Inside Agroforestry

Plan Now for the Blizzard of 2007!...page 2

Windbreaks, Snow, and Water...page 3

Trees Helped Save Cattle and Money...page 4

Windbreaks for all Seasons and Reasons...page 5

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Inside This Issue

Successful Colorado Trees, Wind, and Blowing Snow

Living Snowfence

Program

(See Wind on page 7)

As winter blizzards hit, residents of the

Great Plains have been reminded to

respect nature’s fury. A sinister snowstorm can leave behind many things, perhaps the most impressive is the snow

drift. Experience with snow drifts and

how they can interfere with normal activities can range from inconvenience, to

economic hardship, to real life danger. 

These experiences could be minimized

given adequate resources, education,

cooperation, and technology application.

Access to land would allow the placement of living snowfences that could collect and deposit snow in priority areas.

According to Ed Ryen, Assistant

Maintenance Engineer for the North

Dakota Department of Transportation,

eastern North Dakota has many miles of

mature multiple-row windbreaks. The

winter of 1996-97 was a vicious one for

the northern Great Plains. North Dakota

alone spent $4.7 million from the federal

government on snow removal for state

roads, with another $1.2 million spent by

the National Guard to open county roads.

Furthermore, parts of the Interstate

A living snowfence (LSF) is a planting

of trees and shrubs designed to keep snow

from drifting onto roads and help prevent

road closings. The Colorado Department

of Natural Resources and the Colorado

State Soil Conservation Board have a successful 15-year-old program that establishes an average of 21 living snowfences

per year.

Properly placed, living snowfences

can: store blowing snow and keep roads

clear in most storms; enhance road safety; provide wildlife habitat; enhance

beauty; provide winter livestock protection and sheltered calving areas; help

reduce soil erosion; and decrease tax dollars needed to plow snow.

Following is a summary of information

about Colorado’s program. 

Objectives

• Reduce road closures due to drifting 

snow.

• Reduce costs and increase efficiency of

snow control on roads.

• Provide stable and critical wildlife

habitat.

• Enhance environmental aesthetics.

• Improve visibility and enhance driver 

safety.

• Fifty new plantings per year.

Background

• An average of 21 living snowfences

per year have been established over the 

program’s 15-year existence.

• 80.4 miles of LSF containing 241,037 

trees and shrubs have been planted in 318

locations throughout Colorado.

• Average planting is 1/4 mile in length 

and contains two to three rows of trees

and shrubs.

Program Operation

• A cooperative effort involving the 

(See Colorado on page 6)

This landowner planted a series of windbreaks to catch snow and protect both his farmstead and the county road. The three rows parallel to the highway consist of a twin-row of

Green Ash, set back 200 feet from the edge of the right-of-way. A row of Tatarian

Honeysuckle is set back another 100 feet. The county road runs north-south.
Comments from the Center Leadership

2 Inside Agroforestry

During the winter of 1996-97 residents of the Northern

Great Plains and Midwest experienced one of the most severe

snow seasons on record. People were trapped in cars or in

unheated homes and died of acute overexposure. Livestock —

cattle, horses, sheep, hogs, and wildlife succumbed by the thousands to lack of available water and feed, and sub-zero wind 

chill factors. Local commerce came to a total standstill. The

trucking industry had to go on-hold and could not transport

goods into or out of the region. They were often detained in truck

stops for days. Perishables spoiled and deadlines could not be

met. The local, regional, and national economy suffered as a

result.

Could the loss of life, suffering, and waste have been avoided? To some degree, YES! Of course, we can’t keep snow from

falling and wind from blowing. We can, however, affect the final

outcome of catastrophic snow and wind events by carefully planning and implementing snow and wind buffers including: farm

and field windbreaks, living snowfences, and outdoor living

barns.

By planting now, we can be ready for the blizzard of 2007 or

whatever year it happens, and it will happen again. We can control where the snow piles. We can diminish the effects of harsh

wind-driven “horizontal” snowstorms. We can reduce chill

indexes for humans, livestock, and wildlife. We can safeguard

lives of travelers by keeping snow off slick roads and decrease

the cost of snow removal at the same time.We can keep snow

from covering livestock’s feed. We can distribute snow evenly

across cropland fields, making it available to replenish depleted

soil moisture with the spring thaw.

