cut 1984 65.3 101.8 21.8 127.8 22,014 15.2

Residual 0.2 18.6 0.1 29.1 5,547 16.9

All

Initial 86.3 81.2 28.5 109.8 18,836 15.8

Cut 85.8 67.0 28.2 87.1 14,595 15.5

Residual 0.5 14.2 0.3 22.7 4,241 17.1

a DBH.

b International 1⁄4-inch rule.

c All trees ≥1.0 inch DBH were felled unless selected and marked as a residual tree. 
176 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Data were collected on woody reproduction located under and adjacent 

to 29 residual northern red oaks in the four study areas (table 4). Growth 

of the residual overstory trees in the 17- to 22-year period after deferment 

cutting averaged 8 inches DBH, 10 feet in total height, and 5 feet in crown 

radius (table 4). Based on crown radius growth the average area covered by 

each residual overstory tree crown increased from 660 ft2 to 1170 ft2, an 

increase of almost 80 percent during the study period.

Table 2—Species composition before commercial harvests in four central Appalachian hardwood stands.

Commercial species Riffle Creek Fish Trough Shavers Fork Red House All

--------------------------------- % basal area/acre ---------------------------------

Sugar maple 2.4 6.9 4.0 2.0 3.8

American beech 1.9 14.6 9.3 0.5 6.6

Red maple 10.0 0.6 2.2 2.4 3.8

White ash < 0.1 1.5 4.9 2.5 2.2

White oak 20.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 5.4

N. red oak 14.7 5.2 14.8 15.7 12.6

Yellow-poplar 13.4 38.4 46.7 46.7 36.3

Black cherry < 0.1 3.7 2.7 27.9 8.6

Others 37.5a 29.1b 13.8 2.3 20.7c

Totals 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

a 22% chestnut oak.

b 18% American basswood.

c Includes 17 species.

Table 3—Advanced reproduction ≥12 inches tall and <1.0-inch DBH present before harvests in four central 

Appalachian hardwood stands.

Commercial species Riffle Creek Fish Trough Shavers Fork Red House All

--------------------------------- no. of stems/acre ----------------------------------

Sugar maple 745 833 380 558 629

American beech 1575 450 1200 209 859

Red maple 340 0 0 47 97

White ash 43 200 520 23 197

White oak 128 0 20 0 37

N. red oak 255 33 40 140 117

Yellow-poplar 0 33 20 256 77

Black cherry 128 33 0 721 221

Others 169 18 140 279 150

Totals 3,383 1,600 2,320 2,233 2,384

Table 4—Mean DBH, total height, and crown radius of residual northern red oaks in two-aged 

central Appalachian hardwood stands.

No. of trees

Stand name observed Year DBH Total height Crown radius

---- in. --- ---------------- ft -----------------

Riffle Creek 6 1979 14.3 89.8 13.3

2001 22.0 96.0 18.1

Fish Trough 7 1980 16.7 98.7 15.1

2001 25.9 110.9 20.9

Shavers Fork 8 1981 15.7 91.1 14.8

2001 25.4 99.6 21.6

Red House 8 1984 18.1 101.4 14.5

2001 24.4 112.9 16.7

All 29 Variable 16.3 95.5 14.5

2001 24.5 105.3 19.4
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 177

Effect of Overstory Trees on DBH and Height of 

Reproduction

DBH and total height of codominant reproduction were positively 

related to the position of individual trees relative to the crowns of residual 

overstory trees (p <0.01). In general, DBH and total height increased as 

distance from residual overstory trees increased (figures 2 and 3). Regressions analyses also indicated that DBH and total height differed by stand (p 

<0.01), probably reflecting subtle effects of site quality, tree age, and species 

composition. Mean DBH was 3.5 inches for trees located under residual 

overstory trees compared to 3.9 inches (p = 0.04) for trees located adjacent 

to residual overstory tree crowns (table 5). Similarly, mean total height for 

trees located under or adjacent to overstory trees was 41.8 feet and 44.8 

feet (p <0.01), respectively. The analyses revealed no interaction between 

stand and position, indicating that slope coefficients were not significantly 

different. This finding supports the general conclusion that DBH and height 

of codominant reproduction was strongly related to position of codominant 

reproduction relative to residual overstory trees, regardless of study site.

DBH (in.)

Figure 2—DBH of codominant 

reproduction by position of stem 

relative to edge of overstory tree 

crown.

Figure 3—Total height of 

codominant reproduction by 

position of stem relative to edge 

of overstory tree crown.
178 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Effect of Overstory Trees on Species Composition of 

Reproduction

A recent survey of the permanent sample points located in each stand 

indicated that yellow-poplar, black cherry, red maple, and sweet birch 

accounted for most of the codominant stems in the reproduction (table 6). 

Other valuable species such as sugar maple and northern red oak also were 

present in relatively small proportions.

Based on data collected in transects in 2001, the residual overstory trees 

significantly influenced the distribution of species occupied by codominant 

reproduction (table 7). Both location (p <0.01) and tolerance class 

(p = 0.03) were significant class variables, while stand and cardinal direction 

were not. Interaction between location and tolerance class was not evident 

(p = 0.69). Basal area of codominant reproduction adjacent to residual trees 

averaged 49.5 ft2/acre compared to 31.7 ft2/acre under residual trees 

(p <0.01). It was clear that basal area of codominant reproduction of intolerant and mid-tolerant species was greatest in the space adjacent to residual 

trees, where competition for sunlight is reduced (table 7). Note that basal 

area of mid-tolerant species, which includes the oaks, was 18.2 ft2

/acre 

adjacent to residual trees compared to only 10.0 ft2

/acre under residual trees 

(p <0.01), a difference of over 80 percent.

When all crown classes of reproduction were considered in the analysis, 

basal area averaged 72.5 ft2

/acre and 55.5 ft2/acre for trees adjacent to or 

Table 5—Mean DBH and total height of 17- to 22-year-old codominant reproduction by location relative 

to residual overstory trees.

DBH Total height

Location Location

Stand Under Adjacent p-value Under Adjacent p-value

------------- in. (n)a ------------- ----------- ft ---------

Riffle Creek 3.92 (10) 4.10 (31) 0.76 45.0 46.1 0.74

Fish Trough 4.35 (20) 4.49 (24) 0.74 48.0 51.9 0.11

Shavers Fork 3.54 (43) 3.98 (42) 0.16 41.7 43.8 0.27

Red House 3.10 (42) 3.44 (52) 0.11 38.1 41.5 <0.01

All 3.55 (115) 3.90 (149) 0.04 41.8 44.8 <0.01

a Number of trees in sample.

Table 6—Composition of 17- to 22-year-old reproduction in two-aged central Appalachian hardwood stands.

Commercial species Riffle Creek Fish Trough Shavers Fork Red House All

----------------------------------------------- no. of stems/acre --------------------------------------------

Sugar maple 128a

 (36)b 300 (9) 75 (3) 16 (0) 130 (12)

American beech 315 (92) 70 (0) 170 (0) 16 (0) 143 (23)

Red maple 187 (100) 7 (3) 55 (10) 56 (5) 76 (30)

White ash 6 (0) 25 (2) 34 (0) 12 (0) 19 (1)

White oak 34 (6) 0 (0) 170 (0) 0 (0) 51 (2)

N. red oak 181 (79) 17 (2) 35 (8) 30 (0) 66 (22)

Yellow-poplar 87 (45) 190 (78) 318 (112) 656 (198) 313 (108)

Black cherry 57 (36) 24 (8) 9 (3) 228 (86) 80 (33)

Others 448 (225) 311 (88) 21 (20) 467 (139) 312 (118)

Totals 1443 (619) 944 (190) 887 (156) 1481 (428) 1189 (349)

a All stems ≥ 1.0 inch DBH.

b Dominant and codominant stems.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 179

under residual trees, respectively, but the distribution of species was not 

affected by location relative to the residual overstory trees (table 7).

Discussion

The analysis focused on the composition and development of codominant 

reproduction, while subordinate stems received little attention. At the 

20-year stage of development, when crown classes are evident, codominant 

stems are those most likely to remain competitive for an extended time. For 

intolerant and mid-tolerant species, in particular, subordinate stems have 

little chance of exhibiting sufficient height growth to survive or maintain 

their position in the canopy of an aggrading stand (Trimble 1973). Intolerant species also are more likely to lose competitiveness once they become 

subordinate to neighboring trees of the same age or receive overhead 

competition from older, taller trees.

The observed influence of overstory trees on reproduction will increase as 

the crowns of the overstory trees expand. When transect data were recently 

collected, the residual overstory trees were approximately 100 years old, and 

the reproduction ranged from 17 to 22 years old. Overstory trees were more 

than 100 feet tall, while codominant reproduction was less than 50 feet 

tall. Height growth of the residual overstory trees was relatively slow, about 

0.5 ft/yr (table 4), compared to 4.5 ft/yr (table 5) for the reproduction. 

At these rates of growth, the reproduction needs an additional 30 to 40 

years to become competitive with overstory trees. Similarly, the crowns of 

residual overstory trees are likely to expand and continue to influence the 

development of the reproduction for many years. In this study, retaining 15 

trees per acre with an average DBH of 16 inches resulted in a 22 percent 

canopy cover immediately after the harvest. After 20 years, average DBH 

had increased to 24 inches, and canopy cover had increased to 39 percent. 

In a few more years, nearly half of the stand area will be located under the 

crowns of the residual overstory trees. It is apparent from these observations 

that successful reproduction of valuable intolerant and mid-tolerant species 

will be limited to less than half the stand area in years to come.

Northern red oak has a relatively large crown area compared to other species of the same DBH (Lamson 1987). The results presented here represent 

a worst-case scenario in terms of how the residual overstory trees can exhibit 

Table 7—Mean basal area per acre of 17- to 22-year-old reproduction by tolerance class 

and by location relative to residual overstory trees.

Transect Tolerance class

Location sample size Intolerant Mid-tolerant Tolerant Total 

n ---------------------------- ft2

/acre ------------------------------

All trees 

Adjacenta 91 24.9 24.7 22.9 72.5

Under 91 19.3 17.2 19.0 55.5

Codominant trees

Adjacent 91 19.9 18.2 11.4 49.5

Under 91 15.1 10.0 6.6 31.7

a Reproduction was located under residual overstory tree crowns or adjacent to residual trees where 

there was no residual overstory competition.
180 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

a negative impact on reproduction, particularly shade-intolerant species. 

Species with smaller crowns or less aggressive crown expansion would tend 

to occupy less of the stand area compared to northern red oak.

Reproduction in the new age class would benefit from an intermediate 

cultural practice such as cleaning or crop tree release (Miller 2000). These 

precommercial treatments free selected codominant stems from crown 

competition, thus accelerating their growth and increasing their future 

competitiveness. In two-age stands, however, opportunities to successfully 

release intolerant and mid-tolerant species may be limited to areas located 

between the residual overstory trees.

This study did not compare reproduction in two-age stands to that 

observed in even-age stands, but there is evidence that the residual overstory 

trees in two-age stands reduced the overall growth of codominant reproduc

-

tion, regardless of its location. Data collected from 17-year-old even-aged 

stands located a few miles from the experimental two-age stands indicated 

that average DBH exceeded 6 inches and average total height exceeded 

50 feet for codominant reproduction on site index 70 (Miller 2000). By 

comparison, DBH and total height of codominant trees located adjacent to 

residual overstory trees in the two-age stands averaged only 4 inches and 

45 feet, respectively (table 5). Codominant reproduction located under the 

residual overstory trees was even smaller.

There are several alternative strategies for managing two-age stands to 

reduce the impact of residual overstory trees on reproduction:

• Leave fewer trees per acre in the initial harvest operation.

• Leave species with relatively smaller crowns and less aggressive crown 

expansion.

• Leave clumps of residual trees to increase open space and reduce the 

effect of residual tree crown expansion.

• Start with 15 residual trees per acre, but reduce the number of residual trees 

by chemical or mechanical means once the new age class is established.

Finally, it is important to prepare for the regeneration of desired species 

many years before conducting harvests in hardwood stands (Miller and 

Kochenderfer 1998). An assessment of the regeneration potential should be 

conducted before a planned harvest to determine if preparatory silvicultural 

treatments are needed. The negative impacts of interfering plants and high 

deer populations must be controlled to allow desirable advanced reproduc

-

tion to develop many years before a planned harvest. Once competitive 

advanced reproduction is in place, removing most or all of the overstory 

will provide the light and seedbed conditions for a new age class of desirable 

trees to develop.

References

Duguay, J. P.; Wood, P. B.; Miller, G. W. 2000. Effects of timber harvests on 

invertebrate biomass and avian nest success. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 28(4): 

1123-1131.

Johnson, J. E.; Miller, G. W.; Baumgras, J. E.; West, C. D. 1998. Assessment of 

residual stand quality and regeneration following shelterwood cutting in central 

Appalachian hardwoods. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 15(4): 203-210.

Lamson, N. I. 1987. DBH/Crown diameter relationships in mixed Appalachian 

hardwood stands. Res. Pap. NE-610. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 3 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 181

Miller, G. W. 1996. Epicormic branching in central Appalachian hardwoods 10 years 

after deferment cutting. Res. Pap. NE-702. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 9 p.

Miller, G. W. 2000. Effect of crown growing space on the development of young 

hardwood crop trees. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 17(1): 25-35.

Miller, G. W.; Kochenderfer, J. N. 1998. Maintaining species diversity in the central 

Appalachians. Journal of Forestry. 96(7): 28-33.

Miller, G. W.; Schuler, T. M. 1995. Development and quality of reproduction in 

two-age central Appalachian hardwoods—10-year results. Proceedings of the 

Tenth Central Hardwood Forest Conference. Morgantown, WV. March 5-8, 

1995. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-197. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 364-374.

Miller, G. W.; Wood, P. B.; Nichols, J. V. 1995. Two-age silviculture - an innovative 

tool for enhancing species diversity and vertical structure in Appalachian 

hardwoods. Proceedings of the National Silviculture Workshop. Mescalero, 

NM. May 9-12, 1995. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-267. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest Experiment 

Station. 175-182.

Miller, G. W.; Johnson, J. E.; Baumgras, J. E. 1997a. Deferment cutting in central 

Appalachian hardwoods: an update. Forest Landowner. 56(5): 28-31.

Miller, G. W.; Johnson, J. E.; Baumgras, J. E.; Bustamente, R. G. 1997b. Two-age 

silviculture on the Monongahela National Forest—managers and scientists assess 

17 years of communication. Proceedings of the National Silviculture Workshop. 

Warren, PA. May 19-22, 1997. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-238. Radnor, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment 

Station. 123-133.

SAS. 2000. SAS Online Doc Versions 8, February 2000, SAS Institute, Cary, North 

Carolina.

Smith, D. M. 1986. The Practice of Silviculture, 8th Edition. John Wiley and Sons. 49.

Smith, H. C.; Miller, G. W. 1991a. Deferment cutting in Appalachian hardwoods: 

the what, whys, and hows. In: Johnson, J. E., ed. Uneven-age Management of 

Upland Hardwoods Workshop, 1991 February 25-27. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia 

Polytechnic Institute and State University. 33-37.

Smith, H. C.; Miller, G. W. 1991b. Releasing 75- to 80-year-old Appalachian 

hardwood sawtimber trees: 5-year d.b.h. response. Proceedings of the Eighth 

Central Hardwood Forest Conference. March 4-6, 1991. University Park, PA. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-148. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 403-413.

Smith, H. C.; Lamson, N. I.; Miller, G. W. 1989. An esthetic alternative to 

clearcutting? Journal of Forestry. 87(3): 14-18.

Smith, H. C.; Miller, G. W.; Schuler, T. M. 1994. Closure of logging wounds after 

10 years. Res. Pap. NE-692. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 6 p.

Trimble, G. R., Jr. 1973. The regeneration of central Appalachian hardwoods with 

emphasis on the effects of site quality and harvesting practice. Res. Pap. NE-282. 

Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Forest Experiment Station. 14 p.

Trimble, G. R., Jr. 1975. Summaries of some silvical characteristics of several 

Appalachian hardwood trees. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-16. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment 

Station. 5 p.

USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1967. Soil survey of Tucker County and Part of 

Northern Randolph County West Virginia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil 

Conservation Service, Elkins, WV.

USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1982. Soil survey of Randolph County Area, 

Main Part, West Virginia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation 

Service, Elkins, WV.
182 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Abstract—National Forest managers in the Interior Highlands of Arkansas are 

restoring 155,000 acres of unburned shortleaf pine stands to shortleaf pine-bluestem habitat. Habitat restoration consists of longer rotations, removal of midstory 

hardwoods, and reintroduction of fi re. A study was installed in the spring of 2000 to 

evaluate shortleaf pine regeneration and overstory stand growth under treatment. At 

this point in the study, there is no difference in milacre stocking of pines related to 

number of growing seasons after burning. Analysis suggests that residual basal areas 

below 50 ft2

 per acre will be needed to develop suffi cient advance growth of shortleaf pine to ensure regeneration when regeneration cutting is implemented. Over a 

four-year period, growth in treated and control stands is substantially less than that 

predicted from growth models developed in this forest type. However, there are 

no signifi cant differences in growth over four years between treated stands and the 

control stands. 

Introduction

The Ouachita Mountains cover approximately 6.6 million acres in western 

Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma, of which 85 percent is forested. Nearly 40 

percent of the area is in forest stands dominated by shortleaf pine, which 

comprises 46 percent of the live-tree volume, 50 percent of growing-stock 

volume, and 67 percent of sawtimber board-foot volume on timberlands in 

the region; over half of the shortleaf pine volume in the region is found on 

National Forest land (Guldin and others 1999).

These shortleaf pine forests evolved with fi re. Historical accounts 

and General Land Offi ce records suggest that at the time of European 

colonization, the forest was more open than it is today, and fi res no doubt 

contributed to that low density (Foti and Glenn 1991). Both wildfi res and 

fi res started by Native Americans were probably common. But since the 

1930s, fi re suppression has been extremely effective in the region. Fire 

return intervals prior to European settlement were on the order of from two 

to 40 years. Today, fi re return intervals average 500 years or longer (Foti 

and others 1999), although the recent and widespread increase in the use 

of prescribed burning in contemporary forestry practice may alter this rate 

downward in the future.

As managers on National Forest lands seek to restore natural patterns and 

processes to the shortleaf pine ecosystem, the reintroduction of frequent 

surface fi res is critical to success. Fire exclusion and conservative approaches 

to thinning second-growth shortleaf pine and pine-hardwood stands have 

produced stands that have more pines, and more hardwoods especially in the 

smaller size classes, than would be expected if fi res had continued to burn 

Shortleaf Pine-Bluestem Habitat Restoration 

in the Interior Highlands: Implications for 

Stand Growth and Regeneration

James M. Guldin1, John Strom2, Warren Montague2, 

and Larry D. Hedrick3

1 USDA Forest Service, Monticello AR.

2 USDA Forest Service, Poteau RD, 

Ouachita NF, Waldron, AR.

3 USDA Forest Service, Ouachita NF, 

Supervisor’s Offi ce, Hot Springs AR.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 183

over the past seven decades. This is at odds with descriptions in the literature 

that refer to open woodlands of pine and hardwood, with big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) and other grasses in the understory (Foti and others 

1999). Among the prominent advantages for this restoration is the attendant 

benefits that would be provided for restoration of a healthy population of 

the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis).

The Ouachita National Forest completed a Forest Plan Amendment 

in 1996, encompassing 155,000 acres of national forest land in western 

Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma in Management Area (MA) 22. The goal of 

the new MA22 is to implement restoration of the shortleaf pine-bluestem 

ecosystem, to implement the direction of the Region 8 RCW Environmental 

Impact Statement, and to maintain and enhance other associated resource 

values and attributes. Management Area 22 has been a resounding success 

with resource managers and the public. For it, the Ouachita NF received the 

Chief’s Award for Forest Stewardship in 2001. And the National Audubon 

Society honored the project with its designation as a nationally Important 

Bird Area in 2002.

The prescriptions include removal of most midstory hardwoods, thinning 

from below in overstory and midstory pines, and reintroducing surface fires 

on a one- to three-year return interval. These treatments have been effective 

in restoring many underrepresented species in the landscape, such as purple 

coneflower (Echinacea pallida), bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus), 

red-cockaded woodpecker, Bachman’s sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis), and 

eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) (Bukenhofer and Hedrick 1997). 

In addition, there is roughly seven times the preferred forage for white-tailed 

deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in treated versus untreated areas (Masters and 

others 1996).

The details of the restoration prescription are designed to carry the exist

-

ing fully stocked second-growth pine and pine-hardwood stands to restored 

condition. Pre-restoration stands typically contain approximately 130 ft2 per 

acre of basal area, of which 100 ft

2

 per acre is in the pine component and 30 

ft

2

 per acre in the hardwood component; of the hardwood basal area, twothirds is in the sub-sawtimber size class and most likely originated as a result 

of fire control efforts implemented in the 1930s (Guldin and others 1994).

The restoration prescription involves three components. First, the 

overstory basal area is reduced from 100 ft

2

 per acre to approximately 75-80 

ft

2

 per acre using essentially a thinning from below and implemented using 

commercial timber sales. Those sales typically remove from 2000-3000 

board feet (fbm) Scribner per acre, and are a successful and integral element 

of the district timber sale program. The sales generate program dollars 

(under the Knutsen-Vandenberg Act of 1930, as amended by the National 

Forest Management Act of 1976) for subsequent habitat treatments. The 

second element of the prescription is the removal of midstory hardwoods 

that have encroached in the stands as a result of seven decades of fire exclu

-

sion. Material is generally felled by chainsaws or girdled and left standing to 

meet standing snag requirements in the MA22 plan amendment. Finally, as 

the felled hardwoods decompose, a program of triennial prescribed fire is 

implemented. Generally, two prescribed burns can be imposed prior to the 

closure of the five-year window for expenditure of K-V trust funds collected 

in the initial thinning that triggers the process. The entire sequence of 

restoration would not be possible in the absence of a viable district timber 

management program.

In the long term, two silvicultural issues are of interest to ensure longterm productivity and sustainability of the prescriptions associated with 
184 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

MA22. First, a question exists about the impacts of repeated prescribed 

burning regimes on the growth of the existing pine overstory. This has a 

bearing on the length of time needed to support supplemental thinning and 

eventually on the yields that might be expected when stands in the area are 

ultimately subject to regeneration cutting. 

The second question is the exact manner by which shortleaf pine 

regeneration can be expected when the time comes for regeneration cutting 

in MA22 stands. Shortleaf pine is one of the few pines with the ability to 

resprout at young ages if the top is killed, a trait described in the early 1900s 

as an adaptation to fire (Mattoon 1915). This resprouting ability might 

allow the development of a reproduction cutting method based on an un-

derstory storage bank of pine seedlings and saplings that can be relied upon 

to respond to release, if the overstory basal area is substantially reduced 

below fully-stocked levels. Under proper conditions, this advanced pine 

regeneration could be quickly released with overstory removal. That would 

provide for more reliable reforestation than relying either on shortleaf pine’s 

inconsistent annual seed production or on the timing of a site preparation 

prescription designed to catch whatever seedfall is available in a given year. 

The question, then, is to characterize the growth and yield of shortleaf 

pine stands under restoration, and proper conditions and silvicultural 

prescriptions under which shortleaf pine advance growth can be obtained 

and accumulated in light of the triennial regime of prescribed fire currently 

being used in the pine-bluestem restoration prescription. In this paper, a first 

look is provided at observed growth in shortleaf pine stands, and on the differences in pine regeneration size, density, and stocking after one, two, and 

three seasons of growth after prescribed fire in stands being managed under 

the shortleaf pine-bluestem restoration prescription.

Methods

Study Area

This study area is located on the Poteau Ranger District of the Ouachita 

National Forest. Twelve stands were randomly selected for inclusion in the 

study; they are all mature stands dominated by shortleaf pine and contain a 

minor and varying proportion of hardwoods. Site indices vary between 55 

and 65 feet (base age 50 years), and stand age varies from 55 to 70.

Treatments

Nine of the stands are under active prescriptions for shortleaf pine-blue-

stem restoration, and three are in nearby stands comparable in age and site 

quality but which have not been subject to the restoration treatment. The 

nine treated stands had all been subject to treatment for at least five years; 

treatment included midstory reduction (hardwood midstory trees were 

chainsaw-felled), a low thinning of light intensity in the pine overstory, and 

had been burned at least twice using dormant-season fires. Three of the 

stands had last been burned during the 1999 dormant season, three during 

the 1998 dormant season, and three during the 1997 dormant season. Thus, 

treatments were identified as one (B1), two (B2), and three (B3) years after 

burning, respectively; the control treatment (C) remained untreated by 

thinning, midstory reduction, or burning. Stands in the B2 treatment were 

thinned recently, and thus are excluded from the growth analysis in this paper.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 185

Plot Measurements

Within each of the 12 stands, six plots were established on a square 

4-chain x 4-chain grid. At each plot, a nested series of measurements were 

taken. Overstory trees, defined as trees with diameter at breast height 

(DBH) greater than > 9.6 inches inclusive, were sampled on a 0.2-acre 

fixed-radius plot. Midstory trees, defined as trees between 3.6 inches and 9.5 

inches in diameter, inclusive, were sampled on a 0.1-acre fixed radius plot. 