What we have are choices! We can wait, do nothing, and

complain about nature’s fury or we can plan for the future and

plant wind and snow barriers to make life safer and more comfortable. If we wait, we will certainly have to pay the price of

lost lives, income, time and resources. If we plant the proper

trees and shrubs now, many of the trees will be large enough to

be functiional in five to ten years.

Some states have already initiated programs to manage

wind-driven snow. You will read about some of them in this

newsletter. Special praise is due the state of Colorado for their

15-year living snowfence program. Wyoming, Idaho, Kansas,

Nebraska, and Oklahoma have planted snowfences, but have

much yet to do. South Dakota, North Dakota, and Minnesota

have begun new, ambitious windbreak snow management programs that will certainly benefit their states if they continue at

the present pace. Several other states are just beginning to consider the advantages of tree buffers to manage snow.

We, at the Center, certainly encourage you to contact your

State Department of Transportation, wildlife agency, forestry

agency, conservation district, and other applicable resource management agencies to form an initiative to buffer snow. As so well

stated in the past...the best time to plant a tree is yesterday, the

next best time is today! So, begin planning, designing, and planting windbreaks, living snowfences, and outdoor living barns to

soften the effects of the blizzard of 2007.

A commentary on the status of agroforestry

as reported by Co-Interim Program Manager, Jerry Bratton

Plan for the Blizzard of 2007!

When you hear someone talk about

large drifts of snow, often times the first

mental images that come to mind are

blocked roads, school closings, or livestock losses. However, with a little planning, snow drifts can be turned into a

valuable water resource. In fact, several

researchers have studied ways to “capture” snow using windbreaks, tall grass

barriers, and/or annual crop barriers.

Thousands of excavated ponds, sometimes called “dugouts,” are used for livestock water across the rangelands of the

Great Plains. Are we making the most use

of all the water resources available? 

In the early 1980’s, Robert Jairell and

Ron Tabler with the USDA Forest Service

in Laramie, Wyoming, used scale models

to simulate snow drift patterns around

excavated livestock ponds. These ponds

normally have excavated material piled

adjacent to it. According to Jairell and

Tabler’s research, when the embankments

are on the windward side of the pond, little snow accumulates in the pond. But,

with the embankment on the downwind

side of the pond, the pond fills with snow.

Snow accumulation was then maximized

by placing a snowfence on the windward

side of a pond with a downwind embankment. The research experiment used a

wooden snowfence design, but similar

results could be achieved with a living

snowfence using shrubs or trees with

about a 50 percent density. For ponds

with embankments on the windward side,

they were able to induce more snow drift

into the pond by placing a snowfence on

top of the embankment. Although they

used a wooden snowfence in that example, too, a living snowfence of shrubs or

even stiff grasses on the windward spoil

bank would probably have similar results.

This data illustrates to us that snow in

the wrong place can be a hazaard and a

nuisance, but snow in the right place

becomes a resource.

Adapted from: “Model Studies of Snowdrifts

Formed by Livestock Shelters and Pond

Embankments” by David L. Sturges and

Ronald D. Tabler.

Making the Most Out of Snow Drifts
Inside Agroforestry 3

Windbreaks, Snow, and Water

Everyone knows about the ability of a

windbreak to prevent wind erosion and

slow down wind speeds. Often overlooked is the ability of a windbreak system to harvest snow. In the Great Plains,

where snow fall can equal 30 percent of

the total precipitation for the year, harvested snow is valuable. Many parts of

the Great Plains and Prairie Provinces

receive only 10 to 16 inches of precipitation per year. Whether the crop receives

the full precipitation amount or is three to

five inches short is the difference between

a success and failure.

According to a 1989 Canadian study,

“a section of land protected by shelterbelts had 29 percent more water in the

form of snow than did a section of land

without windbreak protection. The shelterbelts reduced ground drifting, trapped

snow and therefore reduced atmospheric

losses. The water conserved in the sheltered section is an important factor of

higher yields found on sheltered land.”

After nearly a decade of study,

researchers at the Agricultural Research

Station at Mandan, North Dakota have

shown that harvesting an additional foot

of snow is often equivalent to an additional inch of water that can translate to an

additional five bushels of wheat per acre.

When wheat yields only run 20 to 25

bushels per acre normally, five more is a

pretty good increase.