Twelve milacres were established on a 13.2-foot grid within the 0.1-acre 

fixed radius plot, with the grid point at plot center omitted.

Overstory and midstory trees were sampled by measuring DBH to the 

nearest 0.1 inch and recording their species identity. Milacre measurements 

proceeded in a different manner using two tallies: an inventory tally and a 

tagged-tree tally. The inventory tally consisted of a count of all seedlings 

and saplings greater than 6 inches tall but less than 3.5 inches in diameter, 

inclusive, on each milacre. The tagged-tree tally consisted of subdividing the 

milacre into quadrats, identifying and tagging the tallest conifer and tallest 

hardwood on each quadrat (if present), and recording groundline diameter, 

DBH, and total height.

Data Analysis

The stem density and basal area for combined overstory and midstory 

trees per plot were calculated by applying the appropriate expansion factor 

to trees from either the 0.1-acre or 0.2-acre plot. The Shortleaf Pine Stand 

Simulator model (SLPSS, Lynch and others 1999) was used to calculate 

overstory timber volumes in the spring of 2000 and the summer of 2003, 

providing data on stand overstory stand growth over four years. Milacre 

stem density per plot was obtained by tallying the inventory of regeneration 

stems, applying the appropriate expansion factor per milacre, and averaging 

for the 12 milacres per plot. Milacre stocking of shortleaf pine was calculated 

from the proportion of milacres in a plot having at least one shortleaf pine. 

Treatment mean and standard error statistics were calculated for these 

variables across all plots within a treatment (n=36).

Overstory growth was analyzed by calculating the difference in total 

merchantable volume (ft

3

 per acre), total merchantable green weight (tons 

per acre), and sawtimber volume (fbm Scribner per acre). Growth was 

also compared with that predicted over four years for the control and the 

treated stands using the SLPSS model. Regeneration data were analyzed 

using analysis of variance methods found in the SAS statistics software (SAS 

Institute 1990). Mean comparisons among treatments were conducted using 

the Student-Newman-Kuels mean comparison test.

Results and Discussion

Regeneration Differences by Treatment

Pine milacre stocking was inadequate in all treatments falling below the 

recommended standard of 300 trees per acre and 30 percent milacre stock

-

ing (Guldin and others 2004) and did not differ significantly by treatments 

(table 1). Milacre stocking varied from slightly more than 10 percent of 

milacres stocked with shortleaf pine in the B3 treatment to less than 1 per

-

cent in the B2 treatment; the control treatment also had 10 percent milacre 

stocking of shortleaf pine. At this point in the study, there appears to be no 
186 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

difference in milacre stocking of pines related to number of growing seasons 

after burning beneath the residual overstory densities found in this study.

There is a 2.5-fold increase in the number of stems of regeneration of all 

species as a result of treatment versus no treatment; however, there was no 

significant difference in total regeneration density one, two, or three years 

after the most recent burn (table 1). The combined treatment of thinning, 

midstory reduction, and fire result in this enhanced cohort of regeneration, 

not the number of growing seasons since the most recent prescribed burn.

This treatment pattern did not exist in the shortleaf pine component. 

There was no statistically significant difference in shortleaf pine regeneration 

density by treatment, which parallels the observation about milacre stocking 

of pines previously observed. Pine regeneration density varied from 324 

stems per acre in the B3 treatment to 9.3 stems per acre in the B2 treatment; 

the control contained 268 stems per acre (table 1). 

Significant differences did exist in oak regeneration density between 

treated stands and the control stands, but not among the treated stands. 

Treatment resulted in between four and five times as many oaks as were 

found in the control stands (table 1). Oak regeneration density varied 

between 4,148 stems per acre in the B3 treatment to 5,156 stems per acre in 

the B1 treatment, compared to 1,051 stems/acre in the control. 

There was a twofold difference in the stem density of other non-oak 

hardwood species among the four treatments. Stem density of other hardwoods varied from 1,787 stems per acre in the control stand to 3,398 stems 

per acre in the B2 treatment. However, this difference was not statistically 

significant (table 1).

The distribution of seedling-origin stems and sprout-origin stems in the 

regeneration cohort varied between time since last burn versus control, 

but again not within the burning treatments per se. The control treatment 

had between three and 10 times the number of seedlings as the burn treatments (table 2), which reinforces the intuitive notion that stems of seedling 

origin were most likely to accumulate in the absence of burning treatments 

over time. Conversely, and as expected, the burn treatments resulted in a 

three- to four-fold increase in the number of sprouts per acre compared to 

the control (table 2). Although the trends in the burn treatments showed an 

increased number of seedling-origin stems versus the number of years after 

treatment, these trends were not significantly different. However, the ratio 

of seedling-origin to sprout-origin reproduction increased markedly across 

treatments—roughly speaking, 1:2 in the control, 1:20 in the B3 treatment, 

1:40 in the B2 treatment, and 1:100 in the B1 treatment. 

Table 1—Means (and standard error, in parentheses) for milacre stocking and regeneration density by 

treatment.

Regeneration density, all species

Milacre All Shortleaf Oak Other

stocking species pine spp. hardwood spp.

Treatment -percent- -stems/acre- -stems/acre- -stems/acre- -stems/acreB1 6.48 a 8,245 a 287 a 5,056 a 2,903 a

(3.73) (699) (174) (812) (481)

B2 0.93 a 7,759 a 9 a 4,352 a 3,398 a

(0.64) (487) (6) (454) (364)

B3 10.18 a 7,435 a 324 a 4,148 a 2,963 a

(2.82) (596) (120) (652) (641)

Control 9.30 a 3,106 b 268 a 1,051 b 1,787 a

(3.08) (360) (118) (153) (363)
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 187

In all but a few instances, the average size of the tallest seedling per 

quadrat was smaller in treated stands compared to the control stands. There 

was no consistent pattern in groundline diameter by treatment; in pines 

and oaks, the groundline diameter two years after burning was less than 

that one year after burning, whereas the groundline diameter was greater 

two years after burning in the other species category (figure 1). Similarly, 

height growth patterns suggest that regeneration in the control stands is 

generally taller than in treated stands, especially in the pine and other species 

component (figure 2), but trends among burn treatments are not clear. As 

the study matures, growth data from tagged trees measured over time will 

provide a better impression of regeneration development after burning.

These data are obscured by the number of observations of overstory basal 

area that lie beyond the range where one might expect to observe regeneration. A subset of the original data set was created that excluded all control 

Table 2—Seedling-origin versus sprout-origin stems of regeneration by treatment.

Regeneration density

Seedling-origin Sprout-origin

Treatment -stems/acre- -stems/acreB1 83 b 8,162 a

B2 176 b 7,583 a

B3 356 b 7,079 a

Control 1,172 a 1,990 b

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

C B1 B2 B3

Pine

Oak

Other spp

Groundline diameter, inches

Figure 1—Differences in quadratic 

groundline diameter by treatment.

0

1

2

3

4

5

C B1 B2 B3

Pine

Oak

Other spp

Height, feet

Figure 2—Differences in height by 

treatment.
188 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

plots and all treated plots if all 12 milacres had no pine stocking. When 

subject to simple linear regression, a log transformation of pine stems per 

acre was strongly correlated with total overstory basal area (figure 3). The 

predicted equation was

Log10 (SLPR) = 4.17172 – 0.01907 * (Total BA) 

where 

SLPR=shortleaf pine regeneration, stems/acre;

Total BA = basal area for all species, ft2

/acre; and 

R2(adj) = 0.622, Pr>F<0.0001.

Overstory Growth

After four growing seasons, there were no significant differences in 

volume growth between the B1 and B3 treatments and the control (table 

3). Total merchantable cubic volume growth in the stands varies from -4 ft3

per acre in the B1 treatment to 70 ft3

 per acre in the control over a four-year 

period. In green weight, change in tonnage varied from a slight decline 

in the B1 treatment to a 2.4 ton per acre increase in the control. Scribner 

board-foot volume changes over four years varied from an increase of 320 

fbm per acre in the B1 treatment to 846 fbm per acre in the control stands. 

However, growth in either control or treated stands does not appear to be 

at a level one would expect (figure 4). For example, the Scribner board-foot 

volume growth in the three treatments that is predicted using the SLPSS 

growth model varies from 480 to 500 fbm per acre annually. Observed 

Table 3—Change in volume over four years by treatment.

Total merch. Total merch. Scribner

cubic volume green weight volume

growth growth growth

Treatment -ft3

/acre- -tons/acre- -fbm/acreB1 -4.7 a -0.2 a 320 a

B3 16.3 a 2.4 a 536 a

Control 70.7 a 6.8 a 838 

Figure 3—Relationship between overstory 

basal area and pine regeneration 

density for treated plots in the database 

in which milacre stocking is greater 

than zero. 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 189

growth is about 70 percent less than expected, and even the measured 

growth in the control stand was less than half that expected under application of the growth model.

Conclusions

Minimum stocking guidelines for shortleaf pine regeneration (Guldin and 

others 2004) call for 200 stems/acre and 20 percent of milacres stocked 

in uneven-aged stands, and 300 stems per acre and 30 percent of milacres 

stocked in even-aged stands. By either of these standards, obtaining a reliable cohort of advanced regeneration of shortleaf pine as a result of simply 

treating these stands with the traditional shortleaf pine-bluestem treatment is 

inadequate. Supplemental treatment of some kind will be necessary to obtain 

an adequate cohort of pine regeneration suitable for long-term sustainability 

of the stand.

One possible reason for the inadequate result under the current stands is 

that overstory density is greater than that required to promote the establishment of pine regeneration. When a subset of treated stands was analyzed 

separately based on having at least one milacre stocked with shortleaf pine 

per plot, significant relationships were obtained between pine milacre stem 

density and overstory basal area. 

With lower basal areas, additional work will be needed to determine 

sprouting potential of different sizes of shortleaf pine regeneration, and 

whether the three-year burning interval must be lengthened to allow pine 

seedlings to grow large enough such that they will not be top-killed when 

the prescribed fire program is reestablished. 

Additional research is required to determine the effects of treatments on 

stand growth. Over a four-year period, growth in either treated or control 

stands is substantially less than that predicted from growth models developed 

in this forest type. However, there are no significant differences in growth 

over four years between treated stands and the control stands. The growth 

model was developed in unburned second-growth shortleaf pine stands 

and may not reflect the influence of burning. In addition, a large sample of 

treated and untreated stands will be needed to provide a better assessment of 

the impacts of this restoration treatment on stand growth.

Figure 4—Board-foot volume 

growth, fbm Scribner per acre, in 

two treatments and the control. 

Projected growth was determined 

using a four-year projection with 

the SLPSS growth model.

7500

10000

12500

15000

spring 2000 summer 2003

B3 pred

B3 obs

B1 pred

B1 obs

C pred

C obs

Sawlog vol/ac, fbm Scrib
190 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

As these studies mature, the tracking of stand conditions over time will 

allow for better determination of whether shortleaf pine can be accumulated 

as advance regeneration under these stands. Ultimately, additional research 

will be needed to determine what combination of delay in the burning treat

-

ment and reduction in overstory basal area will result in an effective advance 

growth seedling bank of shortleaf pine in these restored pine-grass habitats.

Literature Cited

Bukenhofer, G. A.; Hedrick, L. D. 1997. Shortleaf pine/bluestem grass ecosystem 

renewal in the Ouachita Mountains. In: Transactions of the 62nd North American 

Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference. Washington, D.C.: Wildlife 

Management Institute. 509-515.

Foti, T.; Richards, L. L.; Andre, J.; Voeller, J. E. Chapter 2, Prehistoric and historic 

changes, p. 7-20. In: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1999. 

Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment: terrestrial vegetation and wildlife. Report 

5 of 5. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-35. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 201 p.

Foti, Thomas L.; Glenn, Susan M. 1991. The Ouachita Mountain landscape at 

the time of settlement, p. 49-65. In: Henderson, Douglas; Hedrick, L. D. 

Restoration of old-growth forests in the Interior Highlands of Arkansas and 

Oklahoma—proceedings of the conference, Winrock International, Morrilton 

AR, September 19-20, 1990. Hot Springs, AR: Ouachita National Forest and 

Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development. 190 p.

Guldin, J. M.; Baker, J. B.; Shelton, M. S. 2004. Regeneration development among 

a range of reproduction cutting methods in shortleaf pine and pine-hardwood 

stands in the Ouachita Mountains, p. 15-20. In: Guldin, James M., tech. comp. 

Ouachita and Ozark Mountains symposium: Ecosystem Management Research. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. 74. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southern Research Station. 321 p.

Guldin, J. M.; Thompson, F. R.; Richards, L. L.; Harper, K. C. 1999. Chapter 3: 

Status and trends of vegetation, p. 21-72. In: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service. 1999. Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment: terrestrial 

vegetation and wildlife. Report 5 of 5. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-35. Asheville, NC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 201 

p.

Guldin, J. M.; Baker, J. B.; Shelton, M. G. 1994. Midstory and overstory plants 

in mature pine/hardwood stands of the Ouachita/Ozark National Forests, 

p. 29-49. In: Baker, J. B., tech. comp. Proceedings of the Symposium on 

Ecosystem Management in the Ouachita Mountains: Pretreatment Conditions 

and Preliminary Findings: 1993 October 26-27; Hot Springs, AR. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. SO-112. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 259 pp.

Lynch, Thomas B.; Hitch, Kenneth L.; Huebschmann, Michael M.; Murphy, Paul 

A. 1999. An individual tree growth and yield prediction system for even-aged 

natural shortleaf pine forests. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 23(4): 203-

211.

Masters, R. E.; Wilson, C. W.; Bukenhofer, G. A.; Payton, M. E. 1996. Effects of 

pine-grassland restoration for red-cockaded woodpeckers on white-tailed deer 

forage production. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 24(1): 77-84.

Mattoon, W. R. 1915. Life history of shortleaf pine. Bull. 244. Washington, D.C.: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 46 p.

SAS Institute Inc., 1990. SAS Procedures Guide, Version 6, 3rd edition. Cary, NC: 

SAS Institute Inc., 1990. 705 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 191

Abstract—The National Forest Management Act of 1976 mandates that a site’s 

productive capacity must be protected on federally managed lands. Monitoring the 

effects of management on a site’s productive capacity is not easy, and in 1989 a 

national program of Long-Term Soil Productivity (LTSP) research was established to 

assist National Forests toward this end. The LTSP program focuses on disturbances 

associated with timber harvest, but fi ndings apply to any activities altering vegetation or soil. LTSP centers on core experiments that manipulate site organic matter, 

soil porosity, and the complexity of the plant community. Results from a dozen 

decade-old LTSP installations in the Sierra Nevada and the Southern Coastal Plain 

do not indicate that site productivity has been impaired despite substantive soil 

compaction and massive removals of surface organic matter. The strongest effect of 

treatment on planted tree growth on sites governed by temperate and subtropical 

climates was the control of competing vegetation. With only one-fi fth of the LTSP installations reporting, fi ndings should not be generalized to other sites and climates.

Introduction

The Long-Term Soil Productivity (LTSP) study began in 1989 as a 

“grass roots” proposal that grew to a national program of the USDA Forest 

Service. LTSP was founded to examine the long-term consequences of 

soil disturbance on fundamental forest productivity through a network of 

designed experiments. The concept caught the imagination of other resource 

managers and scientists, and partnerships and affi liations soon were forged 

among public and private sectors in the United States and Canada. Today, 

more than 100 LTSP and affi liated sites comprise the world’s largest coordinated research network addressing basic and applied science issues of forest 

management and sustained productivity.

Background

Historical Basis

The LTSP program began in response to the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA) and related legislation (USDA Forest Service 

1983). NFMA requires the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture to ensure, 

through research and monitoring, that forest management practices do not 

permanently impair the productivity of the land. This requirement seems 

superfl uous because sustaining productivity is an obvious aim of modern 

forest management and has been a Forest Service goal since the agency 

was founded. It is remarkable only in that NFMA may be the world’s fi rst 

modern mandate for a forest land ethic that carries the weight of law.

The North American Long-Term Soil Productivity 

Experiment: Coast-to-Coast Findings From the 

First Decade

Robert F. Powers1, Felipe G. Sanchez2, D. Andrew Scott3, and Deborah 

Page-Dumroese4

1 USDA Forest Service, Pacifi c 

Southwest Research Station, Redding, 

CA.

2 USDA Forest Service, Southern 

Research Station, Research Triangle 

Park, NC.

3 USDA Forest Service, Southern 

Research Station, Pineville, LA.
192 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Responding to NFMA, an independent committee of scientists was 

appointed to form a framework for implementing the law. Their recom-

mendations led in 1985 to a statement of responsibilities surrounding 

federal land management activities (Code of Federal Regulations 1985). 

One notable element was that the Forest Service must monitor the effects of 

forest management prescriptions, including “significant changes in land pro

-

ductivity.” This monitoring requirement was developed more than a decade 

in advance of The Montreal Process (Canadian Forest Service 1995) and the 

environmental surge toward “green certification” (Anonymous 1995).

The Forest Service knew that clear and objective definitions were key to 

addressing its monitoring charge. “Land productivity” was a central issue. 

Broadly, it could be defined as a site’s capacity to produce a cornucopia of 

timber, wildlife, watershed, fishery, and aesthetic values. All these values are 

legitimate expressions of land productivity, but some are less tangible, more 

subjective, and more variable temporally than others. Instead, and with guid

-

ance from the U.S. Office of General Council, a fundamental definition was 

forged. Land productivity was defined as the carrying capacity of a site for 

vegetative growth. This was useful, because the capacity of a site to capture 

carbon (C) and grow vegetation is central to its potential for producing all 

other values. Given the vagaries of annual fluctuations in dry matter produc

-

tion, consensus held that a departure from baseline would have to exceed 

15 percent to be deemed significant (USDA Forest Service 1987). But what 

variables should be monitored?

The National Forest Approach

Trying to measure the productive potential of a site directly by assaying 

trends in tree or stand growth is fraught with frustrations and uncertainty 

because trends vary with stand age, structure, stocking, treatment history, 

and the lack of reference controls (Powers 2001). Consequently, soil-based 

indices have been proposed as more objective measures of a site’s produc

-

tive potential (Burger 1996, Powers and others 1990). The USDA Forest 

Service also saw the value in soil properties as an independent basis for 

monitoring potential productivity. In 1987 the Watershed and Air Manage

-

ment division of National Forest Systems adopted a program of soil quality 

monitoring that was based on the following rationale (Powers and Avers 

1995):

• Management practices create soil disturbances.

• Soil disturbances affect soil and site processes.

• Soil and site processes control site productivity.

Monitoring soil and site processes directly is not feasible. Instead, the 

Forest Service proposed a monitoring strategy based on measurable soil 

variables that either reflect, or are correlated with, important site processes. 

Accordingly, each Forest Service Region has developed threshold monitor

-

ing standards for soil quality reflecting state-of-the-art knowledge and 

professional judgment (Page-Dumroese and others 2000; Powers and Avers 

1995; Powers and others 1998). Threshold standards are meant to detect 

when significant changes have occurred in potential productivity at a statisti

-

cal confidence of ± 15 percent of the true site mean. These standards await 

validation and are updated as findings accrue from research. Unfortunately, 

correlations between soil monitoring variables and potential productivity are 

mainly conceptual. Because they are conceptual and somewhat subjective, 

they can be challenged.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 193

Research Coordination

Recognizing the difficulty inherent in developing soil quality monitoring 

standards based partly on professional judgment, the National Forest System 

(NFS) of the Forest Service asked Forest Service Research for assistance. A 

small but seasoned team of scientists and practitioners assembled informally 

in 1988 to address the problem. Extensive review of world literature revealed 

that two ecosystem properties most likely to impact long-term productivity 

were site organic matter and soil porosity. While these site and soil properties 

were seen clearly as of paramount importance, we concluded that existing 

information was sparse, site specific, often contradictory, and too anecdotal 

to be broadly useful. More fundamental work was needed, and we proposed 

a nationally coordinated field experiment to address the issue directly and un

-

ambiguously. The proposal was reviewed internally by leading Forest Service 

scientists and professionals, and both nationally and internationally by re

-

search scientists outside the agency. We believe that this was the most widely 

reviewed research study plan ever produced by the Forest Service. A final 

study plan was prepared (Powers and others 1989). The plan was approved 

as a national effort in 1989 by the Deputy Chiefs for Research and National 

Forest Systems in Washington, D.C., and 10-year funding was secured for 

implementing the study on public lands. The overview was published and 

circulated widely (Powers and others 1990, 1996; Powers and Avers 1995).

Partnerships

The first LTSP installation was established in 1990 on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest in the loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) forest type of the 

Louisiana Coastal Plain. The following year saw units established in the 

mixed conifer (Abies/Pinus/Pseudotsuga) forest of California’s Sierra Nevada 

and in the glacial till landscape of Minnesota’s aspen (Populus deltoides/

tremuloides) forest. The experiment then expanded to other sites and Life 

Zones. As the LTSP program gained momentum it drew widening atten

-

tion. British Columbia’s Ministry of Forests adopted the LTSP concept in 

1990 as a high priority program for Interior British Columbia (Hope and 

others 1992). Two installations were established by 1994 and several more 

followed (Holcomb 1996). Independently, the Canadian Forest Service 

began experiments in Ontario that closely paralleled the LTSP design, and 

the two programs merged in 1996 to expand the network. Today, the total 

number of installations with the core design stands at 62 (figure 1).

In the United States, forest industry voiced concern that the experi

-

ment highlighted only “negative” impacts of management and that LTSP 

lacked treatments aimed at enhancing site productivity. Accordingly, we 

invited leaders from private and public forest management groups to a 

1995 working session in St. Louis, Missouri, to air concerns and to find 

ways of improving the study and strengthening the network. This led to an 

expanded affiliation that included studies on industrial lands and elsewhere. 

Conditions for affiliation are that (1) studies have certain elements in 

common with the LTSP experimental design (at least the minimal potential 

impacttreatment), (2) treatment plots be large enough to have minimal 

edge effect once plots attain leaf area carrying capacity, and (3) members 

agree to share findings and provide mutual support (Powers and others 

1996). These affiliate sites have brought the LTSP network to more than 

100 installations (figure 1), making it the world’s largest coordinated effort 

aimed at understanding how pulse disturbances affect sustained forest 

productivity.
194 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

The Study

A Conceptual Model

The LTSP program is predicated on the principle that within the 

constraints of climate, a site’s potential net primary productivity is strongly 

regulated by physical, chemical, and biotic soil processes affected readily by 

management. The key properties directly affected by management are soil 

porosity and site organic matter (OM). These two properties regulate critical 

site processes through their roles in microbial activity, soil aggregate stability, 

water and gas exchange, physical restrictions on rooting, and resource availability (figure 2).

Regardless of silvicultural strategy or harvest intensity, site organic matter 

and soil porosity are impacted directly by forest management operations. 

Therefore, they were targeted for specific manipulation in large-scale, longterm experiments meant to encompass the range of possibilities occurring 

under management. The experiments were designed to address these four 

hypotheses:

 Null hypothesis Alternative hypothesis

1. Pulse changes in site organic matter Critical changes in site organic matter and/or

 and/or soil porosity do not affect the soil porosity have a lasting effect on

 sustained productive potential of a site potential productivity by altering soil

 (sustained capacity to capture carbon stability, root penetration, soil air, water

 and produce phytomass). and nutrient balances, and energy flow.

2. If impacts on productivity occur The biological significance of a change in

 from changes in organic matter and organic matter or porosity varies by climate

 porosity, they are universal. and soil type.

3. If impacts do occur, they are Negative impacts dissipate with time, or can

 irreversible. be mitigated by management practices.

4. Plant diversity has no impact on Diverse communities affect site potential by

 the productive potential of a site. using resources more fully or through 

 nutrient cycling changes that affect the soil.