Many times conservationists hear the

negative aspects of field windbreak systems. One commonly voiced complaint in

the northern Great Plains is the delay in

spring field work caused by the snow drift

on the leeward side of the windbreak.

After the winter of 1996-97, conservation

district staff reported snow drifts were

still present in June in some locations.

Over the years conservationists and farmers have elected to prune or thin windbreaks to allow more uniform distribution

of snow and earlier spring field work.

Pruning and thinning windbreaks can

effectively spread snow, thus reducing the

delay in planting the area covered by a

“Trees have the ability 

to create a microclimate 

that is beneficial to crops 

that cannot be created 

by artificial snowfences.”

——Craig Stange

by Craig Stange, State Staff Forester, USDA NRCS, Bismarck, North Dakota

snow drift. The spreading of snow, however, is not without its cost. Studies in

1985 and 1986 from Canada indicated

that even when soil moisture is not limited, crop yields still increased when protected by a windbreak. In this study the

fields being studied were protected by a

double row Colorado spruce windbreak.

Researchers surmise that the yield

increase on durum wheat was due to less

evaporation from the windbreak slowing

the wind.

A companion study conducted at the

same time in the same area, using slatted

snowfences, did not show the same yield

increase. Trees have the ability to create a

microclimate that is beneficial to crops

that cannot be created by artificial

snowfences.

Just how effective are windbreaks in

harvesting snow and affecting crop

yields? Wayne Carter, a farmer in western

North Dakota, states that his neighbor is

not happy that Wayne planted a field

windbreak 20 years ago. Wayne’s windbreak now stops the snow from blowing

across the road onto the neightbor’s alfalfa field. The neighbor knew that the

increased snow improved the alfalfa

yeilds and prevented winter injury to the

alfalfa crowns. In some cases, maybe,

windbreaks can work too well!

How can producers maximize the benefits and minimize the negatives of field

windbreaks? The answer lies in applying

a systems approach. As Grandma always

said, “don’t put all of your eggs in one

basket.”

Crops respond best, during the growing season, to the protection provided by

very dense windbreaks. Yet, dense windbreaks often create deep snow drifts

delaying field work. Ways to minimize

negative aspects of deep snow drifts are:

• Leave stubble stand over winter areas

upwind of the windbreak.

• If field management requires some

tillage, leave three to four feet wide strips

of standing stubble between each tillage

pass. Field observations indicate that this

method can effectively spread snow

across the field to the depth of the stubble.

• If necessary, based on the upwind

(See Water on page 6)

A windbreak across a large field distributes snow throughout the field, providing winter protection and moisture for crop production.
Spotlight On Success North Dakota

4 Inside Agroforestry

Four-Generation-Old Windbreaks Protect Cattle from

Winter Stress and Death

in 1976 which trap the bulk of the snow and distribute it over the

land. That winter, there was 15 inches of snow collected evenly

for 150 feet downwind of the secondary windbreak. 

The primary windbreak (nine rows) catches the remaining

snow and provides wind and thermal protection to the farmstead,

benefiting the livestock and the Kadrmas family.

“The hay stacks were not snowed in, the lots were not full of

snow, and there was easy access around the yard,” Gordon said.

Gordon believes he saved a considerable amount of fuel and

stress, compared to his neighbors, in digging out last winter. He

had to feed a lot of hay, but he used considerably less feed than

producers without adequate wind protection.

“During one of the very windy days with gusts to 60 mph,

cows were standing in the lots just chewing their cud with a light

dusting of snow falling on their backs,” Gordon said. “The deer

and pheasants enjoyed the wind and snow protection also. They

were around all winter. It was a win-win situation for anyone or

anything trying to survive the North Dakota outdoors.”

The spring and summer that followed the difficult storms,

brought about a drought. With this drought, Gordon noticed

another benefit of his windbreaks. 

“The only green grass was in those areas where the trees and

shrubs had trapped snow.”

Even a year later, Gordon is realizing the benefits of protecting his cattle from the harsh winter winds and snow.

“Most producers are experiencing conception problems this

year, due to the stress that their surviving cows went through last

winter,” Gordon said. “I had no problems breeding my cattle that

were sheltered.” 

Gordon believes that it is time to promote tree planting, not

only to landowners, but to the natural resource professionals who

educate them.

“Farmers need to establish livestock belts in their pastures to

provide protection to yearlings in the early spring,” Gordon said.