Figure 1—Location of core LTSP 

and affiliate installations on 

the approximate range of the 

commercial forest in the United 

States and two Canadian 

provinces. Stars indicate 

installations achieving at least 

10 years of growth.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 195

Selecting Sites and Applying Treatments

The study was targeted at forest types, age classes, and soil conditions 

apt to fall under active forest management involving harvesting, thinning, 

or fuel modification. These were fully stocked, young-growth, even-aged 

stands—i.e., not “ancient forests” or non-forested openings. Preliminary 

plots of 0.2 or 0.4 ha were identified and surveyed for variability in soil and 

stand conditions. Those with comparable variability at a given location (similar soil type, stand density, and amounts of disturbance) were chosen for the 

experiment. Pretreatment samples were taken to quantify standing biomass 

and nutrient capital in the overstory, understory, and forest floor. Stands 

were then harvested under close supervision and treatments were imposed 

randomly. The main effect treatments were as follows:

Main effect Symbol Description of treatment

Modify site organic OM0

 Tree boles removed. Retain crowns, felled 

 matter understory, and forest floor.

OM1

 All aboveground living vegetation removed.

 Forest floor retained.

OM2

 All surface organic matter removed. 

 Bare soil exposed.

Modify soil porosity C0

 No soil compaction.

C1

 Compact to an intermediate bulk density. 

C2

 Compact to a severe bulk density.

We had two reasons for choosing these levels of organic matter manipulation. First, they encompass the extremes in organic matter removal likely 

under any silvicultural system short of removing surface soil or extracting 

roots. Second, they produce a step series of nutrient removal that is disproportionate to biomass loss. Table 1 illustrates these points using six typical 

LTSP sites arrayed along a climatic gradient. It shows that overstory trees 

contain roughly 80 percent of site aboveground organic matter with about 

Figure 2—Conceptual model of the 

influence of site organic matter 

and soil porosity on fundamental 

site processes that regulate primary 

productivity.
196 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

two-thirds occurring in boles. At best, the forest floor accounts for only onefourth of aboveground organic matter.

Nitrogen (N) shows a different trend. Although half or more of 

aboveground organic matter may be in tree boles, this accounts for only 

one-fifth to one-third of the aboveground N capital. On average (and in the 

absence of frequent disturbance), the forest floor of mature stands contains 

as much N as boles and crowns, combined. However, the actual proportion 

of aboveground N in the forest floor varies with climate (table 1). In moist 

boreal forests of British Columbia where decomposition is slowed by cool 

temperature and perhaps by partial anaerobia, the forest floor accumulates 

far more N than is contained in the vegetation. Under warm, humid conditions, the forest floor decomposes rapidly and is a relatively low reservoir of 

N. Regardless of Life Zone, the understory in mature forests is only a minor 

component of site organic matter or N (only a few percentage points of the 

aboveground total after canopies have closed).

Compaction was accomplished through multiple passes of heavy machinery to achieve target levels of soil bulk density varying by soil texture 

(Daddow and Warrington 1983). Organic removal was accomplished by 

full suspension of boles or crowns, or by manually raking the forest floor 

from the plot to expose mineral soil. Experimental treatments were not 

meant to mimic operational practices, but rather to bracket the extremes in 

disturbance likely to occur under present or future management. Generally, 

all factorial combinations of main effect treatments were applied, producing 

nine core combinations of organic matter removal and soil compaction. 

Treatment plots (0.4 ha) were separated from residual stands by a distance 

at least equivalent to the height of bordering trees. This plot size and separation avoided competitive edge effects that could mask the true impact of the 

treatments, a confounding factor that affects small plot studies and many 

historical investigations (Powers and others 1990, 1994). Only rarely were 

treatments replicated at a given location. High establishment costs (about 

$60 thousand per set of 9 treatments) and the need to generalize findings 

across a broad ranges of sites convinced us that the better approach was to 

replicate the experiment within particular soil types (soil Series of Families) 

but at geographically separated locations. Soil types were chosen based on 

their regional prevalence and on their position along a continuum of site 

productivity within a regional forest type. In California for example, three 

installations occur on each of three soil types representing low, medium 

and high levels of productivity (nine in all), and another three installations 

occur on unreplicated soil types representing levels of productivity between 

Table 1—Absolute and proportional amounts of biomass and nitrogen removed by the three organic matter treatments on representative 

LTSP sites (OM0 = bole only removed, OM1 = whole tree removed, OM2 = whole tree + understory and forest floor removed). Life zone 

codes after Holdridge (Lugo and others 1999); BM = boreal moist, CTM = cool temperate moist, WTD = warm temperate dry, WTM = 

warm temperate, moist, STM = subtopical moist. 

Biomass removed (Mg/ha) Nitrogen removed (kg/ha)

(% of above ground total) (% of above ground total)

Location Life zone Forest type OM0

 OM1 OM2 OM0 OM1 OM2

British Columbia BM Subboreal spruce 126 (56) 158 (71) 223 (100) 195 (18) 253 (24) 1,068 (100)

Minnesota CTM Trembling aspen 175 (61) 214 (75) 286 (100) 194 (30) 316 (48) 653 (100)

Idaho CTM Mixed conifer 160 (61) 191 (73) 261 (100) 190 (22) 410 (48) 846 (100)

California WTD Mixed conifer 252 (47) 473 (89) 532 (100) 218 (20) 609 (57) 1,064 (100)

Missouri WTM Central hardwood 96 (42) 175 (77) 228 (100) 195 (24) 540 (67) 811 (100)

Louisiana STM Loblolly pine 133 (77) 153 (88) 173 (100) 134 (38) 229 (65) 352 (100)
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 197

the extremes. Only a few installations were established in a given year and 

replicates in a given soil type sometimes were established in different years. 

In California, three installations (Central, Owl, and Vista) are replicates of a 

particular soil Series or Family, but Challenge and Wallace are not (table 2). 

The LTSP study is planned to extend several decades to at least the culmination of mean annual volume increment. Only those achieving 10 years from 

treatment are reported here.

Plots were regenerated with the tree species indigenous to the site and 

measurement trees were separated from outer plot boundaries by several 

rows of buffer trees. Except for aspen (Populus) forests and the mixed conifer 

sites of interior British Columbia where policy precluded herbicides, all main 

effect treatment plots were split. One half of each plot was kept weed-free by 

regular applications of herbicides, and the other half was allowed to develop 

naturally (thereby producing side-by-side subplots with simple and diverse 

forest communities). Where possible, the more severe treatments were 

applied and followed by mitigative measures, such as fertilization to replace 

nutrients and subsoiling to alleviate compaction. Each field installation was 

equipped with an automated climatological monitoring station, thereby linking all sites in a network characterized by precipitation, temperature, solar 

radiation, and relative humidity.

Post Treatment Measurements

Although many measurements could be taken, principal investigators 

agreed that a reduced set of eight core measurements were critical to the 

success of the LTSP program. Beyond treatment establishment, funds were 

extremely limited. Therefore, minimum measurement intervals were identified for each variable:

Measurement variable Minimum measurement interval

Climatological data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Continuous.

Soil moisture and temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Monthly.

Soil bulk density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Each 5 years.

Soil strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Seasonally each 5 years.

Soil organic matter content and chemical composition . . . . . . .Each 5 years.

Water infiltration and saturated hydraulic conductivity. . . . . . . .Each 5 years.

Plant survival, growth, damage from pests, NPP . . . . . . . . . . . .Each 5 years.

Foliar chemistry and standing nutrient capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Each 5 years.

Methods for estimating growth and net primary productivity (NPP) 

were left to the discretion of each principal investigator, but generally they 

involved periodic destructive sampling within the treated buffer. While early 

findings have been reported for individual sites (Alban and others 1994; 

Amaranthus and others 1996; Tiarks and others 1998; Powers and Fiddler 

1997; Stone and Elioff 1998), most have dealt with stand conditions short 

of crown closure and may not be indicative of long-term trends when sites 

are stocked at carrying capacity. This paper constitutes the first effort at summarizing findings from installations that have reached 10 growing seasons. It 

highlights installations in two geomorphic provinces with differing climates: 

the Sierra Nevada of California, and the Southern Coastal Plain (table 2). 

Analyses are principally of two types: analysis of variance and least squares 

regression via standard procedures.
198 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Findings to Date

Findings reported too hastily can be misleading. While a decade may 

seem a long observational period for many studies, we have resisted making 

a hasty synopsis of cross-site comparisons. Even at 10 years, crown canopies 

have not closed on many treatment plots. However, we believe that oscillations from initial perturbations have dampened enough to give us an early 

glimpse of longer-term trends. We confine our analyses to simple responses 

of soil and vegetation to the main effect treatments on our oldest installations for which data are available, those from the Southern Coastal Plain 

and Sierra Nevada—two regions contrasting greatly in climate and geology. 

Our analyses carry the caveat that trends may change when data are available 

from all LTSP installations.

Organic Matter

Productivity

We tested the hypothesis that site organic matter removal affects forest 

productivity by comparing total standing biomass at 10 years for 12 sites, 

five from the Sierra Nevada and seven from the Southern Coastal Plain. 

Planting through logging slash sometimes reduces tree survival. Therefore, 

we based our analyses on total standing biomass (planted trees plus understory vegetation) on non-herbicide plots. Total vegetative production reflects 

site potential more fully, particularly where tree stocking has not reached site 

carrying capacity.

Removing all surface organic matter prior to planting had no general 

impact on total vegetative production at 10 years, regardless of geographic 

province (figure 3). The linear trend determined by regression suggests that 

removing surface organic matter reduces productivity more on poorer sites 

than on better, but the intercept is not significantly different from zero (p = 

0.33) and the slope trend is not significantly different from 1.0 (p = 0.62).

Soil Chemistry

Data from the seven Coastal Plain sites indicate that organic matter 

removal had negligible impact on the concentration of organic C in the 

Table 2—Site and pretreatment stand characteristics of LTSP installations achieving 10 years of growth. Life zone codes after Holdridge 

(Lugo and others 1999); BM = boreal moist, CTM = cool temperate moist, WTD = warm temperate, dry, WTM = warm temperate, moist; 

STD = subtropical dry, STM = subtopical moist. Nd = information not determined or not available.

 Stand

Installation Life Elev ppt. age Preharvest biomass (kg/ha)

Location name zone Forest type (m) (cm) Soil origin (yr) Overstory Understory FF

California Central WTD Mixed conifer 1685 114 Granodiorite 117 422,111 94 80,455

California Challenge WTD Mixed conifer 790 173 Metabasalt 108 473,348 576 60,926

California Owl WTD Mixed conifer 1805 114 Granodiorite 115 576,071 34 72,233

California Vista WTD Mixed conifer 1560 76 Granodiorite 132 373,609 43 72,567

California Wallace WTD Mixed conifer 1575 178 Volcanic ash 230 450,193 83 115,757

Idaho Priest River CTM Mixed conifer 900 85 Volcanic ash 120 191,250 1,750 68,000

Louisiana Glenmora STD Pine-hardwoods 61 147 Marine sediments 52 153,000 4,200 15,900

Louisiana Malbis STD Pine-hardwoods 52 150 Marine sediments 45 91,000 5,100 Nd

Louisiana Mayhew STD Pine-hardwoods 61 147 Marine sediments 55 236,200 1,700 15,400

Louisiana Metcalf STD Pine-hardwoods 61 147 Marine sediments 55 203,200 1,800 20,500

North Carolina Croatan WTM Pine-hardwoods 7 136 Marine sediments 65 167,800 3,190 52,410
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 199

upper soil profile (figure 4). Nor did removing surface organic matter have 

any apparent effect on the mass of C or N in the upper soil profile at 10 

years. Analysis of variance for soil C and N content on the three North 

Carolina installations replicated on the Croatan National Forest detected no 

significant effect among organic matter removal treatments (table 3). Yet, 

when the same soils were analyzed for organic C concentrations before treatment and at time intervals thereafter, post-treatment concentrations were 

greater at all depths than initial values (figure 5). This was true at all depths, 

even where all surface organic matter had been removed.

This presents a curious and seemingly contradictory point. On one 

hand, surface organic matter removal seemed to have no obvious effect 

on soil C storage at 10 years. On the other hand, soil carbon concentrations significantly increased following harvest. The explanation for this lies 

in the primary source of soil organic C. Apparently, soil inputs following 

disturbance depend less on decomposition of surface residues and more on 

the decay of fine roots that remained from the previously harvested stand. 

This conclusion is supported by work elsewhere. In a Tennessee study more 

than a decade after harvesting a mixed-hardwood forest, Johnson and Todd 

Figure 3—Standing biomass of trees and 

understory vegetation at 10 years as 

influenced by the retention or removal 

of organic surface residues (no soil 

compaction). Dashed line indicates 1:

1 parity between treatments. Basis: 12 

sites in California and the Southern 

Coastal Plain. (OM = organic matter.)

Figure 4—Concentration of organic soil carbon 

at 10 years for three soil depths as influenced 

by the retention or removal of organic surface 

residues. Dashed line indicates 1:1 parity 

between treatments. Basis: seven sites in the 

Southern Coastal Plain.
200 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

(1992) found no differences in soil organic matter beneath previous piles of 

logging slash and units free of slash. Evidently, under moderate and warmer 

climates, C is respired as CO2

 as surface residues decompose, and very little 

C is incorporated into the soil beyond. In their work on California soils 

similar to our California LTSP sites, McColl and others (1990) showed that 

dissolved organic C from mature forests contributed less than 1 Mg C ha-1

yr-1 to the mineral soil—only a fraction of the increases we found (figure 5).

On the other hand, fine roots decaying from harvested stands provide 

sizable C inputs in fractions small enough to pass a conventional 2 mm sieve. 

Van Lear and others (2000) found that soil C concentrations were more 

than an order of magnitude greater in the vicinity of roots remaining from 

a stand harvested 16 years earlier than in the general soil. The effect was 

evident to as much as a meter depth. Root decay apparently follows a simple 

Q10 model of rate increasing with temperature (Chen and others 2000), 

and should be quite rapid in soils of the warm, humid Southern Coastal 

Plain and in those dominated by a Mediterranean climate. We conclude 

that organic C from surface residues (logging slash, understory vegetation, 

and forest floor) most likely is respired as CO2

 during decomposition and 

contributes relatively little to soil C. And while organic N mineralized to 

ammonium during decomposition presumably is released to the soil, either 

Table 3—Influence of organic matter removal on soil organic carbon (C) and 

nitrogen (N) 10 years after treatment at the North Carolina LTSP sites. 

Statistical significance of differences among treatments indicated by p > F.

Organic matter removal

Soil depth (cm) OM0 OM1 OM2 p > F

Organic C (Mg ha-1)

 0-10 28.4 33.3 33.8 0.21

 10-20 21.4 23.5 25.1 0.61

 20-30 14.0 25.1 16.5 0.69

Total N (kg ha-1)

 0-10 807 905 882 0.85

 10-20 542 524 540 0.99

 20-30 352 385 368 0.94

Figure 5—Quantity of fine fraction 

organic soil carbon stored at three 

soil depths before and after the OM1

treatment on the Croatan LTSP site in 

North Carolina. Vertical bars indicate 

one standard error of the mean. 

Trends were similar among all OM 

treatments.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 201

it is immobilized quickly, nitrified and leached, or is too miniscule relative to 

organic N to be detected through conventional analysis (table 3).

Soil Compaction

Soil compaction effects on productivity through the first 10 years were 

assayed by comparing total standing biomass (trees plus understory vegetation) on C0

 (not compacted) and C2 (severely compacted) treatments (figure 

6). Organic matter treatment was held constant at OM2 (complete removal) 

to eliminate the possibility of compaction x organic matter interactions. The 

regression trend suggests that in general, soil compaction leads to slightly 

greater productivity, but the slope of the linear trend is not significantly different from 1.0 (p = 0.22) and the intercept is not significantly different from 

zero (p = 0.82). We conclude that soil compaction in our most extreme treatments did not significantly or universally affect total vegetative productivity 

on sites in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Coastal Plain.

But findings may be biased if trees on compacted soils have lower 

understory competition, or if soil texture is such that both understory and 

overstory growth are increased by compaction as was reported by Powers 

and Fiddler (1997). We found that understory biomass was 55 percent 

greater on plots not compacted (p = 0.08), although this was not so on soils 

with a sandy texture where biomass tended to be greater on compacted soil. 

To reduce possible confounding, comparisons also were made of tree biomass for C0

 and C2 treatments on plots kept free of understory vegetation. 

Even so, 10-year tree biomass on C0

 and C2 plots were identical (Y = 1.94 + 

1.00X, adj. r2 = 0.78). Data for plots free of understory competition (open 

squares) are superimposed on figure 6. We found no evidence that 10-year 

productivity was universally impacted by soil compaction, regardless of the 

presence or absence of understory vegetation.

Given that soil compaction generally is believed to reduce tree growth, 

this result is surprising. One explanation for the lack of an overall soil 

compaction effect might be that our treatments did not reach compaction 

levels considered to be severe. To examine this, we calculated soil bulk 

density immediately following severe compaction as a function of bulk 

Figure 6—Effect of severe soil compaction 

on total standing biomass at 10 years 

(OM2 treatment). Filled diamonds 

indicate the biomass of trees + 

understory vegetation where understory 

vegetation was present. Open squares 

indicate tree biomass where understory 

vegetation was absent. Neither 

trend differs significantly from a 1:1 

relationship, indicating that severe soil 

compaction had no general effect on 

productivity.
202 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

density immediately before compaction for the 10-20 cm depth zone over a 

broad range of sites in the LTSP network. The trend was strongly linear of 

the form:

Y = 0.426 + 0.788X [Eq. 1] r2

 = 0.95

Where: X = soil bulk density in Mg m-3 at 10-20 cm before soil compaction Y = soil bulk density at 10-20 cm in the first year following severe com

-

paction. r2 = the proportion of variation in 

Y explained by the linear relationship.

This indicates that the degree to which soil bulk density was increased by 

compaction depends strongly on the initial bulk density. That is, soils with 

low initial bulk densities were compacted more than soils where bulk densi

-

ties already were high. It also suggests that soil with an initial bulk density 

of 1.99 Mg m-3 can not be compacted further through the procedures we 

employed.

Soil compaction occurs at the expense of larger pores, resulting in the 

loss of aeration porosity (Siegel-Issem and others, in press). This means 

that soils compacted further from a very high initial bulk density may lose 

air-filled pore space and the soil may become waterlogged or suffer from 

the buildup of respiratory gases. Grable and Siemer (1968) suggest that 

an aeration porosity of 10 percent is a critical limit for root respiration and 

growth. Although we did not measure pore size distribution on most of our 

soils, we can solve for approximate total porosity by assuming a soil particle 

density of 2.65 Mg m-3. Using Eq. 1 above, and solving for the bulk density 

at which no further compaction is possible by the means we used, we can 

infer that the “uncompactable porosity” remaining at a bulk density of 1.99 

is 24 percent, and that this essentially defines the micropores remaining after 

practically all air-filled porosity has been depleted.

The highest bulk densities we achieved on any depth for any of the sites in 

figure 6 were in the range of 1.65 to 1.71 Mg m-3 (Louisiana). Based on the 

simple approximations above, this translates to a total porosity between 38 

and 35 percent immediately following compaction, for an estimated aeration 

porosity of between 14 and 11 percent once microporosity is subtracted. 

This suggests that aeration porosity following severe compaction on the 

Louisiana sites remained just above the 10 percent threshold proposed by 

Grable and Siemer (1968). Greenhouse studies have shown that loblolly 

pine can grow reasonably well even under waterlogged conditions (SiegelIssem and others, in press). This is probably because of the presence of 

aerenchyma cells allowing gas exchange between roots and the aboveground 

atmosphere.

Another possibility explaining the absence of a clear impact of soil 

compaction on productivity is that soils may have recovered quickly from the 

initial effects of compaction. We tested for recovery by comparing soil bulk 

densities at 10-20 cm in the first year after severe compaction treatment with 

those on the same plots after 10 years. Figure 7 indicates that recovery in 

that period has been negligible at soil depths below 10 cm.

We conclude that despite appreciable increases in soil bulk density, par

-

ticularly on lower density soils, compaction has not affected productivity in a 

general sense over the first 10 years. In our view, the most likely explanations 

concern the facts that (1) soil compaction may improve soil water availability 

on droughty sites (Gomez and others 2002); (2) the highest soil bulk densi

-

ties were associated with loblolly pine sites, a species that tolerates high bulk 

densities and poorly drained conditions (Siegel-Issem and others, in press); 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 203

and (3) soils are not compacted readily around stumps left from the previous 

stand (large surficial roots buffer against compaction). Friable soil bordering 

roots of remnant stumps maintains a favorable balance of moisture and 

aeration and becomes the locus for increased rooting activity and superior 

growth in the new stand (Van Lear and others 2000).

Evidence abounds that soil compaction reduces tree growth (Greacen 

and Sands 1980, Powers and others 1990) and models for estimating 

tree growth reduction with increasing compaction have been developed 

(Froehlich and McNabb 1984). But more recent findings indicate that the 

impacts of compaction are not universal. Instead, impacts depend largely on 

site conditions affecting air and water balance in the rooting zone (Gomez 

and others 2002; Heninger and others 

2002; Miller and others 1996; SiegelIssem and others, in press).

The Presence of Understory 

Vegetation

Over the first 10 years of the LTSP 

experiment, the single strongest factor 

affecting planted tree growth was 

the competitive effect of understory 

vegetation. Whether in the Sierra 

Nevada or the Southern Coastal Plain, 

tree biomass averaged about one-fifth 

greater where understory vegetation 

was excluded (figure 8). In the Sierra 

Nevada, where summer drought is 

common, planted tree productivity averaged more than three times 

higher in the absence of understory 

vegetation.

Figure 7—Soil bulk density recovery from severe 

compaction between the first and 10th year in the 

10-20 cm depth zone on 11 LTSP installations. 

Understory excluded. No recovery indicated by the 

1:1 line of parity. Regression line indicates that the 

higher the initial bulk density, the lower the rate of 

recovery.

Figure 8—Effect of understory vegetation on the biomass of planted trees at 10 

years for OM2

C0 treatments on 12 LTSP installations. Regression line indicates 

that growth response to vegetation control is proportionally greater on lower 

productivity sites, but absolutely greater at higher levels of productivity. Dashed 

line indicates 1:1 parity between treatments.
204 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Conclusions

The LTSP experiment is still in its infancy. Installations were established 

over several years, and only the oldest and most productive are approaching 

site carrying capacity. The findings reported here may provide the earliest 

glimpse into general longer-term trends. Or they may be seen as aberrations 

once a more complete data set emerges and vegetation more fully occupies 

our sites. What we can conclude for the Sierra Nevada and the Southern 

Coastal Plain is that there is no evidence that soil productivity has been 

seriously impaired in the first 10 years despite massive removals of surface 

organic matter and substantial soil compaction.

References

Alban, D. H.; Host, G. E.; Elioff, J. D.; Shadis, J. A. 1994. Soil and vegetation 

response to soil compaction and forest floor removal after aspen harvesting. Res. 

Pap. NC-315. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

North Central Forest Experiment Station. 8 p.

Amaranthus, M.; Page-Dumroese, D.; Harvey, A.; Cazares, E.; Bednar, L. 1996. 

Soil compaction and organic matter affect conifer seedling nonmycorrhizal and 

ectomycorrhizal root tip abundance and diversity. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-494. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 12 p.

Anonymous. 1995. The certified forest: what makes it green? Journal of Forestry. 

93: 1-41.

Burger, J. A. 1996. Limitations of bioassays for monitoring forest soil productivity: 

rationale and example. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 60: 1674-1678.

Canadian Forest Service. 1995. Criteria and indicators for the conservation and 

sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests. The Montreal Process. 

Canada, Quebec: Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources. 17 p.

Chen, H.; Harmon, M. E.; Griffiths, R. P.; Hicks, W. 2000. Effects of temperature 

and moisture on carbon respired from decomposing woody roots. Forest Ecology 

and Management. 138: 51-64.

Code of Federal Regulations. 1985 (July). Monitoring and evaluation. In: 

Part 219—Planning, Subpart A—National Forest system land and resource 

management planning. Chpt. 11, 36 CFR 219.12(k). Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 45-71.

Daddow, R. L.; Warrington, G. E. 1983. Growth-limiting soil bulk densities as 

influenced by soil texture. Watershed Systems Development Group, WSDG 

Report WSDG-TN-00005. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service. 17 p.

Froehlich, H. A.; McNabb, D. H. 1984. Minimizing soil compaction in Pacific 

Northwest forests. In: Stone, E. L., ed. Forest soils and treatment impacts. 

Proceedings of the 6th North American Forest Soils Conference. Knoxville, TN: 

University of Tennessee. 159-192.

Grable, A. R; Siemer, E. G. 1968. Effects of bulk density, aggregate size, and soil 

water suction on oxygen diffusion, redox potentials, and elongation of corn 

roots. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings. 32: 180-186.

Gomez, G. A.; Powers, R. F.; Singer, M. J.; Horwath, W. R. 2002. Soil compaction 

effects on growth of young ponderosa pine following litter removal in 

California’s Sierra Nevada. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 66: 

1334-1343.

Greacen, E. L.; Sands, R. 1980. Compaction of forest soils: a review. Australian 

Journal of Soil Research. 18: 163-189.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 205

Heninger, R.; Scott, W.; Dobkowski, A.; Miller, R.; Anderson, H.; Duke, S. 2002. 

Soil disturbance and 10-year growth response of coast Douglas-fir on nontilled and tilled skid roads in the Oregon Cascades. Canadian Journal of Forest 

Research. 32: 233-246.

Holcomb, R. W. 1996. The long-term soil productivity study in British Columbia. 

FRDA Rep. 256. Victoria, B.C.: British Columbia Ministry of Forests. 23 p.

Hope, G.; Macadam, A.; Osberg, M.; Trowbridge, R.; Kranabetter, M. 1992. 

Working plan: the effects of soil compaction and organic matter retention on 

long-term soil productivity in British Columbia. I. Sub-boreal spruce zone. 

Unpublished report, B.C. Ministry of Forests. 27 p.

Johnson, D. W.; Todd, D. E., Jr. 1992. Harvesting effects on long-term changes in 

nutrient pools of a mixed oak forest. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 62: 

1725-1735.

Lugo, A. E.; Brown, S. C.; Dodson, R.; Smithand, T. S.; Shugart, H. H. 1999. The 

Holdridge life zones of the conterminous United States in relation to ecosystem 

monitoring. Journal of Biogeography. 26: 1025-1038.

McColl, J. G.; Pohlman, A. A.; Jersak, J. M.; Tam, S. C.; Northup, R. R. 1990. 

Organics and metal solubility in California forest soils. In: Gessel, S. P.; Lacate, 

D. S.; Weetman, G. F.; Powers, R. F., eds. Sustained productivity of forest soils. 

Vancouver, B.C.: Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia. 178-195.

Miller, R. E.; Scott, W.; Hazard, J. W. 1996. Soil compaction and conifer growth 

after tractor yarding at three coastal Washington locations. Canadian Journal of 

Forest Research. 26: 225-236.

Page-Dumroese, D.; Jurgensen, M.; Elliot, W.; Rice, T.; Nesser, J.; Collins, T.; 

Meurisse, R. 2000. Soil quality standards and guidelines for forest sustainability 

in northwestern North America. Forest Ecology and Management. 138: 

445-462.

Powers, R. F. 2001. 5. Assessing potential sustainable wood yield. In: Evans, 

J., ed. The forests handbook. Vol. 2. Applying forest science for sustainable 

management. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science, Ltd. 105-128.

Powers, R. F.; Mead, D. J.; Burger, J. A.; Ritchie, M. W. 1994. Designing longterm site productivity experiments. In: Dyck, W. J.; Cole, D. W.; Comerford, N. 

B., eds. Impacts of forest harvesting on long-term site productivity. London. UK: 

Chapman and Hall. 247-286.

Powers, R. F.; Alban, D. H.; Miller, R. E.; Tiarks, A. E.; Wells, C. G.; Avers, 

P. E.; Cline, R. G.; Fitzgerald, R. O.; Loftus, N. S., Jr. 1990. Sustaining site 

productivity in North American forests: problems and prospects. In: Gessel, S. 

P.; Lacate, D. S.; Weetman, G. F.; Powers, R. F., eds. Sustained productivity of 

forest soils. Vancouver, B.C.: Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia. 

49-79.

Powers, R. F.; Alban, D. H.; Ruark, G. A.; Tiarks, A. E.; Goudey, C. B.; Ragus, J. 

F.; Russell, W. E. 1989. Study plan for evaluating timber management impacts 

on long-term site productivity: a research and national forest system cooperative 

study. Unpublished study on file with the Washington Office, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service. 33 p.

Powers, R. F.; Avers, P. E. 1995. Sustaining forest productivity through soil quality 

standards: a coordinated U.S. effort. In: Powter, C. B.; Abboud, S. A.; McGill, 

W. B., eds. Environmental soil science. Anthropogenic chemicals and soil quality 

criteria. Brandon, Manitoba: Canadian Society of Soil Science. 147-190.

Powers, R. F.; Tiarks, A. E.; Burger, J. A.; Carter, M. C. 1996. Sustaining the 

productivity of planted forests. In: Carter, M. C., ed. Growing trees in a greener 

world: industrial forestry in the 21st century. Baton Rouge, LA: School of 

Forestry, Wildlife & Fisheries, Louisiana State University. 97-134.

Powers, R. F.; Fiddler, G. O. 1997. The North American long-term soil productivity 

study: progress through the first 5 years. In: Proceedings, 18th Annual Forest 

Vegetation Conference, 1997 January 14-16, Sacramento, CA. Redding, CA: 

Forest Vegetation Management Conference. 88-102

.
206 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Powers, R. F.; Tiarks, A. E.; Boyle, J. R. 1998. Assessing soil quality: practicable 

standards for sustainable productivity in the United States. In: Adams, M. B.; 

Ramakrishna, K.; Davidson, E., eds. The contribution of soil science to the 

development of and implementation of criteria and indicators of sustainable forest 

management. SSSA Special Publ. No. 53. Madison, WI: Soil Science Society of 

America. 53-80.

Siegel-Issem, C. M.; Burger, J. A.; Powers, R. F.; Patterson, S. C. In press. Root 

growth potential as a function of soil density and water content for four forest 

soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal.

Stone, D. M.; Elioff, J. D. 1998. Soil properties and aspen development five years 

after compaction and forest floor removal. Canadian Journal of Soil Science. 78:

51-58.

Tiarks, A. E.; Buford, M. A.; Powers, R. F.; Ragus, J. F.; Page-Dumroese, D. S.; 

Ponder, F. Jr.; Stone, D. M. 1998. North American long term soil productivity 

research program. In: Communicating the role of silviculture in managing the 

national forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-238. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 140-147.

USDA Forest Service. 1983. The principal laws relating to Forest Service activities. 

Agric. Handb. 453. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 591 p.

USDA Forest Service. 1987. Soil quality monitoring. In: Soil Management 

Handbook 2509.18, Chpt. 2 (October). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service.

Van Lear, D. H.; Kapeluck, P. R.; Carroll, W. D. 2000. Productivity of loblolly pine 

as affected by decomposing root systems. Forest Ecology and Management. 138: 

435-443.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 207

Abstract—The Middle Fork Clearwater Wild and Scenic River was established 

under the 1968 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Forest Service managers gradually 

became concerned with the increasing loss of the large, old ponderosa pine and 

Douglas-fi r that characterize much of the river corridor and adjacent uplands. The 

perceived dilemma was how to maintain both high esthetic values and a seral forest 

that was resilient in the face of wildfi re, insect attacks, and disease presence. The 

Lochsa District on the Clearwater Forest developed guidelines for management 

within the corridor. Prescriptions included shelterwood with reserves, group selection, and prescribed fi re. These treatments maintained the highly esthetic character, 

improved big game winter range, reduced fi re hazard, maintained soil stability on 

steep slopes, realized an economic return, and set up these forests for long-term 

resiliency.

Introduction

The Management Setting

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed in 1968. Among others, it 

named the Middle Fork Clearwater as a Wild and Scenic River, designated as 

a recreation river. Recreation rivers are managed for their high scenic quality 

but are readily accessible by road and may have development along their 

shores. Private lands along the Middle Fork, downstream from the National 

Forest, are encumbered with scenic easements, authorized and funded 

through the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. These easements limit development 

and land-disturbing activities to preserve the scenic quality of the corridor. 

Management actions on both private and federal lands need to preserve 

and enhance the outstandingly remarkable values for which the river was 

designated. For the Middle Fork, this includes maintaining a forested setting 

along the river. For many years after designation, this was interpreted to 

exclude timber harvest.

Years of fi re exclusion and years of drought resulted in conditions that 

made river managers rethink that interpretation. Under natural conditions, 

these lower river breaks would have underburned every 25 years or so. This 

would have maintained seral ponderosa pine and Douglas-fi r in fairly open 

stand conditions. Instead, 60 years of fi re exclusion has allowed grand fi r and 

additional Douglas-fi r to become established and grow into dense stands. 

Over the past decade, north-central Idaho has experienced droughty conditions. Drought, coupled with these dense stand conditions, has put stress on 

the older overstory ponderosa pine, making them vulnerable to insects and 

diseases. Many have died. Even without active management, the character 

of the forest was shifting and becoming more vulnerable to drastic change 

Caring for a Wild and Scenic River

Kris Hazelbaker1

1 USDA Forest Service, Region 1, 

Clearwater/Nez Perce Forest Plan 

Revision Team, Kamiah, ID.
208 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

as a result of intense wildfire. This is a significant departure from historic fire 

effects. Most of this area would be classed as Fire Regime Condition Class 3 

(Schmidt and others 2002; see table 1), well outside its historic disturbance 

regime, and at risk of losing key ecosystem components.

The Clearwater Forest Plan (Anonymous 1987) designated the area 

within 1⁄4 mile of the river as Management Area (MA) A7, to be managed as 

a wild and scenic river. The breaklands farther than 1⁄4 mile from the river are 

to be managed for big game winter range and timber management, with a 

high visual quality objective (MA C4). Since the late 1990s, elk populations 

have declined, with at least part of the cause being lack of high quality 

winter forage.

Soils are shallow on these steep breaklands and are inherently unstable. 

Mass wasting is a natural soil movement or landslide occurrence that supplies 

woody debris and cobbles for anadromous fish spawning gravels. Any treatments would need to be designed to limit additional soil movement.

Private Land Guidelines

Private landowners within the Wild and Scenic River corridor, downriver 

from the forest, were the first to address these changing forest conditions. 

Their sites were drier and started showing symptoms of stress sooner. Landowners wanted to manage their forests to keep them healthy. The scenic 

easement holder (the Forest Service) could have said “no harvest” as long 

as the trees were green, as the easements only allow the landowner to cut 

dead trees. Rather, working with the forest landscape architect, local ranger 

Table 1—Fire regime condition classes.

Condition class Fire regime Example management options

Condition class 1 Fire regimes are within an historical Where appropriate, these areas can be

range, and the risk of losing key ecosystem maintained within the historical fire regime

components is low. Vegetation attributes by treatments such as fire use.

(species composition and structure) are 

intact and functioning within an historical 

range.

Condition class 2 Fire regimes have been moderately altered Where appropriate, these areas may need

from their historical range. The risk of losing moderate levels of restoration treatments,

key ecosystem components is moderate. such as fire use and hand or mechanical

Fire frequencies have departed from treatments, to be restored to the historical

historical frequencies by one or more fire regime.

return intervals (either increased or 

decreased). This results in moderate 

changes to one or more of the following: 

fire size, intensity and severity, and 

landscape patterns. Vegetation attributes 

have been moderately altered from their 

historical range.

Condition class 3 Fire regimes have been significantly altered Where appropriate, these areas may need

from their historical range. The risk of losing high levels of restoration treatments, such

key ecosystem components is high. Fire as hand or mechanical treatments, before

frequencies have departed from historical fire can be used to restore the historical

frequencies by multiple return intervals. fire regime.

This results in dramatic changes to one or 

more of the following: fire size, intensity, 

severity, and landscape patterns. Vegetation 

attributes have been significantly altered 

from their historical range.

From: Schmidt and others 2002. 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 209

district personnel developed harvest guidelines that would maintain the 

forest appearance but develop healthy stands, resilient to disturbance, over 

time. These guidelines were generally to remove no more than 20 percent 

of the canopy at a time, to keep road construction off of the steep ground, 

and to retain the large seral trees (Jones 1998). These guidelines were used 

successfully on a number of private properties over several years.

National Forest Proposal

The East Bridge project area was chosen for assessment because past 

harvest had created landscape patterns that did not fit the natural pattern. 

There were straight lines at the edges of clearcuts and “gun sight” breaks on 

the ridgelines. These conditions did not meet the visual goals for lands along 

the river corridor. It looked like an easy fix: just feather the edges and take 

a few more trees off the ridgeline, and things would be just fine. That isn’t 

exactly how it worked out.

The initial proposal would have addressed the short-term scenic quality 

from the highway but would not have addressed the long-term maintenance 

of the forest or dealt with winter range concerns (Klinger 1998, Talbert 

1999). It would have repaired existing problems with scenic quality but 

would not have developed a forest that would be healthy and resilient for 

many decades to come. The selected alternative for the project dealt with 

both the existing scenery problems and long-term forest health. The guidelines developed and tested on private lands were adopted for this project, 

which has now been implemented as the East Bridge Timber Sale and the 

East Bridge Prescribed Burn (table 2).

Table 2—Summary of East Bridge treatment units.

Treatment

 unit Current vegetation Prescription Expected results

1, 1A Mixed conifer, marginal Group selection followed by Develop a two-storied stand of

 stocking, root rot active underburn and spot planting early seral xeric conifers

5 Mixed conifer, very active Shelterwood with reserves

 root rot followed by underburn and

 planting

4, 6 Xeric mixed conifer, active Group selection followed by

 root rot underburn and spot planting

11 Xeric mixed conifer, low Prescribed fire Reduction in understory stocking,

 stocking in overstory, high higher percentage of seral

 stocking in small trees species in understory

Ecology and History

Fire-Resistant Species

The forest in the East Bridge area is a dry forest, dominated by ponderosa 

pine and Douglas-fir at lower elevations. Both ponderosa pine and Douglasfir are fire resistant due to their thick bark. As elevation increases, grand fir 

and western redcedar are more common. Grand fir and western redcedar 

are found on moist, relatively warm sites. They are very susceptible to fire 

damage, especially at young ages. The low-elevation ponderosa pine and 
210 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Douglas-fir were maintained by frequent fires, returning at 25-50 year 

intervals. These fires removed much of the grand fir and cedar, some of the 

young Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine, and a few of the older trees.

Frequent Fires, Low Intensity/Severity

Prior to the early 1900s, fires burned frequently in the East Bridge area. 

The low, steep southerly aspect slopes dried out faster than the high-elevation rolling hills above them (figure 1). These fires left evidence in the large, 

old ponderosa pine on sites that will support grand fir and western redcedar, 

as well as numerous fire scars at the base of many of those pines and Douglas-firs. The East Bridge area is in a transition zone from low-elevation dry 

sites to higher elevation, more moist sites.

Landtype Associations

Landtype associations (LTAs) are landform classifications that follow the 

National Hierarchy of Ecological Units (Cleland and others 1997). They are 

aggregates of site-specific landtypes and subsets of the subsection classifications. The primary landtype association in the East Bridge area is 23A, which 

is composed of stream breaklands on southerly and westerly aspects, with 

shallow soils. These stream breakland landtypes are typically steep – with 60 

percent or steeper slopes. They are some of the hottest and driest sites on 

the Clearwater National Forest. The parent material is micaceous gneisses 

and schists associated with the border zone of the Idaho Batholith. These 

are prone to mass wasting, and over 75 percent of the area is rated as high to 

very high risk of mass wasting (Mital 1998). Mass wasting is a general geological term for dislodgement and down slope movement of soil and rock 

material. The fire regime is a frequent fire return interval (25 to 50 years) 

with non-lethal or mixed severity. Stands on this LTA were typically unevenaged, composed of small, even-aged groups. Fire suppression has successfully 

excluded fire from the area for about 70 years (Hazelbaker 1998).

Fire Exclusion

In the early 1900s, frequent fires swept through this area. The last 

large fire burned in 1934. These fires left scars on the bases of the big, old 

ponderosa pine but didn’t kill them. Since then, human population growth 

and increased national forest management resulted in highly successful fire 

suppression. With the exclusion of fire on these sites, Douglas-fir representation increased and grand fir and cedar invaded the open understories.

Rolling

Hills

Colluvial

Midslopes

Breaklands

Stream

Terraces

Figure 1—Schematic drawing of 

landtype groups.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 211

Existing Stand Conditions

Current forest structures are multi-layered with shrubs, saplings, poles, 

and large trees. Crowns low on the boles of the trees create a ladder-fuel 

condition that could easily carry fire through the stand into the crowns and 

kill even the large, old ponderosa pine. Many of these large trees survived at 

least seven understory fires without major damage but have a low fire-survival 

potential with the current fuel conditions. Most of the seedlings, saplings, 

and poles are grand fir and Douglas-fir. Competition from these young trees 

has put the older ponderosa pine under additional stress. With this additional 

stress, they are beginning to succumb to insects, disease, and drought.

Prescriptions

Management Objectives

High Scenic Quality (Long Term Vs. Short Term)

River managers were concerned that maintaining the existing forest cover 

in the short term could set the area up for stand-replacing fires in the future. 

The resulting bare slopes and risk of ugly scars from mass wasting of bare 

soils would diminish scenic values. Managers wanted to make these stands 

more resilient to fire effects in order to maintain a scenic forest in the long 

term. Due to the heavy fuel loads and arrangement, it was unlikely this could 

be accomplished using only fire without harvest.

Soil Stability

Most of the project area has inherently unstable slopes, but Unit 5 caused 

particular concern for soil stability. There was already a small, active slope 

failure within the boundary. Stand composition was almost entirely Douglasfir, with extensive root rot mortality. The concern was that the continued 

mortality would eventually result in reduced soil stability. Other units also 

had steep slopes and high risk of mass wasting.

Fire Hazard Reduction

U.S. Highway 12, a major east/west route between Idaho and Montana, 

runs along the river. The increased fire hazard, due to stand structure and 

composition, combined with a higher risk of human-caused ignitions, 

pointed to the need to reduce the fire hazard. The project area is adjacent 

to the little town of Syringa, which also raised a concern for the potential of 

urban interface fires.

Shrub Rejuvenation

These breaklands are low elevation sites, used by wintering big game animals. As the shrubs aged and the canopy closed, available forage was reduced. 

As seral species, shrubs need more open growing conditions to grow vigorously and produce abundant forage. Good winter range forage is one of the 

keys to maintaining the good elk herds for which central Idaho is well known.

Establishment of Seral Species

Habitat types range from mesic Douglas-fir types (Pseudostuga menziesii/

Physocarpus malvaceus) through the moist grand fir types, to moist western 
212 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

redcedar types (Thuja plicata/Adiantum pedatum) (Cooper 1991). Without 

periodic disturbance, the understories of these stands filled in with climax 

tree species – Douglas-fir, grand fir, and western redcedar. As the older 

ponderosa pine lost vigor and were subject to increased competition from 

understory trees, they began to succumb to insects, disease, and drought. 

They were disappearing from these stands. There was little opportunity to 

establish additional ponderosa pine, which is very fire tolerant and mod-

erately shade intolerant, and which was much more abundant on the site 

historically.

Technical Details

Prescriptions were developed for shelterwood with reserves, group selec-

tion, and prescribed fire (FSM 2470).

Shelterwood With Reserves

Unit 5: This unit was not directly adjacent to the river corridor, but it is 

visible in the middle ground and background. Cedar and grand fir habitat 

types were both common, with mesic Douglas-fir/ninebark on the drier 

ridges. The existing forest was dominated by Douglas-fir and grand fir, with 

an understory of tall, old shrubs. Root rot was gradually reducing conifer 

stocking levels. The stand was not meeting resource management objec

-

tives to provide big game winter forage, contribute to timber production, 

maintain slope stability, and provide high visual quality. Harvest provided an 

opportunity to rejuvenate the decadent shrubs and re-establish ponderosa 

pine for long-term health of the breaklands landscape which would, in turn, 

provide for high quality scenery from the river corridor.

The prescription for this unit called for a group shelterwood with reserves 

harvest system, leaving about one-half of the area in untreated groups, 

followed by an underburn. The groups have about 135 ft

2

 of basal area; so 

overall, the stand will be left with 60 to 70 ft

2

 of basal area per acre. Pon-

derosa pine was favored as leave trees where it occurred. This prescription 

was designed to be similar to a mixed severity fire. Trees were left in swales 

and along active landslides to maintain short-term soil stability and provide 

material for large woody debris in streams when slides would occur. The 

openings were to be planted with ponderosa pine to assure recruitment of 

this early seral species. There were few ponderosa pines in the overstory, and 

those present were poor seed producers. These stands would be maintained 

as two-storied stands.

Group Selection

Units 1, 1A, 4, and 6: Units 4 and 6 are directly adjacent to the river cor

-

ridor and highway. All are a little drier than Unit 5. The predominant habitat 

type is grand fir/ninebark (Abies grandis/Physocarpus malvaceus) (Cooper 

1991). They have an old ponderosa pine overstory that is gradually disap

-

pearing as the trees die. Clumps of Douglas-fir and grand fir are common 

throughout the stands, both between the older ponderosa pine and under 

the pine canopies.

The group selection method was chosen for these units to produce a 

disturbance similar to a low-severity fire. Harvest was followed with slash 

burning in the openings. Removals targeted groups of grand fir and Doug

-

las-fir in root rot pockets, leaving the old ponderosa pine where possible. 

The openings were one-half to one acre in size. About 25 percent of the 

acreage was treated. Spot planting of ponderosa pine in the small openings 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 213

was prescribed to assure establishment of this desired species. Two factors 

reduced the likelihood of natural regeneration. First, the overstory trees are 

old and are not reliable cone producers. Secondly, the shrubs in ninebark 

habitat types often respond to disturbance with profuse growth, occupying 

the site and precluding seral conifer establishment (Steele and others 1992; 

Fire Effects Information System 2003). Planted trees would also have an 

advantage over naturally regenerated seedlings. They are larger and are 

established sooner so are more likely to stay above the ninebark. The intent 

was to maintain these stands as three-storied stands with even-aged groups.

Prescribed Fire

Unit 11: This unit had scattered large, old ponderosa pine and Douglasfir trees, with an understory of smaller Douglas-fir, grand fir, and a few 

western redcedar and ponderosa pine. These ranged in size from seedlings to 

small pole-sized trees. Distribution of these younger trees was very clumpy, 

with some shrub-filled openings still present. The stocked areas were usually 

overstocked for this site. Underburning was proposed to reduce stocking 

levels and remove some of the small late seral and climax trees. Fuel loads 

were rather high, and the fire management team proposed implementing 

this prescription over two to four entries. The first entry would consist of 

burning under moderate conditions to remove the most flammable fuels and 

kill some of the grand fir and cedar trees. Subsequent burns would gradually 

reduce more of the fuel load and remove more of the grand fir, cedar, and 

small Douglas-fir. The intent was to develop more open, two- or three-storied stands that have a dominant component of ponderosa pine.

Implementation

Project Design With Interdisciplinary Team

The interdisciplinary team made several trips through the area to look at 

desired conditions. This focused the project on the key items that would 

make this a success: retention of the large, old ponderosa pine; retention of 

considerable canopy to maintain scenic quality and soil stability; and reduced 

stocking levels to maintain forest health.

The East Bridge Timber Sale sold in 1999. It included yarding with 

skidders, skyline systems, and helicopters. The majority was yarded with 

helicopters.

Prescribed Fire

In September 1999, Unit 11 was burned for the first time. Aerial ignition 

with a sphere dispenser was used. Ignition was timed to take place just 

before a front moved through with expected rain showers. These materialized the day following ignition and limited fire spread within the unit. 

About one-third of the area within the unit actually carried fire. Shrubs and 

small trees in those areas were top-killed as expected. A few of the large, old 

ponderosa pine trees were also killed because the fire was able to get inside 

the boles through old fire scars.

In October 2002, this unit was burned again. The same aerial ignition 

technique was used. This time, most of the area actually carried fire (figure 2). 

Shrub rejuvenation was more extensive, and more of the small tree seedlings 

and saplings were killed. The resulting stand is a patchy, open stand that is 
214 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

weighted to the early seral species. Additional burning is planned in another 

three to five years.

Shelterwood With Reserves

This unit was harvested in 2003, using a helicopter logging system. It 

will develop into a two-aged ponderosa pine forest. This would be typical 

of forest structure and composition under periodic fires. The open stand 

conditions are conducive to shrub growth for winter use by 

big game. Shrubs that were top-killed by prescribed burning 

after harvest are resprouting, and redstem ceanothus (Ceanothus sanguineus), a preferred browse species, has germinated 

profusely (figure 3). Adjacent stands provide more dense 

vegetation for thermal cover.

Group Selection

These were recently logged (spring of 2003) with a helicopter yarding system. There is little evidence of disturbance 

when viewed from the highway along the river (figure 4). 

There may be a short-term visual impact when the stands 

are underburned this fall. The emphasis in these units was 

maintaining visual quality. Additional entries will likely be 

needed to reduce fuels and improve browse conditions.

Conclusions

Each of the prescriptions met the objectives of improving 

forest health and resiliency while maintaining a forested 

appearance from the scenic river corridor. Some retained 

more forest cover, but all were within the range that could 

Figure 2—Smoke generated over 

the entire burn unit.