“Conservation districts need to push the value of trees while the

memory of last winter is still fresh in people’s minds.”

He stressed that it is critical to put windbreaks in the correct

spot. If positioned improperly, they can create a very severe

problem. Also, he reminds landowners to use a variety of tree

species to protect against losing an entire shelterbelt to disease or

insects.

An additional benefit of windbreaks is the monetary value

added to the property. “Properties with trees are worth more than

properties without,” Gordon said. “Farmsteads with trees sell

faster than those without.”

The Kadrmas farm had a rough winter, but because of the

windbreaks, the winter weather was easier to deal with and benefited the operation tremendously.

“It is never too late to plant trees,” Gordon said. “It is because

of the unselfish efforts of the people before us that we have the

wind protection now.”

It appears that Gordon Kadrmas’ grandfather was not only a

successful cattle producer, but was also quite a weather forecaster. He may not have actually predicted the early April blizzard

that hit North Dakota last winter, but by planting trees on his

land, he saved his grandson from losing even a single head of

livestock.

The first trees on the farm were planted by Gordon’s grandmother and grandfather when they homesteaded the place. His

father planted more trees when he took over, in particular adding

some field windbreaks. Gordon planted several more windbreaks

when he bought the farm in 1970. His daughter has since planted

several additional rows and has helped to install a drip irrigation

system.

“Each generation plants for someone else,” Gordon said. “If it

hadn’t been for my father’s and grandfather’s insight to plant

trees many years ago, I wouldn’t be enjoying the benefits today.”

These benefits were demonstrated last April when a two-day

blizzard hit the north central United States. According to the

North Dakota Agricultural Statistics, the winter of 1996-97 was

more severe and untimely for the livestock industry than at any

other time on record. Cattle death losses were accessed at 100

percent above normal. Some producers lost 40-60 percent of their

herd. In the entire state of North Dakota, 6,000-9,000 head of

livestock perished, effecting a $33 million loss to the livestock

industry.

Gordon’s operation includes 125 stock cows and 50 yearlings.

All were outside during the entire winter, except for a few days

when the cows were actually calving. Within a day or two after

each cow had her calf, they both went back outside since there

wasn’t enough barn space. When the blizzard struck, he was in

the midst of calving and lost no cows or calves.

The Kadrmas family planted secondary tree belts (four rows)

Protecting livestock from cold winds can reduce feed requirements

and improve profitability. And, in some cases, windbreaks can make

the difference between cattle living through a storm or dying.
Inside Agroforestry 5

Windbreaks have been a key agroforestry practice for at least

the past 100 years in the United States, and continue to be probably the most widely used agroforestry practice. Windbreaks have

a long history. Hedges were used in Europe as far back as the

English Tudors in the 1600’s. 

How widespread have windbreaks been applied in the United

States? According to the 1992 USDA Natural Resources

Conservation Service (NRCS) National Resources Inventory

(NRI), windbreaks comprise a substantial resource, being identified in 41 of the 50 states. From protecting blueberries in Maine

to controlling drifting sand in California, and from protecting

grain crops in North Dakota and Minnesota to providing cover

for wildlife in New Mexico and the Texas panhandle, windbreaks provide many benefits. The tree species used are as

diverse as the geographic regions from alder protecting orchards

in New York to ponderosa pine protecting livestock in Nebraska

to Rocky Mountain juniper stopping snow in Colorado and

Wyoming to ‘Tropic Coral’ protecting flower crops in Hawaii. A

person traveling across the country can find a use for a windbreak in just about every state. The region with the least number

of windbreaks is the Southeast probably due to the abundance of

forest land. Even in the Southeast, however, there are opportunities for windbreaks such as crop protection on sandy soils. 

Windbreaks have traditionally been used to protect soil,

plants, animals, and people from adverse winds. The term windbreak is often used interchangeably with shelterbelt. The NRCS

considers a windbreak/shelterbelt to be a linear planting of trees

or shrubs established for environmental purposes. These types of

tree and shrub plantings are used to meet a variety of purposes

including reducing wind erosion, protecting growing plants,

managing snow, providing shelter for structures and livestock,

providing wildlife habitat, providing a tree or shrub product, providing living screens, improving aesthetics, and improving irrigation efficiency. The most commonly planted windbreak types

include farmstead windbreaks and field windbreaks.

Landowners recognize the values of farmstead windbreaks.