Figure 3—Redstem ceanothus seedlings after 

harvest and underburn.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 215

be expected from natural disturbances. The group selection treatments 

created small patches where fuel loads were reduced but left ladder fuels 

in the remainder of the forest. Shelterwood treatments and prescribed fire 

treatments produced a more uniform fuel reduction. Group selection that 

included intermediate treatments (thinning) between the groups that were 

removed would have also reduced fuel loads more uniformly over the treated 

area.

The biggest challenge in implementing all of these treatments was field 

layout. Treatment units are located on very steep breaklands along the 

Middle Fork Clearwater River. Slopes over 60 percent are common. Both 

personnel safety and work productivity were concerns. Post-treatment monitoring is also a challenge. Fortunately, no one was injured and the layout 

work was completed on time, but the results could have been different.

Overall, the scenic quality has been retained, the seral forest was maintained, big game winter range was improved, fuel loads were reduced and 

ladder fuels that could lead to stand replacing fire were removed.

References

Anonymous. 1987. Forest Plan: Clearwater National Forest. Orofino, ID: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Clearwater National Forest. 182 p.

Cleland, D. T.; Avers, P. E.; McNab, W. H.; Jensen, M. E.; Bailey, R. G.; King, 

T.; Russell, W. E. 1997. National hierarchical framework of ecological units. In: 

Boyce, M. S.; Haney, A., eds. Ecosystem management applications for sustainable 

forest and wildlife resources. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 181-200.

Cooper, S. V.; Neiman, K. E.; Roberts, D. W. 1991. Forest habitat types of 

Northern Idaho: a second approximation. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-236. Ogden, 

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research 

Station. 143 p.

Habeck, R. J. 1992. Physocarpus malvaceus. In: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory 

(2003, August). Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. Available: http://

www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2003, August 27].

Figure 4—View of group selection 

harvest.
216 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Hazelbaker, K. A. 1998. Supplement to E. Bridge Creek silvicultural report, existing 

conditions. Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Clearwater National Forest, Lochsa Ranger District, Kooskia, ID. 

2 p.

Jones, D. L. 1998. East Bridge environmental assessment scenic resources report. 

Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Clearwater National Forest, Lochsa Ranger District, Kooskia, ID. 5 p.

Klinger, L. J. 1998. Wild and scenic rivers assessment for East Bridge timber sale. 

Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Clearwater National Forest, Lochsa Ranger District, Kooskia, ID. 4 p.

Mital, J. 1998. Soils/landtype information for East Bridge analysis area. 

Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Clearwater National Forest, Lochsa Ranger District, Kooskia, ID. 17 p.

Schmidt, K. M; Menakis, J. P.; Hardy, C. C.; Hann, W. J.; Bunnell, D. L. 2002. 

Development of coarse-scale spatial data for wildland fire and fuel management. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-87. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 42 p.

Steele, R.; Geier-Hayes, K. 1992. The grand fir/mountain maple habitat type in 

Central Idaho: succession and management. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-284. Ogden, 

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research 

Station. 90 p.

Talbert, D. 1999. East Bridge EA – wildlife and TES plant resources status report. 

Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Clearwater National Forest, Lochsa Ranger District, Kooskia, ID. 27 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 217

Abstract—Wildfi res in 2000 burned over 500,000 forested ha in the Northern 

Rocky Mountains. In 2001, National Fire Plan funding became available to evaluate the infl uence of pre-wildfi re forest structure on post wildfi re fi re severity. Results 

from this study will provide information on forest structures that are resilient to wildfi re. Three years of data (558 plots) have been collected from forested areas that 

burned in 2000, 2001, and 2002. Forests used in this study include dry ponderosa 

pine/Douglas-fi r, cold lodgepole pine/subalpine fi r, and moist western larch forests. 

Probability sampling of all areas within a particular fi re perimeter was used to locate 

study sites and a sampling matrix was used to capture variation in weather, topographic setting, and pre-wildfi re forest structure of which the fi res represented. Fire 

severity (current state of soils and vegetation after the wildfi re) was quantifi ed on 

adjacent paired plots, with each plot representing a different forest structure. Classifi cation trees and cluster analysis identifi ed relations among forest structure characteristics, physical setting, and fi re severity. Probability of a particular forest structure 

relating to fi re severity was computed. This paper describes methodology used in 

the project, discusses challenges associated with conducting this type of study, and 

uses preliminary results (probabilities) from the fi rst two years of data collection to 

show how forest structure relates to both crown and soil surface fi re severity.

Introduction

Fire behavior (expressed as intensity) and severity are dependent on the 

interaction among forest structure and composition (fuel), weather, and 

physical setting (Robichaud and others 2003; Rothermel 1983, 1991; Ryan 

1990; Wells and Campbell 1979). In general, fuels defi ned as canopy bulk 

density (canopy weight for a given volume), live crown base height, and 

surface fuel conditions (amount, composition, moisture content, compactness, continuity) are key forest characteristics related to fi re behavior (Albini 

1976; Agee 2002; Graham and others 1999; Rothermel 1983, 1991; Scott 

and Reinhardt 2001). Most often the objective when altering forest fuels 

is not to remove fi re completely from a forest, but rather to make a forest 

more resilient to fi re and decrease a fi re’s unwanted and detrimental effects 

by altering these key forest characteristics (Agee 2002; Graham and others 

1999; Scott and Reinhardt 2001).

Because fi re behavior and effects are highly complex, there is still uncertainty in knowing when and where forest structure characteristics infl uence

both wildfi re behavior and/or severity, particularly during large and extreme

wildfi re events (Albini 1976; Carey and Schumann 2003; Cruz and others

2003; Omi and Martinson 2001; Graham 2003). In fact, there is little

empirical information determining when (under what weather conditions

Is Forest Structure Related To Fire Severity? 

Yes, No, and Maybe: Methods and Insights in 

Quantifying the Answer

Theresa Benavidez Jain1 and Russell T. Graham1

1 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Moscow, ID.
218 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

and physical settings) forest structure contributes to decreasing crown-fire

occurrence (Carey and Schumann 2003; Cruz and others 2003; Omi and

Martinson 2002).

Moreover, it is difficult to directly quantify fire behavior (e.g., not safe 

for persons to closely observe fire behavior) during extreme wildfire events; 

however, fire severity can be evaluated for its relation to forest structure after 

a fire has occurred and, to a certain extent, indicate how forest structure in-

fluenced a fire’s behavior. Fire behavior characteristics include rate of spread, 

fire line intensity, residence time, transition to crown fire, and spotting, and 

they are usually associated with a flaming front (Rothermel 1972, 1983, 

1991; Albini 1976; Van Wagner 1977). Fire severity is dependent on what 

is burned and the units used for its evaluation (Simard 1991). For example, 

wildfire severity describes the amount of organic material consumed, its 

flame length, torching index, and other indicators of fire risk and fire behav

-

ior. The wildfire severity in terms of its effects on the atmosphere describes 

the particulates and gasses a wildfire produces and its effects on sky clarity 

(Finney and others 2003). In economic terms, fire severity describes the 

value of homes damaged, timber destroyed, or water storage losses measured 

in dollars (Kent and others 2003). Fire severity in relation to vegetation 

and soils describes the extent of char on shrubs, forest floor, rotten wood, 

scorch height on tree boles and crown scorch, exposed mineral soil, and the 

amount of soil modification (fusing of soil particles, changes in color, etc.). 

These descriptors and quantification of fire severity can provide interpre

-

tive possibilities as to the effect a fire would have on processes such as soil 

erosion, tree growth, vegetation regeneration and succession, or nutrient 

cycling. In addition, fire severity can relate to the fire behavior—such as all 

black crowns (fire severity indicator) are caused by a crown fire (fire behavior 

indicator), mixed black and green crowns indicate a surface fire with some 

torching in the crowns and green crowns with abundant organic materials 

remaining on the forest floor would indicate a low intensity surface fire.

In general, forest management concentrates on desired conditions to meet 

a particular goal or objective ranging from timber production to maintaining 

wildlife habitat. As indicated by the passing of the Healthy Forests Restora

-

tion Act of 2003, the development of resilient fire dependent forests is 

also a national emphasis. These objectives singly or in combination can be 

met through silviculture prescriptions that describe forest composition and 

structure development through time. Attributes of resilient fire-dependent 

forests include appropriate species, live trees, seed sources, and intact soils. 

Presence of these elements are important after a wildfire (Debano and others 

1998; Hungerford and others 1991; Jurgensen 1997; Robichaud 2003). 

Because of this importance we chose to describe and quantify fire severity as 

the condition of the vegetation and soils after a wildfire.

The wildfires that burned in the Rocky Mountains in 2000, 2001, and 

2002 provided an opportunity to study the influence that pre-wildfire forest 

structure has on fire severity. In addition, this replicated study will add to 

our knowledge of describing and quantifying fire severity. This paper intro

-

duces the study, provides some preliminary results, and provides some “food 

for thought” on the relation between pre-wildfire forest structure and fire 

severity. In this paper we present methods used in data collection, show how 

pre-wildfire forest structure was reconstructed from post-fire characteristics, 

describe ways to classify fire severity, and determine if relations between for-

est structure and fire severity can be identified.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 219

Methods

Study Areas

Although this study was conducted in Montana, Idaho, Colorado, and 

Oregon on fires occurring in 2000, 2001, and 2003, the analysis and results 

of this paper only encompass data collected on sites burned during 2000 and 

2001 by fires on the Bitterroot, Lolo, Kootenai, and Flathead National Forests in Montana (figure 1). In this analysis a total of 19 separate fires were 

sampled within the cold (lodgepole pine Pinus contorta and subalpine fir 

Abies lasiocarpa) moist (western hemlock Tsuga heterophyll; western redcedar 

Thuja plicata; and grand fir Abies grandis), and dry (ponderosa pine Pinus 

ponderosa and Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii) forests. The Bitterroot fires 

(eight fires) burned 144,040 ha within the cold and dry forests from July 15 

through September 1, 2000. On the Lolo National Forest, three fires totaling 15,662 ha were sampled that burned from August 5 through September 

6, 2000. We sampled the Moose Creek Fire in the Flathead National Forest, 

which burned between August 16 and October 5, 2001 and encompassed 

28,723 ha of cold forest. Eight fires burning a total of 14,000 ha between 

July 31, 2000, and August 30, 2000, were sampled in the moist forests 

within the Kootenai National Forest. All fires were sampled the summer after 

they occurred, except for the fires on the Kootenai National Forest, which 

were sampled the second summer after they occurred.

Study Design

Stratified random sampling of each fire was used to ensure that the 

variation in forest structure, physical setting, and weather were represented 

within each fire. It is the interaction of these characteristics that determine 

fire severity (Ryan 1990, Lohr 1999). In establishing the sampling frame, 

Figure 1—This map shows the area 

where the 2000 and 2001 fires 

burned in the Northern Rocky 

Mountains. We sampled 19 

separate fires located on the 

Bitterroot, Kootenai, Flathead, 

and Lolo National Forests.
220 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

forest cover type was used to describe the broad-scale vegetation. Cover 

types included: ponderosa pine and/or Douglas-fir, (PP/DF), grand fir, 

western redcedar, and/or western hemlock (GF/C/WH), and lodgepole 

pine and/or subalpine fir (LPP/SAF). Within a specific cover type, burning 

index accounted for variation due to weather. Burning index describes the 

effort needed to contain a single fire within a particular fuel type within a 

given area. The index is based on the spread component (SC) and available 

energy release component (ERC) of a fire, which in turn are used to estimate 

flame length from which the burning index is computed (Bradshaw and oth

-

ers 1983, Bradshaw and Britton 2000). Wind speed, slope, fuel (including 

the effects of green herbaceous plants) and the moisture content of the fuels 

are used to determine the SC and ERC. The difference between the two 

components is that SC is determined on the moisture levels of the fine fuels 

while ERC requires moisture levels from the entire fuel complex.

Fire progression maps were used to estimate the day a particular stand 

burned. Using weather data for this day from the closest weather station 

and the most applicable fuel model for each fire, the burning index for 

each stand within the fire perimeter was calculated using Fire Family Plus 

(Bradshaw and Britton 2000). After forest cover type, the stands within the 

fire were stratified by high and low burning index (divided at the median 

burning index) for all stands burned by a particular fire. This stratification 

ensured that stands sampled were burned during the range of weather 

conditions that occurred throughout the fire.

Within each burning index class (high and low) the physical settings of 

the stands were placed into two strata: those with slope angles less than or 

equal to 35 percent and those with slope angles greater than 35 percent. 

In the Northern Rocky Mountains, settings with slope angles less than 35 

percent usually occur on benches, within riparian areas, or along ridge tops. 

Settings with slope angles greater than 35 percent tend to occur on side 

slopes. Within a given slope class, the structure characteristics of stands were 

divided into those containing short, sapling- to medium-sized trees (

<13 

m), and those containing tall, mature to old trees (>13 m). Within these size 

classes stands were divided into two density strata: those with canopy cover 

less than or equal to 35 percent and those with canopy cover greater than 35 

percent. This stratification ensured that stands selected for sampling would 

have a range of horizontal structure. Therefore, the final sampling stratifica-

tion contained forest cover (3 classes), burning index (2 classes), slope angle 

(2 classes), canopy height (2 classes), and stand density (2 classes). All stands 

occurring within a particular stratum and fire perimeter had an equal prob

-

ability of being selected. Additional fire and physical setting characteristics 

not in the stratification but occurring regularly were recorded during sam

-

pling and included aspect, bole scorch height, and direction of the scorch as 

indicators of flame length (Van Wagner 1973) or ignition source (back fire, 

flank fire, or head fire).

Stand Selection

All stands within the fire perimeter contain a unique identification code. 

These codes were randomly assigned into the sampling matrix, which rep

-

resented the designed stratification. The matrix was populated with the first 

15 low-density stands that were randomly selected. Each stand was evaluated 

(in selection order) to determine if it (1) fit within the sampling criteria, (2) 

had an opportunity to burn (in some cases, stands along the fire perimeters 

had fire lines that prevented them from burning), (3) did not have any 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 221

confounding factors that may have influenced burning (e.g., fire retardant 

throughout, large fire lines splitting the stand), and (4) was at least 100 m 

by 100 m in size (large enough to establish the sample points).

In order to increase the number of stands sampled and to determine if 

changes in stand structure influenced fire severity in a given area, randomly 

selected low-density stands were paired with qualified adjacent stands 

(figure 2). To qualify as a paired stand it had to be adjacent to the randomly 

selected stand and contain a change in horizontal structure (density defined 

by canopy cover), species composition, and/or vertical structure (number 

of stories or vegetation layers). A change in stand density was defined as a 

differential between high and low canopy cover of at least 20 percent, (i.e., 

a stand with 25 percent cover was paired with a stand with no less than 45 

percent canopy cover). A change in species composition was defined as a 

change in the cover type (e.g., lodgepole cover type to subalpine fir cover 

type). Vertical structure was a change in the number of stories (canopy 

layers) occurring in a stand, such as the selected stand containing a single 

story and the paired stand containing two or three stories or a selected 

multi-storied stand paired with a single storied stand.

Stand adjacency was determined by a rule set. The first choice for a paired 

stand with a different structure was downhill from the selected stand. Since 

fires predominantly burn uphill, this selection criteria would provide opportunities for sampling stands in which structure influenced either or both 

fire behavior and fire severity. If a major change in topography (such as 180o

aspect change, steep side slope to riparian setting, etc.) occurred downhill 

from the selected stand before a suitable adjacent stand was selected, an 

alternate selection process commenced. Beginning on the western edge of 

the selected stand and continuing in a clockwise direction, forest conditions 

were evaluated until an adjacent stand was located. Ideally, the paired stand 

would be similar in aspect and slope as the selected stand, but subtle changes 

in slope and aspect were allowed. If no suitable stand was located adjacent to 

the randomly selected stand, the low-density stand was not chosen and the 

next stand in the matrix was evaluated.

Plot Selection

The objective of this study was to quantify the relation between pre-wildfire forest structure and fire severity among stands and not to characterize 

fire severity within stands. Therefore, to maximize the number of stands 

Figure 2—Illustration of paired plots between 

two stands. The low-density stands were 

paired to an adjacent stand that had a distinct 

change in forest structure. The adjacent stand 

required a change in horizontal structure 

(density defined by canopy cover), species 

composition, and/or vertical structure 

(number of stories). Plots were located a 

minimum of 50 m to plot center from stand 

edge.
222 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

sampled, only one plot was placed in each selected stand. The edge of a 

stand was defined where the forest structure changed between the paired 

stands (figure 2). An aerial photo or topographic map was used to obtain an 

azimuth intersecting the approximate center of both stands. At a minimal 

slope distance of 100 m from the stand edge along this azimuth, a random 

number between 1 and 6 was selected (using a die). This value was multiplied by 16 and an additional distance (meters) equaling this value along the 

azimuth was traversed before plot installation. If the stand was too small to 

use this additional distance, the plot was located at least 50 meters from the 

stand edge. The plot was monumented with a 1 m rebar stake, the location 

was recorded by a GPS, and distance from the stand edge was recorded.

Data Collection

Site descriptors (aspect, slope, topographic position, and elevation) and 

a general stand description (species composition, number of stories, stand 

origin, horizontal spacing) for each plot were recorded. Our intention was 

to post-classify or develop a continuous variable characterizing fire severity. 

Therefore descriptors of soils and vegetation were collected in considerable 

detail. Our approaches to data collection were developed or modified from 

past fire severity classifications (Key and Benson 2001; Ryan and Noste 

1985; Wells and others 1979) (tables 1, 2, and 3). The characterization and 

Table 1—Surface components, their definitions, and char classes for fire severity. Litter fallen since fire, litter prior to fire, and 

humus depth were measured in cm. All measurements were conducted on a 1/740th ha circular plot. Trees were less than 

12.7 cm diameter breast height (DBH).

Strata Unburned (%) Light char (%) Moderate char ( %) Deep char (%)

Surface

Litter fallen onto surface since fire Litter type (fir or pine, leaves) with no char classes

Litter present prior to fire No sign of char Blackened but present No moderate or deep char class

Humus (decomposed 

 organic matter) No sign of char Blackened but present No moderate or deep char class

Bare mineral soil No sign of char Blackened Gray color Orange color

Rock No sign of char Black edges Black edges White residue

Brown cubical rotten wood No sign of char Burned on surface Charred but still present Imprint on surface

Coarse woody debris 

≤7.6 cm diameter No sign of char Burned on surface Charred but still present Not present

Coarse woody debris 

 >7.6 cm diameter No sign of char Burned on surface Charred but still present Imprint on surface

Stumps No sign of char Burned on surface but intact Completely charred Stump hole

Shrubs and Trees

Shrubs – low 

 <0.60 mm basal stem dia. Stems intact Stems present but charred Base of stem present Stump hole

Shrubs – medium 

 60-250 mm stem dia. Stems intact Stems present but charred Base of stem present Stump hole

Shrubs – tall 

 >250 mm stem dia. Stems intact Stems present but charred Base of stem present Stump hole

Forbs and grasses Growing on Growing on blackened Growing on moderate Growing on deep

 unburned litter surface charred soil charred soil

New seedlings since fire Growing on Growing on Blackened litter Growing on charred soil Growing on deep 

 unburned litter charred soil

Trees present prior to fire 

 <12.7 cm DBH No sign of char Live trees needles present No or brown needles Stump hole
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 223

description of soils and vegetation were accomplished using five strata: (1) 

soil surface, (2) grass, forbs, small shrub, and seedlings, (3) medium and tall 

shrubs (4) saplings and large trees, and (5) woody debris (tables 1 and 2) 

(DeBano and others 1998).

All strata (surface and understory vegetation) except for the large trees 

and woody debris were measured on a 1/740th ha circular plot. For the large 

trees, a combination of fixed and variable radius plots was used to ensure 

enough trees representing all sizes were sampled. Trees greater than 45 cm 

diameter breast height (DBH) were sampled using a variable radius plot 

defined by an 8 m2

 ha-1 angle gauge (40 ft2 ha-1). Trees between 12.7 and 45 

cm DBH were measured using a 1/59th ha fixed plot.

Soil surface characterization included total cover and the proportion of

total cover dominated by new litter (deposition since the fire), old litter

(present previous to the fire), humus, brown cubical rotten wood (rotten

wood at or above the soil surface), woody debris less than or equal to 7.6 cm

in diameter, woody debris greater than 7.6 cm in diameter, rock, and bare

mineral soil. Each of these cover characterizations were divided into char

classes (table 1). The second stratum described the proportion of grass and

forbs growing on a specific charred surface. Cover proportion and number

of basal stems were used to quantify small shrubs (<0.5 m tall or <0.60

mm basal stem diameter) (Brown 1976) (table 1). The number of new tree

seedlings regenerated since the fires (1-year post fire) were counted and if

the species was identifiable it was recorded (table 1). The medium (0.5 to 2

m tall or 60 mm to 250 mm basal stem diameter) and tall shrubs (>2 m tall

or >250 mm basal stem diameter) were quantified using the same protocol as

the low shrubs (table 1) (Brown 1976). The fourth stratum included saplings

(<2.7 cm DBH) established prior to the fire and large (>12.7 cm DBH)

Table 3—Forest structural characteristics derived from the FFE-FVS (Forest and Fuels Extension-Forest 

Vegetation Simulator) model (Reinhardt and Crookston 2003). 

Density Characteristics related Biomass Miscellaneous 

 characteristics to fire behavior characteristics (Mg/ha) characteristics

Trees per ha Height to base of crown (ft) Foliage biomass Average top height

Basal area (sq. m/ha) Canopy bulk density Live branches <7.6 cm Number of stories

Stand density index Live branches >7.6 cm Species composition

Crown competition factor Cubic volume Dominant species

Total canopy cover (%) Vertical distribution of Quadratic mean diameter

crown versus stem

Sum of the diameters (cm) Dry, cold, or moist forest

Average top height for plot

Table 2—Fire severity data taken on large trees (>12.7 cm diameter breast height (DBH) using a fixed (1/59th acre) and variable 

plot (8 m2 ha-1). Trees less than or equal to 45 cm DBH were measured on fixed plot, and trees greater than 45 cm DBH 

were measured on variable plot.

 Bole scorch

height (ft)

 and direction 

Un-compacted scorch is facing (az) 

crown Green Brown Black Scorch at )

Strata ratio crown (%) crown (%) crown (%) Low High base (%

Trees >12.7 cm Total crown Green Brown Black stems, Scorch height Scorch height 

 DBH ratio needles needles no needles and direction and direction Circumference
224 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

trees (tables1 and 2). The total number, species, and height of saplings were

recorded and classified as to their fire severity (saplings with no char, charred

saplings with brown needles, charred saplings with no needles, anda burned

stump (table 1). Species, height, diameter, and uncompacted crown ratio

were recorded for each large tree. The proportion of the total crown contain-

ing green needles, brown needles, no needles, or black stem was determined

for each large tree. Scorch height on the stem was recorded and the circum-

ference of scorch at the base of the stem was measured (table 2). The amount

of woody debris on the site was determined using three 37m linear transects

(0, 120, and 240 degree azimuths) starting at plot center (Brown 1974).

Discussion

Fire behavior most often is described at the stand level with at least an 

elementary understanding of how forest structure, weather, and physical set-

ting interact to create a given fire behavior (Albini 1976; Rothermel 1972, 

1983, 1991; VanWagner 1977). In contrast, there is little understanding 

how these same characteristics interact to provide a specific fire severity 

where each fuelbed and combustion environment can create a different fire 

severity (Ryan and Noste 1983). In this study we described fire severity, 

forest structure, weather, and topographic characteristics across three forest 

types. The fires we sampled were all large (2000 to 144,000 ha) and burned 

dry fuels during extreme weather events. The variation in fire severity and 

fire behavior captured in these fires was beneficial since the inferences 

derived from the data will reflect a wide range of conditions. However, large 

amounts of variation can be detrimental because it often masks relations and 

makes the analysis challenging.

In general, fire models were developed to predict fire behavior and effects within “normal” burning conditions; however, fires used in this study 

burned outside “normal” weather conditions, limiting fire model use in the 

analysis (Albini 1976, Bitterroot National Forest 2000). To be effective, 

the analysis needs to maintain simplicity but be robust enough to answer 

a suite of questions useful to both managers and the scientific community: 

For example, how should forest structure be characterized when related 

to fire severity? How should fire severity be defined to provide ecological 

understanding as well as analytical power? Can relations between forest 

structure and fire severity be determined and if so, which combinations of 

variables best describe these relations? Is there a relation between fire severity 

observed on tree canopies and those associated with the soil surface and 

lower vegetation?