In fact, it is usually the first windbreak planting opportunity for

most farmers or ranchers. A farmstead windbreak provides a

number of benefits to the owner. Some of these benefits can be

easily translated into dollars such as a 10 to 30 percent reduction

in energy costs, increased property values, reduced snow

removal, lower feed costs for livestock, or less physical wind

damage to buildings. Other benefits are less tangible including

reducing noise, improving animal health, screening unsightly

areas, and improving working conditions. In a North Dakota subWindbreaks for all Seasons and Reasons

division, windbreaks were planted around two to three acre lots

before the first lot was sold. The subsequent selling prices were

higher than those in adjoining subdivisions without trees.

Field windbreaks can provide wind protection and other

microclimatic changes to adjacent fields resulting in improved

crop quality and quantity. They can also serve as buffer strips to

help improve water quality and add wildlife habitat. Field windbreaks provide a variety of benefits to adjoining fields and crops

including increasing crop production from 6 to 44 percent,

reducing wind erosion from 50 to 100 percent, improving irrigation efficiency, and managing the moisture from snow more

effectively. Field windbreaks have changed significantly from

the ten row windbreaks of the 1930’s to narrow one and two row

windbreaks of today. 

What does the future hold for this “old” agroforestry practice? Nationwide we have seen a gradual decline in the number

of windbreaks planted and the condition of those remaining. The

NRI shows about a four percent decline for field windbreaks and

about a two percent loss for farmstead windbreaks. A survey of

the key windbreak states in the Great Plains also showed that 60

to 80 percent need some type of renovation. This renovation may

be as simple as removing sod from the windbreak, to releasing

the trees by thinning, to total removal and replacement. A person

may wonder why this decline is occurring. There are no easy

answers but a large percentage of the existing windbreaks are

over 60 years old and reaching the end of their natural life.

Other reasons include changes in agricultural production methods such as larger equipment leading to larger fields and greater

use of herbicides which can be detrimental to the adjoining

windbreaks. 

The positive windbreak benefits far outweigh the negatives.

Windbreaks can increase “profits” for clients and society, reduce

resource problems and costs, create biodiverse habitats for

humans and wildlife, and enhance local ecosystems. 

According to the 1992 USDA

Natural Resources Conservation Service 

(NRCS) National Resources Inventory (NRI), 

windbreaks comprise a substantial resource, 

being identified in 41 of the 50 states.
6 Inside Agroforestry

(Colorado from page 1) (Water from page 3)

federal government, state government,

local governments, private organizations,

special purpose districts, private landowners, and private industry.

• The program does not “belong” to any 

one agency or entity. It is a statewide

partnership where everyone involved 

contributes to a commom fund to get 

individual plantings established and 

maintained.

• Individual plantings originate at the 

local level. Resource needs are determined by mutual agreement and contributions solicited to meet these needs.

Comparative Costs

• Service life of LSF’s is estimated at 50

to 75 years.

• Service life of the commonly-used slat 

snowfences is five to seven years.

• Over a 50-year period, installation and 

maintenance cost of slat snowfences is 

estimated to be four times more than for a

two-row living fence.

• LSF is more efficient in capturing 

snow, thus snow removal costs will be 

reduced with living snowfences.

Program Needs

• Increased funding.

• Increased number of partners.

• Increased pooling of resources through

partnerships is needed to accelerate numbers of new plantings established annually

and to maintain these plantings.

• Estimated snowfence needs for state 

and country roads is between 1,500-2,000

miles. At the current planting rates, it will

take approximately 360 years to meet projected needs.

It’s never too late to start a cooperative

effort like this in your own state. If you

have questions or would like further information, contact John S. Berst, State

Living Snowfence Coordinator, with the

Colorado Department of Natural

Resources, State Soil Conservation Board

at 303-866-5895.

unprotected area, install a series of field

windbreaks.

• If lack of residue or local conditions do

not allow for standing stubble, install tall

wheat grass barriers or densely seeded

double corn rows between windbreaks to

better harvest the snow.

• Encourage neighbors to become a part

of the snow harvesting system so that several sections of snow do not have to be

stored behind just a few field windbreaks.