Characterizing Forest Structure

The Fire and Fuels Extension (FFE: Reinhardt and Crookston 2003) to 

the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS: Wykoff and others 1982) was used 

to characterize pre-wildfire forest structure. The Northern Rocky Mountain 

variant of FFE-FVS provided relative values of forest structure characteristics 

using the data collected at each sample point (e.g., tree DBH, crown ratio, 

total height, and species). Forest structure characteristics derived from 

FFE-FVS included stand density indices (basal area per ha, stand density 

index, trees per ha, etc.), characteristics associated with fire behavior (canopy 

bulk density and height to the base of the live crown), biomass estimates of 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 225

foliage and branches, and other miscellaneous stand characteristics (number 

of stories, dominant species, etc.) (table 3).

Describing pre-wildfire forest structure based on post wildfire conditions 

has proven to be effective but limited. From a forest stand and tree perspec

-

tive, at least in relative terms, different forest structures can be described 

using post wildfire data, because live tree branches and boles were seldom 

completely consumed in our data even during the most intense and severe 

fire. These post wildfire standing tree data along with FFE-FVS provided 

consistent data summaries within and across regions. These techniques can 

also be repeated within both a research and management framework and 

FFE-FVS provides stand structural characteristics linked to models describ

-

ing fire behavior. Even with these benefits, FFE-FVS estimates of needle, 

branch, total biomass, canopy bulk density, number of stories, and horizon

-

tal structure are limited (Reinhardt and Crookston 2003). Subsequently, 

it is unknown how well they reflect true values (Cruz and others 2003). 

However, these relative values are extremely useful for understanding forest 

structure changes across sites and with the information added from this 

study, the capability of FFE-FVS for predicting fire severity as a function of 

forest structural characteristics can be improved.

Although we have good confidence in describing pre-wildfire standing 

tree and stand characteristics using post wildfire data, describing pre-wildfire 

soil surface characteristics post wildfire is problematic. Only in very limited 

circumstances are soil surface conditions described before a wildfire, and 

even recurring forest inventories such as those conducted by Interior West 

Forest Inventory and Analyses (e.g., USDA 1997) do not regularly describe 

forest floor conditions. To definitively describe or predict both fire intensity 

and fire severity requires pre-wildfire biomass estimates of shrub and 

herbaceous layers, fine and coarse surface fuels, litter, and duff. In general, 

fine-scale sampling is required to estimate these surface fuel characteristics, 

and extrapolating existing prediction equations across different regions is 

questionable (Brown 1976). Using habitat type, successional stage, over-

story structure, or other stand or site characteristics for estimating surface 

fuels is limited in scope (e.g., Covington and Fox 1991, Mitchell and others 

1987). A possible estimate of surface fuel conditions that existed pre-wildfire 

might be achieved by using scorch heights on boles of standing trees post 

wildfire as an indicator of flame length. In turn these data could be used 

to identify potential fuels and fuel loadings that could have produced these 

flame lengths. However, this approach for estimating pre-wildfire surface 

fuel conditions is highly speculative and needs thorough investigation.

Classifying Fire Severity

In our study we had the ability to describe fire severity using either 

continuous or categorical variables. Initially we used canonical correlation 

analysis using continuous variables that described soil surface fire severity such 

as amount of mineral soil exposed, amount of charred litter, etc. (table 1). 

The results from this analysis identified variables describing forest structure 

(e.g., basal area per ha, height, and number of stories) and the variation in 

fire severity on the soils and crowns and determined whether these sets of 

variables were related to each other. The unfortunate aspect of canonical 

correlation is that, although it is mathematically elegant, results are difficult 

to interpret (Tabachnick and Fidell 2001) because they express the data in 

multi-dimensional space. However, from an exploratory perspective, the 

analysis did reveal that the relations between soil surface fire severity and forest 
226 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

structure are multivariate. The variability in these data is best described in 

three dimensions (up to 97 percent). Because the relations between soil 

surface fire severity and stand structure are multivariate, there are many soil 

and overstory variables that describe the relations among tree and stand 

characteristics and soil surface fire severity. This finding quickly showed that 

no single overstory characteristic such as tree density controls the impact 

wildfires have on soil surface fire severity; rather, combinations of structural 

characteristics interact to determine how a wildfire impacts the soil surface.

Soil characteristics relevant to fire severity included the mineral and litter 

components within the unburned, light char, and moderate char classes. Deep 

soil char did not appear to be as related to forest structure, most likely because 

it only occurred in isolated areas. Similarly, shrub, grass, and herbaceous cover 

were not important for describing fire severity because they too were not pres

-

ent throughout the burned areas. Therefore, it was difficult to evaluate the 

importance of these variables as to their relations with forest structure. Crown 

severity variables included percent crown scorch within the green, brown, 

and black scorch classes and scorch height (table 2). Variables important for 

describing forest structure included those associated with tree density, total 

biomass, biomass distribution, and vertical crown distribution (table 3).

The fire severity variables identified by the canonical correlation were 

used in cluster analysis to determine if the fire severity descriptors could 

be grouped into distinct classes. Results from the cluster analysis were 

disappointing in that concise clusters of fire severity (low, medium, and 

high) were not identified. To address this challenge, we are pursuing several 

avenues, such as using ordination techniques to determine if fire severity can 

be analytically classified. In addition to attempting to classify fire severity 

analytically, we also are attempting to identify meaningful thresholds noted 

in the scientific literature (e.g., Hungerford and others 1991; Johansen and 

others 2001; Niwa and others 2001; Jurgensen and others 1997).

Relationship Between Forest Structure and Fire Severity

To evaluate whethera relation between forest structure and fire severity

could be determined, we post-classified fire severity using variables identified

in the canonical correlation analysis and supplemented these classifications

with information on fire effects on soils and vegetation (Omi and Kalaokidis

1991; Ryan and Noste 1980; Wells and others 1979). However, the classifica-

tions we developed are preliminary and may change depending on further

investigation. The purpose for using our current fire severity classifications is to

investigate ways to identify relations between forest structure and fire severity.

The fire severity classification for tree crowns used four classes: (1) entire 

crown contained green needles (no sign of fire), (2) crown dominated by 

green needles but with the presence of brown needles and/or blackened 

crowns (charred branches with all needles consumed by the fire), (3) crown 

dominated by brown needles but with the presence of some green and/or 

black branches, and (4) crown dominated by black branches with only a 

trace of brown needles. We separated scorched trees from totally black trees 

because when brown needles fall to the forest floor they decrease soil erosion 

and provide organic matter to the soil (Jurgensen and others 1997, Pannkuk 

and Robichaud 2003). Therefore, fire severity was considered less severe on 

sites with brown needles present on trees compared to trees where all nee

-

dles were consumed. After each tree was assigned a fire severity class, these 

data were summarized to an average crown fire severity for the plot. These 

values were placed into a severity class and used in the analysis. An average 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 227

crown severity between 1 and 1.50 was classified as green (class 1), average 

crown severity between 1.51 and 2.50 was classified as green to brown (class 

2), an average crown severity between 2.51 and 3.50 was classified as brown 

(class 3), and an average crown severity >3.50 was classified as black.

The results from the canonical correlation indicated that litter and mineral 

soil in all char classes were related to soil surface fire severity. Moreover, 

surface organic matter (litter, humus, and brown cubical rotten wood) plays 

many roles in forest nutrition (Jurgensen and others 1997). Therefore, soil 

severity classes were based on the presence or absence of surface organic 

materials and their level of burning. The soil surface fire severity classes 

were defined as follows: unburned litter dominated the plot (class 1), lightly 

burned litter dominated the plot (class 2), unburned or lightly burned 

mineral soil dominated plot with litter present (class 3), moderately burned 

mineral soil dominated plot with litter present (class 4), and 100 percent of 

plot exhibited burned mineral soil with no litter present (class 5).

To identify relations between forest structure (only overstory forest struc

-

ture characteristics were used) and both crown and soil surface fire severity,

we useda nonparametric classification and regression tree (CART) technique

(Steinberg and Colla 1997). CART does not require the normalization

of data through transformations, making the results readily interpretable;

it identifies interactions, maximizes homogeneity withina particular clas-

sification, and can conduct internal cross-validation (checks how

a model

generalizes to new data) among classes (see table4 for cross-validation

matrix). Most of our forest structure data were continuous (table 3) and our

fire severity data categorical, which can be problematic for many analytical

techniques that attempt to relate the two. However, CART partitions data

usinga binary decision process making it appropriate for both categorical

and continuous data. CART produces trees with “nodes” showing where

splits in the classifications occurred. Based on decision rules, CART classifies

observations until either (1) every observation in the outcome is classified

correctly or (2) the outcome contains equal proportions of classes or contains 

the minimum number of observations specified. In this particular analysis,

we specifieda minimum number of 30 observations left in the node. Forest

structure characteristics occurring at the top of

a classification tree provide

an indication that they were clearly related to fire severity, compared to

characteristics that appear later in the tree. CART can also identify thresholds

in relations. For example, when crown base height was identified as an

important characteristic for describing crown severity, it occurred at the top

of the tree; CART then identified the crown base height at which the greatest

number of observations were classified correctly (figure 3a). In addition,

CART provides

a probability of this relationship (figure 3b).

Table 4—Cross-validation matrix showing how well the overall model correctly 

classified tree severity. The values on the diagonal provide the probability 

of correctly classifying the actual fire severity given the forest structure 

variables used in the model.

Predicted class

Actual class No fire Green crowns Brown crowns Black crowns

No fire 0.62 0.17 0.10 0.11

Green crowns 0.05 0.40 0.39 0.16

Brown crowns 0.08 0.39 0.35 0.48

Black crowns 0.11 0.28 0.26 0.34
228 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Figure 3—Figure 3a shows an eight-outcome-node classification tree used for predicting 

crown scorch as a function of pre-wildfire forest structure. Outcomes (shaded, 1 through 

8) show number of observations correctly classified, total number of observations, 

probability of certainty, and whether or not the forest structure characteristic is related to 

crown scorch (yes, no, or maybe). The lower the probability of certainty the more likely 

there is no relationship. Internodes (non-shaded, 1 through 7) show the forest structure 

characteristics used in the split and the threshold where the split occurred (e.g., top 

height <8 m went left to outcome 1). Forest structure characteristics used to split the 

data at the internodes included top height (m), crown base height (m), forest type (dry, 

moist, and cold), quadratic mean diameter (QMD), and crown competition factor (CCF). 

Figure 3b illustrates the probabilities after cross-validation associated with predicting 

unburned crowns (Outcome 1, figure 3a). In this outcome, there is a 0.62 probability that 

trees less than <8 m tall were correctly classified as having unburned crowns (83 of 107 

observations). Twenty-four observations were misclassified that actually contained green 

crowns with fire, brown crowns, or black crowns. Crown severity was placed into four 

classes. Unburned class was where the crown had green needles and no sign of fire. The 

green crown with fire class was where green needles dominated the entire crown, with 

the presence of scorched brown needles and/or black branches. Brown crown class was 

where entire crown was dominated by scorched brown needles but may have had green 

or no needles left. Black crown class was where the entire crown was scorched with no 

needles left or the crown had very few scorched needles.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 229

There are several ways to measure forest density; for example, basal area 

per hectare, crown competition factor (CCF), total cubic feet per ha, trees 

per ha, and canopy bulk density. Both in CART and in canonical correlation 

analysis, canopy bulk density (key variable used in fire models) as calculated 

by FFE-FVS when included with other density measurements was never in-

volved in any relations with fire severity. However, when canopy bulk density 

was the only density measurement used, it was included in the relationships. 

Similar results where noted by Omi and Martinson (2001) when they related 

canopy bulk density to fire severity. We inferred from this result that canopy 

bulk density might not reflect variation in density among sites as well as 

other density measurements such as CCF or basal area per ha.

Forest Structure and Crown Severity

The results from CART were encouraging because they identified forest 

structure characteristics that were related to fire severity, plus they provided 

an indication of the strength and weaknesses of these relations. When 

predicting crown severity as a function of pre-fire overstory forest structure, 

the model explained 36 percent of the variation in the data. This particular 

model performed fairly well at classifying sites with no evidence of fire in tree 

crowns versus areas that tended to contain trees with burned crowns. Sites 

containing non-burned tree crowns had a 0.62 probability of being correctly 

classified. In contrast, the model showed a 0.40 probability of classifying 

burned sites with green crowns present, a 0.35 probability of classifying 

trees with brown crowns, and a 0.34 probability of classifying trees with no 

needles left after the fire (table 4).

The classification tree contained eight outcomes asa function of forest

structure (figure 3a). Outcomes (shaded) show the number of observations

correctly classified, total number of observations, and the outcome’s certainty

(the probability of correctly classifying the fire severity ona new observation

not included in the CART model). Internodes show the forest structure

characteristics used in the split and the threshold where the split occurred

(e.g., top height<8m went left to outcome 1). The first split in the tree was

top height at8m tall (figure 3a). There were 107 observations in outcome

1, which contained trees<8m tall, 83 of the plots were correctly classified

as containing unburned crowns resulting ina 0.72 probability of certainty.

Outcome1 indicates that, yes, there isa relationship between top height and

fire severity.

The certainty of other outcomes is much less when compared to outcome

1. Moreover,a combination of forest structure characteristics is required to

obtain one or more of these other outcomes (outcomes2 through 8). For ex-

ample, two outcomes (6 and 8) might (maybe) havea relation between forest

structure (combination of top height, crown base height, and tree diameter)

and crown severity (figure 3a). In outcome 6, trees were between8 and 23

m (internode1 and 6) tall and have crown base heights >5m (internode 2),

which resulted ina 0.59 probability of certainty where 23 of the 42 observa-

tions were classified correctly. Outcome8 contains trees taller than 23m that

have crown base high heights >5m and havea diameter >30 cm witha 0.57

probability of certainty. These outcomes either contained black or brown

crowns indicating these characteristics tend to favor high fire severities in the 

crowns.

The other outcomes (2, 3, 4, 5, and 7) all have certainty probabilities 

<0.50 and can either contain black, green crowns with fire present, or brown 

crowns (figure 3a). Several observations were misclassified, indicating a 

substantial amount of variation in these outcomes. Outcome 7 was classified 
230 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

as containing green trees with an indication of fire; it contained crown base 

heights >5 m with diameters <30 cm but its probability of certainty was only 

0.35. Upon further investigation, seven observations contained green trees 

with no sign of fire, and the residual observations contained either brown 

or green crowns. This ambiguous outcome may be a function of our fire 

severity classification and probabilities may improve with different breaks in 

our crown severity rating.

The strength of this model is identifying that young stands (short) with 

top heights less than 8 m have a low crown severity rating (green crowns) 

(figure 3b). After cross-validation, there is a 0.62 probability that areas with 

short trees (<8 m tall) were fairly resilient to fire; however, 20 observations 

still experienced moderate to high (brown or black) fire severities (figure 

3b). There were several observations that were correctly classified and 24 of 

the 107 observations were misclassified.

Another important aspect of the model is to observe the entire classifica

-

tion tree to determine which forest structure characteristics were related to 

fire severity and which characteristics have either no relationship or a weak 

relationship to fire severity. Based on location of splits (figure 3a) (top versus 

bottom) and which structure characteristics were used in the splits, this 

model indicates that top height and crown base height play more of a role in 

relating to fire severity than density or size (QMD)—particularly top height, 

since it was the first variable used in the tree and was related to sites that 

contained no fire.

Forest Structure and Soil Severity

The relation of soil surface fire severity to forest structural characteristics 

was weak at best. The overall model explained 20 percent of the variation, 

and the only factor that was somewhat related to soil surface fire severity was 

tree height (figure 4). Observations with trees 

<15 m tall, tended to have 

unburned litter, but there were many observations that were incorrectly 

classified (139 observations) (figure 4). If sites contained trees >15 m tall, 

Figure 4—A three-outcome-node classification 

tree used for predicting soil fire severity as 

a function of pre-wildfire forest structure. 

Outcomes (shaded, 1 through 3) show number 

of observations correctly classified, total number 

of observations, probability of certainty, and 

whether or not the forest structure characteristic 

is related to crown scorch (yes, no, or maybe). 

The lower the probability of certainty the 

more likely there is no relationship. Internodes 

(non-shaded, 1 and 2) show the forest structure 

characteristics used in the split and the threshold 

where the split occurred (e.g., top height 

<15 

m went left to outcome 1). Forest structure 

characteristics used to split the data at the 

internodes included top height (m) and forest 

type (dry, moist, and cold). Soil fire severity 

was defined as (1) unburned litter dominated 

the plot, (2) lightly burned litter dominated the 

plot, (3) unburned or lightly burned mineral soil 

dominated plot, litter still present, (4) moderately 

burned mineral soil dominated plot, litter still 

present, and (5) 100 percent of plot is mineral 

soil no litter present.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 231

the classification tree split the difference in soil surface fire severity based 

on forest cover type (moist versus dry and cold forests). If sites occurred on 

moist forests they tended to have less severe soil surface fire severity (<100 

percent mineral soil exposure with litter present) than when they occurred 

on either dry or cold forests (100 percent mineral soil exposure). Because 

of the low estimates of certainty (<0.47) and the misclassification of many 

observations, we inferred from this analysis that a relation between overstory 

forest structure and soil surface fire severity may not exist. Several factors 

may have contributed to these results: (1) overstory trees have little or no 

relation to soil surface fire severity, (2) fire severity for the soils is poorly classified, and (3) structural characteristics as currently defined are not related to 

soil surface fire severity.

Conclusion

Although these results are preliminary, they do provide an indication that

data from this study will provide information on the relation between forest

structure and wildfire severity. It will: (1) provide key structural characteristics

related to fire severity, (2) identify thresholds in structural characteristics so

they can be applied when treating forest stands, 3) provide useful results that

can be incorporated into models, (4) give an estimate of risk or certainty of

a particular fire severity within a stand containing identified structural characteristics, and (5) provide empirical probability distributions showing the

relations between fire severity and forest structure, which we currently lack.

Acknowledgments

Several people played critical roles in conducting this research. Special 

thanks to the members of the Research Work Unit 4155; Dennis Ferguson, 

Project Leader for securing the funding for this study; and Bill Wykoff for 

providing valuable input on the sampling design. Nick Crookston and John 

Byrne gave excellent reviews of the study plan. John Byrne was instrumental 

in hiring crews and acquiring the necessary vehicles and equipment. Dan 

Frigard, Don Shipton, Teresa Rockwood, John Lhotka, Jonathon Sandquist, 

and Bob Denner truly made this work a success; without their hard work 

and resiliency, we would have never succeeded. We would like to especially 

thank Elizabeth Reinhardt and Bob Keene for taking the time to review and 

comment on the study plan and to Michael Battaglia and Ann Abbott for 

a thorough review of the manuscript. In particular, we would like to thank 

Kevin Ryan not only for providing an excellent review and good suggestions, but also for the strong support we have received.

References

Agee, J. K. 2002. Fire behavior and fire-resilient forests. In: Fitzgerald, Stephen A., 

ed. Fire in Oregon’s forests: Risks, effects, and treatment options. Portland, OR: 

Oregon Forest Resources Institute. 119-126.
232 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Albini, Frank A. 1976. Estimating wildfire behavior and effects. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. INT-30. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Intermountain Research Station. 92 p.

Bitterroot National Forest. 2000. Bitterroot fires 2000: an overview of the events, 

effects on people and resources, and post-fire recovery priorities. Hamilton, MT: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Bitterroot National Forest. 106 p.

Bock, J. H.; Bock, C. E. 1992. Vegetation responses to wildfire in native versus 

exotic Arizona grassland. Journal of Vegetation Science. 3: 439-446.

Bradshaw, Larry S.; Britton, Stuart. 2000. FireFamily Plus: Fire weather and fire 

danger climatology at your fingertips. In: Third symposium on fire and forest 

meteorology; Long Beach, CA. Proc. Boston, MA: American Meteorology 

Society. 112-113.

Bradshaw, Larry S.; Deeming, John E.; Burgan, Robert E.; Cohen, Jack D., comps. 

1983. The 1978 national fire-danger rating system: technical documentation. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-169. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Intermountain Research Station. 44 p.

Brown, James K. 1974. Handbook for inventorying downed woody material. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. INT-16. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 24 p.

Brown, James K. 1976. Estimating shrub biomass from basal stem diameters. 

Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 6: 153-158.

Carey, Henry; Schumann, Martha. (2003, April-last update). [Online] Modifying 

wildfire behavior - The effectiveness of fuel treatments: The status of our 

knowledge. National Community Forestry Center, Southwest Region Working 

Paper 2. Available: http://www.theforesttrust.org/images/swcenter/pdf/

WorkingPaper2.pdf. 26 p.

Cruz, Miguel G.; Alexander, Martin E.; Wakimoto, Ronald H. 2003. Definition of 

a fire behavior model evaluation protocol: a case study application of crown fire 

behavior models. Omi, Philip N.; Joyce, Linda A., tech. eds. Fire, fuel treatments, 

and ecological restoration: conference proceedings; 2002 16-18 April. 

Proceedings RMRS-P-29. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 49-68.

DeBano, Leonard F.; Neary, Daniel G.; Ffolliott, Peter F. 1998. Fire’s effects on 

ecosystems. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 333 p. 

Finney, Mark A.; Bartlette, Roberta; Bradshaw, Larry; [and others]. 2003. Fire 

behavior, fuel treatments, and fire suppression on the Hayman Fire. In: Graham, 

Russell T., tech. ed. Hayman Fire case study. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. 

Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station. 33-180.

Graham, Russell T., tech. ed. 2003. Hayman Fire case study. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

RMRS-GTR-114. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Research Station. 396 p.

Graham, Russell T.; Harvey, Alan. E.; Jain, Theresa B.; Tonn, Jonalea R. 1999. 

The effects of thinning and similar stand treatments on fire behavior in western 

forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-463. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Experiment Station. 27 p. 

Hungerford, Roger D.; Harrington, Michael G.; Frandsen, William H.; Ryan, 

Kevin C.; Niehoff, Gerald J. 1991. Influence of fire on factors that affect 

site productivity. In: Harvey, Alan E.; Neuenschwander, Leon F., compilers. 

Proceedings: Management and productivity of western-montaine forest soils. 

1990, April 10-12; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-280. Ogden, UT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 32-

49.

Johansen, Mathew P.; Hakonson, Thomas E.; Preshears, David D. 2001. Post-fire 

runoff and erosion from rainfall simulation: Contrasting forests with shrublands 

and grasslands. Hydrological Processes. 15: 2953-2965.

Jurgensen, M. F.; Harvey, A. E.; Graham, R. T.; Page-Dumroese, D. S.; Tonn, J. 

R.; Larsen, M. J. Larsen; Jain, T. B. 1997. Impacts of timber harvesting on soil 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 233

organic matter, nitrogen, productivity, and health of Inland Northwest forests. 

Forest Science. 43(2): 234-251.

Kent, Brian; Gebert, Krista; McCafrey, Sarah; Martin, Wade; and others. 2003. 

Social and economic issues of the Hayman Fire. In: Graham, Russell T., tech. ed. 

Hayman Fire case study. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. Ogden, UT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

315-396.

Key C. H.; Benson N. C. 2001. The Composite Burn Index (CBI): field rating 

of burn severity (2003, April 25-last update) [Online]. Available: http://

nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/cbi.html

Lohr, Sharon L. 1999. Sampling: design and analysis. London: Duxbury Press. 494 p.

Niwa, Christine C.; Peck, Robert W.; Torgersen, Torolf R. 2001. Soil, litter, and 

coarse woody debris habitats for arthropods in eastern Oregon and Washington. 

Northwest Science. 75: 141-148.

Omi, Philip N.; Martinson, Erik J. 2002. Effect of fuels treatment on wildfire 

severity. Final Report. Joint Fire Science Program. 36 p.

Pannkuk, C. D.; Robichaud, P. R. 2003. Effectiveness of needle cast at reducing 

erosion after forest fires. Water Resources Research. 39(12): 1333-1343.

Reinhardt, Elizabeth; Crookston, Nicholas L. 2003. The fire and fuels extension 

to the Forest Vegetation Simulator. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-116. Ogden, 

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research 

Station. 209 p.

Robichaud, Peter; MacDonald, Lee; Freeouf, Jeff; Neary, Dan; Martin, Deborah; 

Ashmun, Louise. 2003. Postfire rehabilitation of the Hayman Fire. In: Graham, 

Russell T., tech. ed. Hayman Fire case study. RMRS-GTR-114. Ogden, UT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

293-314.

Rothermel R.C. 1972. A mathematical model for predicting fire spread in wildland 

fuels. Research Paper INT-115. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 44 p.

Rothermel, Richard C. 1983. How to predict the spread and intensity of forest 

and range fires. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-143. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 

161 p. 

Rothermel, Richard C. 1991. Crown fire analysis and interpretations. In: Andrews, 

Patricia L. and Potts, Donald F., eds. Proceedings of the 11th conference on 

fire and forest meteorology; 1991, April 16-19; Missoula, MT. Bethesda, MD: 

Society of American Foresters. 253-263.