• If large snow drifts are still a problem,

plant a deep-rooted perennial such as

alfalfa in the first 50 feet downwind of the

windbreak. The area won’t need to be

worked when it’s wet. The alfalfa can

compensate for any nitrogen leached from

the soil profile. It will also protect the soil

from spring runoff. Most importantly,

alfalfa can effectively use any additional

available water to produce higher yields.

Quality alfalfa almost always has a buyer.

In many parts of our country, cattle

must fend for themselves with the “sky

overhead” as their barn roof. Even with

adequate feed stocks, livestock must be

protected from severe winter winds.

No where was this more evident than

during the April blizzard that struck North

and South Dakota and western Minnesota

in 1997. Tens of thousands of cattle were

lost in that one storm. The cattle that survived were either in barns or protected by

very extensive windbreak systems. That

storm was one of the worst for animals. It

started with a cold wet rain, turned to

freezing rain and sleet and within 24

hours the temperatures had dropped to 20

below zero with gale force winds.

Those windbreak systems that were

wide enough and dense enough still provided the protection the livestock needed.

The cattle with wet coats, protected by

extensive windbreak systems didn’t chill

as severely as those exposed to the full

force of the wind. “Normal” sized windbreaks had filled with snow early in the

season and were providing little protection by the time of the April storm.

Strategically placed windbreaks, when

part of a complete conservation system,

can effectively increase livestock survival, weight gain, crop yields, and accessibility of local citizens. These benefits

are available to all because windbreaks

can effectively reduce wind speeds and

control where the snow will be deposited.

Agroforestry:

Integrating

Conservation, Crops,

Livestock, and Trees 

in the Pacific Northwest

May 12 & 13, 1998, 

Richland, Washington

May 14 & 15, 1998, 

Portland, Oregon

One day of each workshop will be

spent indoors learning about new

windbreak designs and establishment,

riparian buffer technology, silvopasture systems, and hybird poplar applications for buffers and wastewater

treatment. Speakers will include a

wide array of university, federal

agency, state agency, and private

industry individuals, as well as private

landowners which will all address the

applicability, markets, benefits, and

risks of agroforestry in the Pacific

Northwest (PNW). 

The second day will be spent in the

field looking at agroforestry plantings

in the area. Field trips will feature

hybrid poplar, wastewater treatment,

riparian buffers, alley cropping, and

silvopasture systems.

For more information, contact: 

• Gary Kuhn, NAC Western 

Representative, 206-616-7166 

• Beverly Gonyea, U. of Washington

Conference Coord., 206-543-0867 

• Don Hanley, Washington State U. 

Extension Forester, 206-685-4960

Sponsored by: 

National Agroforestry Center • NRCS

• USFS Region 6 • Washington 

State University • University 

of Washington • CH2M Hill • 

Association for Temperate 

Agroforestry • 

Oregon State 

University, 

Cooperative 

Extension 

The “Journal of Forestry” is accepting

scholarly papers on agroforestry 

for consideration for the 

November, 1998 issue. 

For deadlines and guidelines, 

contact, Jeff Goell, SAF, at 

301-897-8720, ext. 130; 

e-mail goellj@safnet.org
Inside Agroforestry 7

(Wind from page 1)

System were blocked on seven occasions for a total of two to

three weeks. Ryen said that the windbreaks provided “an oasis of

clear road in the midst of blinding ground blizzards,” even when

the trees were as far back as 3/8 to 1/2 mile from the road. Ryen

added, “It was obvious when one drove out from behind the

windbreaks -- because it was impossible to see the road.”

Just east of Bismarck are two interchanges that remained open

all of last winter. Ryen said, “Only normal snow plowing was

needed to get a clear road surface.” In both cases, just northwest

of the interchange was a quarter section of cropland that was protected with a series of single-row field windbreaks oriented in a

north-south direction. Any drifts created by the trees were

deposited in the fields where they caused no problems for the

roads.

There are proven techniques for controlling blowing and drifting snow but application is often limited because of the problems

associated with obtaining the necessary right-of-way or easements from adjacent property owners. There are, however, compelling arguments for looking beyond the limits of right-of-way

and creating win-win partnerships. For example, consider some

of the advantages of living snowfences; most site establishment

and maintenance costs are much less than structural fences with a

life span of 50 years compared to 20 years for a structural fence

and sites can be designed for wildlife habitat and livestock protection. They are more aesthetically pleasing and can serve as

visual screens. Living snowfences can also be designed to conserve energy for farmsteads and communities or to function as a

windbreak to reduce soil erosion and increase crop yields.