Ryan, Kevin C. 1990. Predicting prescribed fire effects on trees in the Interior West. 

In: Alexander, M. E. and Bisgrove, G. F., tech. coords. The art and science of fire 

management -- Proceedings of the first Interior West fire council annual meeting and 

workshop; 1988 October 24-27; Kananaskis Village, Alberta, Canada. Edmonton, 

Alberta, Canada: Forestry Canada, Northwest Region, Northern Forestry Centre. 

148-162.

Ryan, Kevin C.; Noste, Nonan V. 1985. Evaluating prescribed fires. In: Lotan, 

James E.; Kilgore, Bruce M.; Fischer, William C.; Mutch, Robert W., tech. 

coords. Proceedings: symposium and workshop on wilderness fire; 1983, 

November 15-18, Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-182. Ogden, UT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 230-238.

Scott, Joe H.; Reinhardt, Elizabeth D. 2001. Assessing crown fire potential by 

linking models of surface and crown fire behavior. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-29. 

Forest Service: Rocky Mountain Research Station. 59 p.

Simard, Albert J. 1991. Fire severity, changing scales, and how things hang together. 

International Journal of Wildland Fire. 1: 23-34.

Simon, N. P. P; Stratton, C. B.; Forbes, G. J.; Schwab, F. E. 2002. Similarity of 

small mammal abundance in post-fire and clearcut forests. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 165: 163-172.
234 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Steinberg, Dan; Colla, Phillip 1984. CART: tree-structured non-parametric data 

analysis. San Diego, CA: Salford Systems. 336 p.

Tabachnick, Barbara G.; Fidell, Linda S. 2001. Chapter 6: Canonical Correlation. 

In: Using multivariate statistics. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. 

177-218.

United States Department of Agriculture. 1997. Interior West forest land resource 

inventory field procedures. Unpublished paper on file at: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Interior West 

Forest Inventory and Analysis, Ogden, UT. 

Van Wagner, C. E. 1973. Height of crown scorch in forest fires. Canadian Journal 

of Forest Research. 3: 373-378.

Van Wagner, C. E. 1977. Conditions for the start and spread of crown fire. 

Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 7: 23-24.

Wells, C. G.; Campbell, R. E. 1979. Effects of fire on soil: a state of knowledge 

review. Gen. Tech. Rep. GTR-WO-7. Washington Office: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service. 34 p.

Wykoff, William R.; Crookston, Nick L.; Stage, Albert R. 1982. User’s guide to the 

prognosis model. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-133. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department Of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 

112 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 235

Abstract—Looking Glass Rock is a large, exposed granite pluton that is a special 

place for recreation and wildlife in the Pisgah National Forest. Even-aged timber 

stands surrounding the base of the rock originated in 1916 from clearcutting of the 

original mixed-species virgin stands. Two species now account for 86 percent of the 

211 ft2 of stand basal area per acre: overstory yellow-poplar (81 percent) and midstory silverbell (5 percent). Timber management is not a current option in this area. 

If options change, however, research results suggest several techniques for managing and regenerating this and other stands on productive sites.

Introduction

Looking Glass Rock (LGR) is a large, exposed granitic pluton that is 

widely recognized as a special place in the Pisgah National Forest of western 

North Carolina (fi gure 1). Rising nearly 1000 feet above the surrounding landscape, LGR is readily visible from many locations, particularly the 

nearby Blue Ridge Parkway, and is proposed for the National Registry of 

Natural Landmarks. LGR is managed as a special interest area by the Pisgah 

District to provide nesting and foraging habitat for the threatened peregrine 

falcon, to preserve the unique botanical features characteristic of the xeric 

habitats associated with thin soils on the top of the pluton, and to maintain 

the scenic attributes desirable for recreational uses, such as hiking and rock 

climbing. The 1600-acre LGR area also is exceptional because it contains the 

oldest hardwood silvicultural research plots in the southern Appalachians. 

Lessons Learned in 84-Year-Old Plots at 

Looking-Glass Rock, North Carolina

David L. Loftis1, W. Henry McNab1, Erik C. Berg1, 

and Ted M. Oprean2

1 USDA Forest Service, Southern 

Research Station, Asheville, NC.

2 USDA Forest Service, Pisgah National 

Forest, Pisgah Forest, NC.

Figure 1—The Looking-Glass Rock 

special interest area in the Pisgah 

National Forest, as viewed from the 

Blue Ridge Parkway. Photo by Bill 

Lea, www.billlea.com.
236 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

The plots were installed in the fall of 1923 to evaluate growth and mortality 

of natural regeneration after clearcutting.

The typical recreation user probably does not know that timber stands 

surrounding LGR are relatively young and largely even-aged. The stands 

originated after a wildfire in logging debris from cutting in 1913 of the last 

virgin stand on George Vanderbilt’s Pisgah Forest, which later became the 

nucleus of the Pisgah National Forest. Of particular interest to silviculturists, 

however, is the mesophytic stand that developed naturally on the east-facing, 

high-quality site at the base of LGR. Development of this stand has been 

reported at ages 18 years (Abell 1935), 42 years (Wahlenberg 1950), 51 

years (Della-Bianca 1971), and 60 years Della-Bianca (1983). In the 1983 

report, Della-Bianca suggested that one of the pioneer species, yellow-poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), would not relinquish domination of the stand in 

the near future. Few examples are available of long-term changes in species 

composition after clearcutting of stands on high-quality sites in the southern 

Appalachians. One purpose of our paper is to update stand development at 

LGR, which was last reported 20 years ago. Another purpose is to explore 

management options that could be applied to similar stands. Although this 

and other stands around LGR will not be managed for timber production, 

research findings from nearby Bent Creek Experimental Forest provide 

methods that can be used to manage stands on similar sites.

Methods

Study Area

LGR is about 30 miles south of Asheville, NC, and 5 miles northwest of 

Brevard. Elevation is about 3100 feet at the base of the rock and 4000 feet 

at the top. Climate in this area is temperate, with short, cool winters and 

long, warm summers. Precipitation is plentiful and evenly distributed, with 

over 65 inches annually. Bedrock geology is mainly gneisses and schists. 

The intrusive LGR pluton, however, consists of resistant Whiteside granite, 

which has been exposed through weathering and erosion of the softer sur

-

rounding rocks. Canopy vegetation at this intermediate elevation consists 

of several species of oaks (Quercus spp.) and pines (Pinus spp.) on the 

xeric to subxeric ridges and slopes, and yellow-poplar, sweet birch (Betula 

lenta), northern red oak (Q. rubra), and a number of other species on 

submesic and mesic lower slopes and coves. Midstory vegetation consists of 

sourwood (Oxydendrun arboretum), dogwood (Cornus florida), red maple (Acer rubrum), and silverbell (Halesia carolina). An evergreen shrub layer 

of mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia) may be present on xeric and subxeric 

sites, and rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum) is common on some 

mesic to subhydric sites. Common forms of natural disturbance include 

crown and stem breakage and uprooting from extensive ice storms and small 

patches of windthrow from localized, intensive microbursts associated with 

thunderstorms.

Timber Stand Studied

The original LGR stand consisted of mixed species, mainly American 

chestnut (Castanea dentata), yellow-poplar, and some cucumbertree (Mag-

nolia acuminata). Volumes averaged about 40 thousand board-feet per acre. 

The stand of about 120 trees per acre was cut in 1913 using a diameter limit 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 237

of 14 inches DBH for chestnut and chestnut oak (Q. prinus), and 16 inches 

for yellow-poplar and other species. Surveying the stand after logging and 

seeing only snags and culls, Frothingham3

 said, “Lumbermen would call the 

area clear cut.” Wildfire burned through the logging slash on May 11, 1916. 

By 1919, abundant seedlings of yellow-poplar had become established, as 

often occurred following severe fires on moist sites in the Southern Appalachians (Frothingham 1931, p. 41). However, the yellow-poplar seedlings 

and sprouts of other desirable species were mostly shaded by a dense stand 

of undesirable staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina) and silverbell. Silviculturists of 

the day were concerned that the stand of desirable species might not emerge.

Four sample plots were established in fall 1923 near the base of the

northeastern side of LGR to evaluate the feasibility of releasing desirable

regeneration from the competition of undesirable species. The treatment,

termed “cleaning,” removed sprouts of chestnut, sumac, and silverbell from

two of the plots. Della-Bianca (1983), however, found little practical difference between treatments in this case study at age 60. In October 1999, after

84 years of growth, we inventoried all arborescent vegetation ≥0.6 inches

DBH on each of the four 0.5-acre permanent plots. Because 1923 treatment effects were no longer evident, we pooled data from the cleaned and

uncleaned plots. Site index averages 110 feet for yellow-poplar at 50 years

(Della-Bianca 1971).

Results

Fifteen species are now present on the plots (table 1). In terms of stem 

numbers, the present LGR stand is dominated by two understory and one 

3 Frothingham, E.H. 1917. Report on 

study of cutover areas in the southern 

Appalachians. Unpublished report 

on file at Bent Creek Experimental 

Forest, USDA Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station, Bent Creek 

Experimental Forest, Asheville, NC.

Table 1—Numbers of trees ≥0.6 inches DBH by species, at seven stand ages on permanent 

plots at Looking-Glass Rock, Pisgah National Forest, NC.

Stand age (years

Arborescent speciesa 8 13 18 34 51 60 84

American chestnut 324 97 108 0 0 0 0

Black locust 222 368 71 61 23 17 5

Carolina silverbell 205 227 298 171 107 235 359

Chestnut oak 21 28 29 9 2 2 2

Cucumbertree 9 18 10 8 7 8 3

Fraser magnolia b b b b b b 8

Northern red oak 30 41 46 23 10 8 4

Staghorn sumac 828 751 628 0 0 0 0

Striped maple b b b b b b 94

White ash 2 5 3 6 5 5 2

White basswood 18 32 23 10 6 6 3

Yellow-poplar 182 890 422 402 188 139 96

Otherc 78 92 108 61 25 69 15

All live 1919 2549 1746 751 373 489 591

All standing dead d d d d d d 47

a Common and scientific names: American chestnut, Castanea dentata; black locust, Robinia 

pseudoacacia; Carolina silverbell, Halesia carolina; Chestnut oak, Quercus prinus; cucumbertree, 

Magnolia acuminata; Fraser magnolia, Magnolia fraseri; northern red oak, Q. rubra; staghorn 

sumac, Rhus typhina; striped maple, Acer pensylvanicum; white ash, Fraxinus americana; white 

basswood, Tilia heterophylla; yellow-poplar, Liriodendron tulipifera; flowering dogwood, Cornus 

florida; hickory spp. Carya spp.; red maple, Acer rubrum; sourwood, Oxydendrun arboretum; 

sweet birch, Betula lenta. b Included with “Other” category in previous reports (Della-Bianca 1983).

c Includes: Flowering dogwood, hickory spp., red maple, sourwood, and sweet birch.

d Not measured in previous inventories.
238 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Stand age (yrs)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Basal area (ft2/ac)

0

50

100

150

200

American chestnut

Black locust

Carolina silverbell

Chestnut oak

Cucumbertree

Northern red oak

Staghorn sumac

White ash

White basswood

Yellow-poplar

overstory species. About 77 percent of the stems are silverbell and striped 

maple (Acer pensylvanicum) in the understory. Yellow-poplar is the dominant 

canopy species but accounts for only 16 percent of stem numbers. Silverbell 

and yellow-poplar have always been a major component of the stand, but 

staghorn sumac, American chestnut, and black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) 

were more important in the early history of the stand. Total stem density 

declined until age 51, then increased as shade tolerant species grew large 

enough (≥0.6 inches DBH) to be tallied.

Yellow-poplar accounts for 81 percent of the total stand basal area of 

211 ft2 per acre (figure 2, table 2). Three other species, Carolina silverbell, 

black locust, and northern red oak make up 11 percent of basal area. For 

most species, basal area has decreased over time, particularly between ages 

60 and 84, when considerable mortality occurred. Basal area of yellowpoplar, however, has increased consistently. The mean annual basal area 

increment for the stand was 2.51 ft2

 per acre. Since age 60, annual increment 

has averaged 1.21 ft2 per acre.

Discussion

Long-term observations of stand development at LGR and elsewhere 

suggest that low- to moderate-elevation, high-quality sites in the southern 

Appalachians will regenerate quickly after clearcutting and will usually be 

dominated by a single desirable species: yellow-poplar. Data from the LGR 

plots demonstrates the consequences of clearcutting on good sites in the 

southern Appalachians where yellow-poplar reproduction consists of sprouts 

from cut stumps and seedlings from buried seeds. The fire after the harvest 

at LGR likely helped rather than hindered yellow-poplar establishment by 

Figure 2—Basal area by tree species at seven stand 

ages on research plots at Looking-Glass Rock. 

Not shown are basal areas of Fraser magnolia

(striped maple) and five other minor species 

(listed in table 1), which totaled 7.36 ft2

/ac at 

age 84.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 239

top-killing competition and exposing mineral soil, which aided germination 

of both stored and new seeds from a few surviving seed trees. Yellow-poplar 

can capture the canopy of high-quality sites from a cohort of mixed species 

soon after harvest and hold it for many, many years. Dominance will likely be 

maintained until the occurrence of some significant overstory disturbance, 

such as crown breakage from an ice storm, which allows additional light on 

the forest floor to stimulate development of advance regeneration of species 

with intermediate shade tolerance, such as some oaks. At LGR, however, 

development of intermediate species on the forest floor resulting from crown 

disturbance is unlikely because the dense midstory of the shade-tolerant 

silverbell and striped maple will intercept much of the additional light.

The findings about regeneration and stand dynamics at LGR should be 

applicable on other high-quality sites in the southern Appalachians. Such 

sites, which cover moist slopes and coves, include about a third of the land

-

scape (Frothingham 1931). On a high-quality site in the nearby Bent Creek 

Experimental Forest, Beck and Hooper (1986) also found that yellow-poplar 

dominated 20 years after the original stand of mixed species was clearcut. 

One interesting difference between these two stands is composition of the 

midstory. Silverbell does not occur naturally at Bent Creek and significant 

amounts of dogwood and red maple are lacking at LGR. Loftis (1989) 

likewise found that yellow-poplar was a major component of stands regen

-

erating high-quality sites after clearcutting, but the proportions were more 

variable than those at LGR and Bent Creek clearcuts. When yellow-poplar 

is present in a stand at crown closure, it is likely to maintain or gain canopy 

space because of its rapid growth and longevity, unless natural disturbances 

or silvicultural treatments occur.

Although the LGR stand will not be managed for timber production, 

we can speculate on outcomes of hypothetical management scenarios based 

on results of research at Bent Creek. Even though the LGR stand is almost 

90 years old, approaching a time when we might consider regeneration, 

continued management of the present thrifty and likely long-lived yellowpoplar stand also could be attractive. One or more intermediate cuttings 

could be prescribed to salvage mortality and concentrate growth on the best 

Table 2—Plotting points for figure 2 by species: basal area in ft

2

/acre at seven stand ages.

Stand age (years)

Arborescent species 8 13 18 34 51 60 84

American chestnut 8.84 8.88 1.83 0 0 0 0

Black locust 8.62 15.24 18.03 18.12 12.28 10.63 5.84

Carolina silverbell 2.70 4.62 11.02 13.11 12.63 10.24 11.41

Chestnut oak 0.17 0.44 1.22 1.83 2.05 2.26 3.18

Cucumbertree 0.09 0.35 0.61 0.87 2.31 3.48 1.96

Fraser magnolia 

aaaaaa

 3.31

Northern red oak 0.26 0.78 2.35 5.40 6.53 6.97 5.88

Staghorn sumac 7.93 5.23 4.22 0 0 0 0

Striped maple 

aaaaaa

 2.22

White ash <0.05 0.09 0.22 1.39 2.35 2.70 1.92

White basswood 0.26 0.65 1.92 2.70 4.09 3.44 3.22

Yellow-poplar 1.83 9.49 18.29 81.27 125.44 140.77 170.30

Other b 0.96 1.74 3.57 5.44 1.70 2.09 1.83

All live 31.70 47.51 65.07 130.10 169.43 182.49 211.06

All standing dead 

cccccc

 16.42

a Included with “Other” category in previous reports (Della-Bianca 1983).

b Includes: Flowering dogwood, hickory spp., red maple, sourwood, and sweet birch.

c Not measured in previous inventories.
240 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

trees. Low thinning, for example, would increase the average diameter of 

the residual stand and increase radial growth for several years. Larger trees 

would be produced more quickly than without silvicultural activity (Beck 

and Della-Bianca 1981).

Due to high stand volumes and the longevity of yellow-poplar, a number 

of regeneration options are available. Single-tree selection has not been 

successful in yellow-poplar stands (Della-Bianca and Beck 1985), but group 

selection is feasible with group openings as small as one-quarter acre (Beck 

1988). Treatment of midstory competition in the openings would encourage 

yellow-poplar regeneration from seed and sprouts. Representation of other 

species would depend on the presence of large advance reproduction at the 

time of cutting and stump sprouts created by cutting (Loftis 1985).

The longevity of yellow-poplar provides great flexibility in converting 

even-aged stands to uneven-aged stands. Two-aged stand management will 

work (Beck 1987). The low residual basal areas required for the creation of 

two-aged stands is reached with a single cut or with two cuts. The regenera

-

tion will be dominated by seedlings and sprouts of yellow-poplar as long 

as midstory competition is controlled. Again, the longevity of the residual 

yellow-poplar will provide several options as the new age class develops. At 

mid-rotation, one could remove the older age class in a selection thinning, 

leaving an even-aged stand. Alternatively one could leave the two-aged stand 

in place until the end of the rotation. Another option would be to begin the 

regeneration process again, leaving residual trees of both existing age classes 

to create an irregular structure with multiple age-classes.

Research has also shown that conventional shelterwood systems can 

regenerate these stands (Loftis 1983). Over a broad range of residual basal 

areas, species composition of regeneration has been roughly the same as 

would have been expected after application of the clearcutting method, as 

long as the overwood is removed in a timely manner. Yellow-poplar has typi

-

cally dominated the species composition of new stands. Other species have 

been present when they occurred as advance reproduction in the previous 

stand or regenerated from stump sprouts.

Research at Bent Creek suggests that it is possible to change the species 

composition in stands dominated by yellow-poplar, increasing the amounts 

of other species such as northern red oak or white ash (Fraxinus americana). 

Loftis (1990) used herbicide treatments to reduce shading from tolerant 

midstory species, such as silverbell and dogwood, to allow development 

of desirable species with intermediate shade tolerance. This treatment can 

be applied in a uniform fashion across an entire stand or in a group or 

patchwise fashion. After large advance reproduction of these species has 

developed, usually in about 10 years, the overstory can be removed in any 

number of ways to provide timely release of the advance reproduction and 

representation of these species in the new stand.

In summary, LGR provides today important botanical, wildlife, and 

recreation resources on the Pisgah Ranger District. Equally important to 

silviculturists, but not so obvious, are the long-term lessons available from 

observations of stand development on the oldest regeneration research plots 

in the southern Appalachians. There and elsewhere on good-quality sites in 

the southern Appalachians, one desirable species, yellow-poplar, has been a 

significant component of stands regenerated by clearcutting. Yellow-poplar 

tends to dominate those stands for many years unless a natural disturbance 

occurs or a silvicultural treatment is imposed to achieve other management 

objectives.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 241

References

Abell, C. A. 1935. Results of cleaning in cove hardwoods. Journal of Forestry. 33: 

626-627.

Beck, D. E.; Della-Bianca, L. 1981. Yellow-poplar: characteristics and management. 

Agric. Handb. 583. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 91 p.

Beck, D. E. 1987. Management options for southern Appalachian hardwoods: the 

two-aged stand. In: Phillips, Douglas R., ed. Proceedings of the fourth biennial 

Southern Silvicultural Research Conference; 1986 November 4 - November 

8; Atlanta, GA. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-42. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 451-454.

Beck, D. E. 1988. Clearcutting and other regeneration options for upland 

hardwoods. In: Proceedings, 16th annual hardwood symposium; 1988 May 15-

18; Cashiers, NC. Hardwood Research Council. 44-54.

Beck, D. E.; Hooper, R. M. 1986. Development of a southern Appalachian 

hardwood stand after clearcutting. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 10: 

168-172. 

Della-Bianca, L. 1971. Frothingham’s hardwood cleaning at Looking-Glass Rock—

43 years later. Journal of Forestry. 69: 100-102.

Della-Bianca, L. 1983. Sixty years of stand development in a southern Appalachian 

cove-hardwood stand. Forest Ecology and Management. 5: 229-241.

Della-Bianca, L.; Beck, D. E. 1985. Selection management in Southern Appalachian 

hardwoods. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 9: 191-196.

Frothingham, E. H. 1931. Timber growing and logging practice in the Southern 

Appalachian region. Tech. Bull. 250. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture. 92 p.

Loftis, D. L. 1983. Regenerating southern Appalachian mixed hardwood stands 

with the shelterwood method. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 7: 212-217.

Loftis, D. L. 1985. Preharvest herbicide treatment improves regeneration in 

southern Appalachian hardwoods. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 9: 

177-180.

Loftis, D. L. 1989. Species composition of regeneration after clearcutting Southern 

Appalachian hardwoods. In: Miller, James H., comp. Proceedings of the fifth 

biennial southern silvicultural research conference; 1988 November 1-3; 

Memphis, TN. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-74. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 253-257.

Loftis, D. L. 1990. A shelterwood method for regenerating red oak in the southern 

Appalachians. Forest Science. 36: 917-929.

Wahlenberg, W. G. 1950. A long-term test; a quarter century of forest regrowth in a 

cutover and cleaned Appalachian cove. Southern Lumberman. 181: 183-187.
242 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 243

Poster Abstracts

Stocking Conditions Infl uence Strength of Small Diameter Ponderosa Pine 

Wood Harvested in Forest Restoration Treatments

Michael A. Battaglia, METI at USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station; Wayne D. Shepperd, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station; Kurt H. Mackes, Colorado State University, Department 

of Forest Sciences; and Linda Joyce, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station. Fort Collins, CO

Treatment to reduce risk of catastrophic fi re in ponderosa pine forests 

of the Colorado Front Range requires removal of large numbers of small 

diameter trees. Many of these trees have grown in highly competitive 

environments and it is unknown what effect these conditions have on 

strength properties. We measured strength properties of 9 to 11 inch 

diameter open-grown (n=15), suppressed (n=20), and mistletoe-infected 

(n=21) ponderosa pine trees. Strength properties were compared to the 

basal area increment (BAI), heartwood-sapwood ratio, and forest density 

surrounding each tree. Growth rates of open grown trees were 50 percent 

higher than suppressed and mistletoe trees, while age and heartwoodsapwood ratio were lower in open grown trees. Modulus of rupture (MOR) 

was similar for suppressed and mistletoe trees but lower for open grown 

trees. Modulus of elasticity (MOE) was highest in the suppressed trees and 

lowest in open grown trees. MOR and MOE increased with increasing stand 

basal area and tree ring density but decreased with increasing individual 

stem BAI. Different competitive environments impact growth rates, which 

infl uence the strength of small diameter wood. Small diameter trees removed 

from dense Front Range forests appear to be superior in strength than 

rapidly growing young trees of the same size. 
244 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

The Forests of Washington and Oregon in the 1930s

Constance A. Harrington, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Olympia, 

WA; and David C. Powell, Umatilla National Forest, Pendleton, OR

Many public land managers are interested in restoring stands and land

-

scapes to a condition within the historical range of variability. To accomplish 

this objective, managers need information about past forest conditions. 

Historical vegetation information, particularly at broad scales, is not readily 

available.

The Pacific Northwest Forest Experiment Station surveyed Washington 

and Oregon forests in the early 1930s and prepared maps showing species 

composition and tree size. Prior to the 1930s, national forest managers 

relied on extensive reconnaissance mapping that tended to delineate areas 

based on timber volume (2,000 to 5,000 board feet per acre, etc.) rather 

than species composition or tree size. The extensive reconnaissance mapping 

had somewhat limited utility because it did not include private or other lands 

not in national forest ownership.

No mapping protocol is completely free of bias, but the 1930s forest 

survey brought a new standard of consistency and accuracy to forest map

-

ping for the Pacific Northwest. Although the forest type maps were widely 

used until the late 1950s, many contemporary managers are unaware of their 

existence. Digital versions of the 1930s forest type maps (at an original scale 

of 1:253,440) have recently become available. These maps are referred to as 

“quarter-state” maps because four sheets were produced for each state – one 

sheet for each quarter.

This poster provides a brief overview of the 1930s forest survey meth

-

odology and includes examples of data from several locations, as well as the 

interpretation of that data. It also indicates how to obtain a CD that includes 

a history of the forest survey, excerpts from early publications produced by 

the survey unit, and the actual forest type maps in several GIS or graphics 

formats. These maps should be very useful to resource managers who need 

broad-scale information about forest composition and structure.

County-level mapping from the mid 1930s has been located for some 

counties. The county-level maps were published at a scale of 1:63,360. They 

are valuable for fine-scale analysis because the tree species and size informa

-

tion is mapped at a finer scale, and because they provide information about 

stocking, age, associated tree species, and certain disturbance factors or 

damaging agents such as timber harvest, wind, and fire. Note that the “quar

-

ter-state” maps described above do not include this level of detail because it 

was not possible to depict it on a large-scale format (1:253,440).

The county maps have been particularly useful for “ecosystem analysis at 

the watershed scale” (e.g., watershed analysis), a mid-scale procedure for 

characterizing the human, aquatic, riparian, and terrestrial components of a 

watershed. Ecosystem analysis is designed to set the stage for subsequent de-

cision-making processes by providing context for fine-scale project planning. 

Historical maps are a critical data source for step four in a six-step ecosystem 

analysis process; step 4 produces a description of reference conditions for the 

watershed.

On the Umatilla National Forest in the Blue Mountains of northeastern 

Oregon and southeastern Washington, the 1930s county-level mapping 

is a primary data source when characterizing reference conditions. This is 

accomplished by using a database lookup (cross-walk) table that relates map 

attributes (the legend codes) with an associated cover type, stand size class, 

stocking category, and structural class. Reference and current conditions 
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 245

are then compared and interpreted before formulating management recommendations.

Information about the availability and format of the 1930s forest type 

mapping is available from these contact persons:

Connie Harrington, Olympia Forestry Sciences Lab, 360-753-7670, 

charrington@fs.fed.us.

Dave Powell, Umatilla National Forest, 541-278-3852, 

dcpowell@fs.fed.us.

Dale Weyerman, Portland Forestry Sciences Lab, 503-808-2042, 

dweyerman@fs.fed.us

Alternative Treatments for Fuel Reduction and Carbon Retention at the 

Forest/Urban Interface

R.F. Powers, D.H. Young, and G.O. Fiddler, Pacific Southwest Research 

Station, Redding, CA

Weak vegetation control in western forests raises the risk of catastrophic 

wildfire from the buildup of understory fuels. The problem is particularly 

acute at California’s forest/urban interface where rural communities often 

are bordered by open pine stands choked with woody shrubs. Prescribed 

fire is an impractical solution because of air quality and liability concerns. 

Burning also increases CO2

 emissions, reduces the site’s carbon storage, 

and degrades soil quality. In our operational scale experiment, alternative 

fuel treatments funded through the National Fire Plan include a control, 

mastication + prescribed fire, hand removal, mechanical mastication, and 

mastication + tillage of chips into the surface soil. This affords a series of 

comparisons on the economic and environmental costs of reducing fuels 

and exporting or retaining organic carbon. This new experiment has been 

replicated at four sites in California. Results show that understory fuels can 

reach 41 tons/acre and store up to 20 tons of carbon and 700 million BTUs 

of potential energy/acre. Treatment costs vary ten-fold, from $400/acre 

(mastication) to $4,000/acre (hand removal). However, these costs pale 

when compared to the risks of doing nothing. All such treatments reduce 

fuels immediately, but managers must consider regrowth of understory fuels, 

and a possible solution is chemical control. A piggybacked study is tracing 

the environmental fate of hexazinone, glyphosate, and imazapyr in the soil in 

several of the treatments.
246 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

FVS-BGC: A Physiology Approach to Simulating Stand Vigor

Eric L. Smith, USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Protection, Forest 

Health Technology Enterprise Team, Fort Collins, CO; and Andrew J. 

McMahan, INTECS, International Inc., Fort Collins, CO

FVS-BGC is a hybrid stand growth model that adds the logic of the 

Stand-BGC physiological process model to the Forest Service’s Forest 

Vegetation Simulator (FVS). FVS operates on a five- to 10-year time step 

and assumes average climate conditions and stable site conditions over 

each time period. In the real world, variable weather conditions affect 

growth rates, affect mortality rates, and create periods of low tree vigor 

that contribute to pest epidemics. The “BGC” portion of this model uses 

climate data to operate on a daily time step. This fine scale approach allows 

users to project variation in stand vigor conditions among years and estimate 

moisture stress conditions within a year. Previous studies have found a 

strong relationship between stand vigor and susceptibility to bark beetle 

attack. Traditionally, managers have used thinning prescriptions to reduce 

bark beetle hazards, with a goal of applying them when stand densities 

exceed a threshold level. Projection systems such as FVS have been used 

to estimate when stands will exceed that threshold. This approach assumes 

that stand density is closely linked to stand vigor. Using FVS-BGC, we 

demonstrate how stand growth and normal climate variability combine to 

create a wide age and density band during which a vigor-based threshold 

might be crossed. Using climate records for example stands, we calculate 

probabilities of exceeding this vigor threshold at different ages. We also 

demonstrate how the interactions of site characteristics influence stand 

growth potential and vigor conditions. The desire to maintain forests in 

certain conditions for nontimber purposes requires an understanding of the 

potential for creating physiological conditions that may not be viable under 

some climate conditions. FVS-BGC may be helpful in these cases.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 247

Red River Watershed Forest Health Analysis

Eric L. Smith, USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Protection, Forest 

Health Technology Enterprise Team, Fort Collins, CO; Carol Randall, 

USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Protection, Coeur d’Alene, ID; and 

Andrew J. McMahan, INTECS, International Inc., Fort Collins, CO

A watershed assessment project of the Red River watershed in the Red 

River Ranger District of the Nez Perce National Forest, Idaho, provided an 

opportunity to test and demonstrate a set of newly developed forest health 

analysis and display tools. The watershed is the site of an ongoing mountain 

pine beetle epidemic. This disturbance has impacts on wildlife habitat, fuel 

conditions, and other resource values. The Westwide Pine Beetle (WWPB) 

Model is a recently developed extension of the Forest Vegetation Simulator 

(FVS). Within FVS, we used: (1) base FVS model growth and mortality 

routines; (2) the Event Monitor, to calculate various published bark beetle 

hazard rating systems; and (3) the WWPB Model to simulate the landscapelevel effects of the mountain pine beetle. The impacts of past and potential 

silvicultural activities were included in these simulations. We used three 

customized ArcView GIS projects—FVS-EMAP, and two WWPB Model 

Mapping Tools—to spatially portray FVS output. FVS-EMAP is our newly 

available system that provides a simple interface to move FVS output into 

ArcView. We also used the Stand Visualization System (SVS) and Envision to 

create stand and landscape visualization images of the conditions over time. 

We show how the use of these tools provides a powerful linkage between 

stand level and landscape level analyses, helping forest managers address 

ecosystem management objectives.
248 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

James Allen

Black Hills National Forest

Hell Canyon District

330 Mt. Rushmore Road

Custer, SD 57730

Lance Asherin

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 West Prospect

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Virgil Baldwin

Washington Office

Vegetation Management and Protection Research

1601 N. Kent St.

Arlington, VA 22209

James Barnett

Southern Research Station

Alexandria Forestry Center

2500 Shreveport Highway

Pineville, LA 71360

Douglas Basford

Region 4

Supervisor’s Office, Salmon-Challis National 

Forest

50 Hwy 93 South

Salmon, ID 83467

Michael Battaglia

Rocky Mountain Research Station

RWU-4451

240 West Prospect Rd.

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Erik Berg

Southern Research Station

Bent Creek Experimental Forest

1577 Brevard Rd.

Asheville, NC 28806

Barry Bollenbacher

Regional Office

Northern Region

200 East Broadway, Federal Building

Missoula, MT 59807

Veronique Bonnet

Matcom - Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 W. Prospect Rd.

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Donald Boone

Black Hills National Forest

Hell Canyon District

330 Mt. Rushmore Road

Custer, SD 57730

Joanna Booser

Region 6

Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests

1645 Hwy 20 East

Bend, OR 97701

Saron Badley

Challis Ranger District

Salmon-Challis National Forest

HC63 Box 1669

Challis, ID 83226

Don Bragg

Southern Research Station

RWU-4106

P.O. Box 3516 UAM

Monticello, AR 71656

James Brown

R8 Regional Office

Forest Health Protection

3595 Mystic Drive

Buford, GA 30519

Ed Brown

Fremont-Winema National Forests, Region 6

Chemult Ranger District

P.O. Box 150

Chemult, OR 97731-0150

Franklin Burch

Washington Office

FRGE

213 E. Mt. Ida Avenue

Alexandria, VA 22301

Attendees of the 2003 National Silviculture Workshop
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 249

Janice Burke

Rocky Mountain Regional Office

Renewable Resources

740 Simms St.

Golden, CO 80401

David Burton

Region 5

Aspen Delineation Project

2070 Orange Drive

Penryn, CA 95663

Rick Caissie

Sulphur Ranger District

PO Box 10

Granby, CO 80446

Gary Cline

Region 5

Tahoe National Forest

631 Coyote St.

Nevada City, CA 95959

Blaine Cook

Region 2

Black Hills National Forest

25041 North Hwy 16

Custer, SD 57730

Diane Cote

Sanpete Ranger District

Manti-LaSal National Forest

540 N. Main

Ephraim, UT 84627

Barbara Crane

R8 Region Office

Southern Region

1720 Peachtree Rd. NW

Atlanta, GA 30309

David Crawford

Region 2

Columbine Ranger District, San Juan National 

Forest

PO Box 439

Bayfield, CO 81122

Michael Crawley

Supervisor’s Office

Manti-La Sal NF

599 W. Price River Drive

Price, UT 84501

Frank Cross

Forest Health Protection

Region 2

P.O. Box 25127

Lakewood, CO 80225-0127

Terence DeLay

Brush Creek/Hayden Ranger District

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests

South Hwy 130/230

Saratoga, WY 82331

Robert Deal

Pacific Northwest Research Station

620 SW Main Street, Suite 400

Portland, OR 97205

Karen Debord

Central Office

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Branch of Forestry

12136 W. Bayaud Ave

Lakewood, CO 80228

Gary Dixon

Washington Office

Forest Management Service Center

2150 Centre Ave., Bldg. A, Ste. 341a

Fort Collins, CO 80526-1891

Dennis Dwyer

Region 3

Lincoln National Forest

61 Curlew

Cloudcroft, NM 88345

Phillip Eisenhauer

Region 4

Dixie National Forest

1789 Wedgewood

Cedar City, UT 84720

James Ellenwood

Washington Office-Detached

FHP-FHP

2150 Centre Ave., Bldg. A, Ste. 331

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Lane Eskew

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Publishing Services

240 W. Prospect Rd.

Fort Collins, CO 80526
250 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Brian Ferguson

Region 4

Regional Office

324 25th Street

Ogden, UT 84401

Gary Fiddler

Pacific Southwest Region

RO

2400 Washington Ave.

Redding, CA 96001

Richard Fitzgerald

Washington Office

4311 Majestic Lane

Fairfax, VA 22033

Clark Fleege

Boise National Forest

Lucky Peak Nursery

15169 E. Highway 21

Boise, ID 83716

Larry Ford

Tahoe National Forest

Sierraville Ranger District

PO Box 95

Sierraville, CA 96126

Krista Gebert

Rocky Mountain Research Station

800 E. Beckwith

Missoula, MT 59807

Cindy Glick

Deschutes National Forest

Ochoco and Deschutes National Forest

1645 E Hwy 20

Bend, OR 97701

Gerald Gottfried

Rocky Mountain Research Station

RWU-4651 c/o Tonto National Forest

2324 E. McDowell Road

Phoenix, AZ 85006

Kurt Gottschalk

Northeastern Research Station

NE-4557

180 Canfield St.

Morgantown, WV 26505-3180

Russell Graham

Rocky Mountain Research Station

1221 S. Main

Moscow, ID 83843

Susan Gray

R2 Regional Office

State and Private Forestry

740 Simms St.

Golden, CO 80401

Jim Griffin

Supervisor’s Office

Rio Grande National Forest

755 Cedar Street

Del Norte, CO 81132

James Guldin

Southern Research Station

Arkansas Forestry Sciences Lab

100 Reserve Street

Hot Springs, AR 71902

Arthur Haines

Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre & Gunnison National Forests

Gunnison Ranger District

216 No. Colorado St.

Gunnison, CO 81230

Mike Harris

Region 8

Mena/Oden Ranger Districts

Ouatchita National Forest

1603 Hwy 71N

Mena, AR 71953

Cheri Hartless

Bitterroot National Forest, Region 1

Stevensville Ranger District

PO Box 1091

Darby, MT 59829

David Hernández

Superior National Forest

Kawishiwi Ranger District

118 South Fourth Ave. East

Ely, MN 55731

David Hessel

Colorado State Forest Service

1389A W. 112th Ave

Westminster, CO 80234
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 251

Patrick Heuer

Tongass National Forest

Sitka Ranger Distict

204 Siginaka Way

Sitka, AK 99835

Marisue Hilliard

Rocky Mountain Region

Director- Renewable Resources

PO Box 25127

Lakewood, CO 80225-0127

Valerie Hipkins

Washington Office

NFGEL

2480 Carson Rd.

Placerville, CA 95667

Chris Holmes

Washington Office

Interagency Liaison

584 Kevins Dr.

Arnold, MD 21012

Patricia Hudson

Hell Canyon Ranger District

Black Hills National Forest

330 Mt. Rushmore Road

Custer, SD 57730

Philip Jahns

Okanogan Valley Office

Okanogan-Wenatchee NF

1240 S. Second Ave.

Okanogan, WA 98840

Theresa Jain

Rocky Mountain Research Station

1221 S. Main

Moscow, ID 83843

Richard Jeffers

Southern Region

Regional Office

1720 Peachtree Rd. NW, Suite 816N

Atlanta, GA 30309

Mellissa Jenkins

Caribou-Targhee National Forest

PO Box 858

Ashton, ID 83420

Kim Johnson

Region 1

Bitterroot National Forest

Stevensville Ranger District

88 Main

Stevensville, MT 59870

Stephen Johnson

Region 2

Canyon Lakes Ranger District

Arapho-Roosevelt National Forest

1311 S. College

Fort Collins, CO 80524

Darrell Johnson

Ashley National Forest, Region Four

Vernal Ranger District

355 North Vernal Ave.

Vernal, UT 84078

David W. Jones

Eastern Region

Regional Office

310 W. Wisconsin Ave.

Milwaukee, WI 53203

Karen Jones

Pacific Southwest Region

Tahoe National Forest

22830 Foresthill Rd.

Foresthill, CA 95631

Linda Joyce

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 West Prospect

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Janette Kaiser

Washington Office-Forest and Rangeland

201 14th Street, SW

Washington, DC 20250

Lynn Kaney

Region 6

Newport Ranger District, Colville NF

315 North Warren

Newport, WA 99156

Steven Katovich

Northeastern Area, FHP

1992 Folwell Avenue

St. Paul, MN 55108
252 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Merrill R. Kaufmann

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Front Range Ecosystem Management Unit

240 West Prospect Road

Fort Collins, CO 80526

David Keefe

Region 4

Dixie National Forest

Escalante Ranger District

P.O. Box 246

Escalante, UT 84726

Philip Kemp

Region 2

Mancos-Dolores Ranger District

San Juan National Forest

110 N. 6th

Dolores, CO 81323

Carla Kempen

R5, Tahoe National Forest

Downieville Ranger District

15924 Hwy 49

Camptonville, CA 95922

John Kennedy

Tahoe National Forest

Sierraville Ranger District

317 South Lincoln

Sierraville, CA 96161

Joan Kittrell

Deschutes National Forest

P.O. Box 208

Crescent, OR 97733

Amy Krommes

ARNF & PNG, Region 2

Boulder Ranger District

3063 Sterling Circle

Boulder, CO 80301

Mike Landram

Pacific Southwest Region

Region 5

1323 Club Drive

Vallejo, CA 94947

Gary Lawton

Craig Ranger District

Tongass National Forest

Box 500

Craig, AK 99921

Leigh Lentile

Dept. of Forest, Rangeland, and Watershed

Colorado State University

527 N. Loomis Ave.

Ft. Collins, CO 80521

David Loftis

Southern Research Station

Bent Creek Experimental Forest

1577 Brevard Road

Asheville, NC 28806

Ann Lynch

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Flagstaff Lab

2500 South Pine Knoll

Flagstaff, AZ 86001-6381

Monty Maldonado

Washington Office

Forest and Rangelands

1400 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20250

Michael Manthei

Region 3

Coconino National Forest

2323 E Greenlaw Lane

Flagstaff, AZ 86004

Stephen Mata

Rocky Mountain Research Station

RWU-4451

240 W. Prospect

Fort Collins, CO 80526

William McArthur

R6/PNW Pacific Northwest Region

Natural Resources

333 SW First Avenue

Portland, OR 97204-3440

Diana McGinn

Nebraska National Forest

Pine Ridge Ranger District

1240 W. 16th St.

Chadron, NE 69337

Carol McKenzie

Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre & Gunnison National Forest

Grand Valley & Paonia Ranger Districts

2250 Highway 50

Delta, CO 81416
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 253

Andrew McMahan

Washington Office-Detached

FHTET

2150 Centre Ave., Bldg. A, Suite 334

Ft Collins, CO 80526

Gary Miller

Northeastern Research Station

180 Canfield Street

Morgantown, WV 26505

John Minutilli

Truckee R.D.

Tahoe National Forest

10342 Hwy 89N

Truckee, CA 96161

Greg Montgomery

Intermountain Region

Moab-Monticello Ranger District

Manti-La Sal National Forest

P.O. Box 820, 496 East Central

Monticello, UT 84535

James Myers

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest

2468 Jackson ST

Laramie, WY 82070-6535

John Natvig

Region 5

USFS T.E.A.M.S. Enterprise

P.O. Box 241

Fort Meade, SD 57741

Duane A. Nelson

Pacific Southwest Regional Office

1323 Club Drive

Vallejo, CA 94592

Dan Nolan

Rocky Mtn Regional Office

Renewable Resources

Lakewood, CO 80225-0127

Doug Page

Region 4

Uinta National Forest

2460 South Highway 40

Heber City, UT 84032

Marcia Patton-Mallory

Rocky Mountain Research Station

2150 Centre Avenue, Building A

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Sharon Paul

Mescalero Apache Tribe

268 Pine St, P.O. Box 227

Mescalero, NM 88340

Jean Perkins

Supervisor’s Office

Superior National Forest

8901 Grand Avenue Place

Duluth, MN 55808

Dave Powell

Supervisor’s Office

Umatilla National Forest

2517 SW Hailey Avenue

Pendleton, OR 97801

Robert Powers

Pacific Southwest Station

2400 Washington Ave

Redding, CA 96001

Kenneth Reed

Region 2

San Juan - Dolores

100 North 6th

Dolores, CO 81323

Terrance Reedy

Region 5

Modoc National Forest

800 W. 12th Street

Alturas, CA 96101

Richard Rehberg

Region 4

New Meadows Ranger District

Payette National Forest

3674 Highway 95

New Meadows, ID 83654

Tom Rennick

San Juan National Forest

Mancos-Dolores Ranger District

100 North 6th, PO Box 210

Delores, CO 81323
254 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004.

Julia Richardson

Supervisor’s Office

Humboldt-Toiyabe

1200 Franklin Way

Sparks, NV 89431

Allen Saberniak

Supervisor’s Office

Hiawatha National Forest

2727 N. Lincoln Road

Escanaba, MI 49829

Jim Schlaich

Region 6

Bend/Ft Rock Ranger District

Deschutes National Forest

1230 NE 3rd Street, Room A-262

Bend, OR 97701

Christie Schneider

Medicine Bow-Routt NF

P.O. Box 187

Encampment, WY 82325

Anna Schoettle

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 W. Prospect Rd.

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Callie Schweitzer

Southern Research Station

Ecology & Management of S. Appalachian 

Hardwoods

833 Chase Road

Huntsville, AL 35811

Glenda Scott

Northern Region

P.O. Box 7669

Missoula, MT 59807

Jim Serra

Foresthill Ranger District

Tahoe National Froest

22830 Foresthill Road

Foresthill, CA 95631

Wayne D. Shepperd

Rocky Mountain Research Station

RWU-4451

240 W. Prospect

Ft. Collins, CO 80526

Bruce Short

Rocky Mountain Region

Regional Silviculturist

PO Box 25127

Lakewood, CO 80225-0127

Steve Slaughter

Ninemile Ranger Station

Lolo National Forest

20325 Remount Road

Huson, MT 59846

Eric Smith

FHP WOD

Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team

2150A Centre Avenue

Fort Collins, CO 80526-8121

Jessica Smith

SD Division of Resource Conservation and 

Forestry

3305 1/2 West South St.

Rapid City, SD 57702

James Stone

Deschutes National Forest

Supervisor’s Office

1645 Highway 20 E

Bend, OR 97701

Diane Strohm

PSICC National Forest

Hayman Recovery

540 Elkton Dr

Colorado Springs, CO 80907

Eugene Sundberg

Region 4

North Fork, Salmon Challis National Forest

120 Washington Ave

Salmon, ID 83467

Jim Thinnes

Rocky Mountain Region

White River National Forest

P.O. Box 948

Glenwood Springs, CO 81602-0948

Chris Thomas

Bighorn National Forest

2013 Eastside 2nd Street

Sheridan, WY 82801
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-34. 2004. 255

David Thomas

Black Hills National Forest

25401 No. Highway 16

Custer, SD 57730

Gaines Tibbs

Southern Region

Forest Management

1720 Peachtree Road, NW, Suite 816 N

Atlanta, GA 30309

Don Tomczak

Regional Office

Southern Region

1720 Peachtree Road, NW; Room 816

Atlanta, GA 30309

Brian Vachowski

Washington Office

Missoula Technology & Development Center

5785 Highway 10 West

Missoula, MT 59808

Don Vandendriesche

Washington Office-Detached

Forest Management Service Center

2150A Centre Avenue

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Robert Vermillion

Gunnison Ranger District

Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, Gunnison NF

216 N. Colorado

Gunnison, CO 81230

Laura Ward

Region 1

Ninemile Ranger District

Lolo National Forest

20325 Remount Road

Huson, MT 59846

Stephen Weaver

Southern Region - Regional Office

Forest Management

1720 Peachtree Road, NW, Ste. 816N

Atlanta, GA 30309

Steven Weaver

Sierraville Ranger District

Tahoe National Forest

P.O. 95

Sierraville, CA 96126

Jerry Westfall

Region 5

Tahoe National Forest

631 Coyote St

Nevada City, CA 95959

Craig Wilson

Tahoe National Forest

Sierraville Ranger District

317 South Lincoln

Sierraville, CA 96161

Andrew Youngblood

Pacific Northwest Research Station

LaGrande FSL

1401 Gekeler Lane

LaGrande, OR 97850

Richard Zaborske

Washington Office

Forest and Rangelands Management

Sidney Yates Federal Building, 201 14th Street, 

SW

Washington, DC 20250

Kevin Zimlinghaus

Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest

Boulder/Clear Creek R.D.

3063 Sterling Circle Suite 1

Boulder, CO 80301
Trade or company names are used for the information and convenience of the reader; such use does not constitute an official 

endorsement or approval of any service or product by the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture to the exclusion of others that may be 

suitable. 

Herbicides used improperly can be injurious to humans, animals, 

and plants. Follow the directions and heed all precautions on the 

label. Store herbicides in original containers under lock and key 

out of the reach of children and animals and away from food and 

feed. Remember to read the entire product label and use only 

according to label instructions.
Federal Recycling Program Printed on Recycled Paper

RMRS

ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination 

in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national 

origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, 

or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all 

programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for 

communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, 

etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice 

and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office 

of Civil Rights, Room 326 W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 

(voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

The Rocky Mountain Research Station develops scientific 

information and technology to improve management, protection, 

and use of the forests and rangelands. Research is designed to 

meet the needs of the National Forest managers, Federal and 

State agencies, public and private organizations, academic 

institutions, industry, and individuals.

Studies accelerate solutions to problems involving 

ecosystems, range, forests, water, recreation, fire, resource 

inventory, land reclamation, community sustainability, forest 

engineering technology, multiple use economics, wildlife and fish 

habitat, and forest insects and diseases. Studies are conducted 

cooperatively, and applications may be found worldwide.

Research Locations

Flagstaff, Arizona Reno, Nevada

Fort Collins, Colorado* Albuquerque, New Mexico

Boise, Idaho Rapid City, South Dakota

Moscow, Idaho Logan, Utah

Bozeman, Montana Ogden, Utah

Missoula, Montana Provo, Utah

Lincoln, Nebraska Laramie, Wyoming

*Station Headquarters, Natural Resources Research Center, 

2150 Centre Avenue, Building A, Fort Collins, CO 80526.