Compare these to the advantages of conventional slatted

snowfences or structural fences which include: their short-term

preparation of being erected and used very quickly, ability to be

used on sites where vegetation is not practical, and the fact that

the density is fixed and known. 

In the words of George F. Welk, Area Maintenance Engineer

for the Minnesota Department of Transportation “With the magnitude of problems that were experienced in the past across the

Great Plains, isn’t it time to reduce the impacts that drive the cost

of government higher? Would it seem appropriate for institutions

of higher learning to include courses in the discipline of snow

control? After all, no one would ever build a new road without

culverts and then examine the need for drainage after experiencing a heavy rain storm and then react to it by placing drains. Why

does this happen with snow? Are there other ways? It’s time to

give this serious thought.”

Adapted from: “Commentary on Snow Control” by George F. Welk, PE, “Snow

Control Challenges and Opportunites Across the Minnesota Landscape” by Dan

Gullickson, Minnesota Department of Transportation Forester, and “Living

Snowfences Fact Sheet” by Mike Majeski.

Height and Density of a Living

Snowfence or Windbreak Will

Determine How Much Snow

Can Be Stored in the System

From: “Windbreaks for Snow Management” by James R. Brandle and H.

Doak Nickerson, University of Nebraska. 

Ryen said that the windbreaks provided 

“an oasis of clear road in the midst 

of blinding ground blizzards...

It was obvious when one drove out 

from behind the windbreaks -- 

it was impossible to see the road.”

Height (H) equals the height of the snowfence or windbreak. Both height and density affect the amount of snow

stored and the area in which it is deposited. Return to the

diagram example to compare actual differences in snow

storage.
Upcoming Events We Need Your Help...

May 12-13 and 14-15, 1998

Agroforestry: Integrating Conservation,

Crops, Livestock, and Trees in the 

Pacific Northwest, (12-13) Richland, 

WA and (14-15) Portland, OR. Contact 

Gary Kuhn, 206-616-7166.

October 4-7, 1998

North American Conference on 

Enterprise Development Through 

Agroforestry: Farming the Forest & 

Agroforest for Specialty Products, 

Inside Agroforestry is published quarterly by the

National Agroforestry Center. Phone: 402-437-

5178; Fax: 402-437-5712.

Michele Schoeneberger, Research Program 

Leader and Soil Scientist, ext. 21

Jerry Bratton, FS Lead Agroforester, ext. 24

Bruce Wight, NRCS Lead Agroforester, ext. 36

Kim Isaacson, IA Editor, Technology Transfer 

Specialist, ext. 13

Clover Shelton, Technology Transfer Assistant, 

ext. 14

Jim Robinson, NRCS Agroforester located at Fort 

Worth, TX; phone: 817-334-5232, ext. 3624

Gary Kuhn, NRCS Agroforester located at Seattle,

WA; phone: 206-616-7166

Web Site: http://www.unl.edu/nac

Mission

The National Agroforestry Center (NAC) is a partnership of the USDA Forest Service and

the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.The Center’s purpose is to accelerate the

development and application of agroforestry technologies to attain more economically, environmentally, and socially sustainable land-use systems. To accomplish its mission, the Center interacts with a national network of partners and cooperators to conduct research, develop technologies and tools, establish demonstrations, and provide useful information to natural resource professionals.

USDA policy prohibits discrimination because of race, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, or handicapping condition.

Any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against in any USDA-related activity should immediately contact the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250.

Minneapolis, MN. Contact, Scott 

Josiah, 612-624-7418.

June 22-23, 1998

Windbreak Renovation Workshop,

North Platte, NE. Contact, Jon Wilson, 

308-532-3611.

June 23-26, 1998

Plains & Prairie Forestry 

Association Annual Meeting, North 

Platte, NE. Contact, Dennis Adams, 

402-472-5822.

Thank you for your help...our mailing list

has been updated. To ensure that our list

is correct and that our Inside Agroforestry

and Agroforestry Note mailings reach you

in a timely manner, take a moment to

look at the address printed below to be

sure it is correct. If not, please fax your

correction to 402-437-5712.We hope that

you enjoy Inside Agroforestry and

Agroforestry Notes.

Opinions expressed in Inside Agroforestry are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the policy of the USDA Forest Service and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.