LOUISIANA MID-CYCLE SURVEY SHOWS CHANGE IN FOREST RESOURCE TRENDS 

Charles Em Thomas and Carl V. By1 in 

ABOUT THIS SURVEY 

Because costs of doing surveys are 

escalating rapidly, and both dollars and 

manpower are scarce resources, a lowi ntensi ty survey for the mid-cycle inventory may be the answer to timely monitori ng of State resource trends. 

Forest surveys have been conducted in 

the South since the early 1930s. This 

activity , authorized by the McSweeneyMcNary Research Act of 1928, was directed 

to gather and keep current authoritative 

data on the extent, character, condition, 

" and use of the Nation's forest resources. 

The first survey of Louisiana began 

in 1934 when foresters and timber estimators systematical ly cruised the whole 

forest area, They ran parallel compass 

1 i nes 10 mi les apart across the State, 

and along these lines examined about 

35,000 sample plots. These samples represented a satisfactory sample for the 

enti re state, 

To make the information more specific 

to areas within the state, survey units 

were established to be relatively homogeneous as to forest, economic, and industrial conditions, 

The Delta units consist of alluvial 

bottom lands of the Mississippi River, 

where forests are almost exclusively 

hardwoods and cypress. The three others, 

the Southeast, Southwest, Northwest 

units, are largely coastal flatwoods and 

rolling uplands where forests are generally pine. 

The cycle of Louisiana surveys, except for the period 1935-54, has been 

about 10 years. With reduced personnel 

and tight travel budgets, survey cycles 

are 1 i kely to become longer, not shorter. 

On the other hand, we are trying new 

procedures to gai n more frequent i nformation on forest resource trends. These 

new surveys won't replace full-scale inventories, but they will enable more 

frequent estimates at roughly one-tenth 

the cost of regular surveys. This 1980 

mi d-cycl e survey was conducted joi ntly by 

the Louisiana Office of Forestry, the 

National Forestry Appl i cations Laboratory, and the Renewable Resources Evaluation unit at the Southern Forest Experiment Station. 

To conduct the survey with minimal 

resources and in a short time, a new 

sampling procedure was used for ground 

plots, Basically, a sub-set of the regular survey sample plots was selected for 

re-measurement accordi ng to thei r volume 

in the 1974 inventory. About 220 plots 

were re-measured by survey crews and 

Louisiana Office of Forestry personnel, 

Area was determined by photointerpretation of optical bar photography 

at the Forestry Appl ications Laboratory. 

The Office of Forestry supplied vehicles 

and the Louisiana Department sf Natural 

Resources provided money to conduct the 

survey. 

The survey was designed to achieve 

reasonable results on a broad scale, 

Estimates for area and inventory volume 

are the most reliable. Estimates for 

Parishes must be used cautiously. Because 

growth and removals amount to only 5 to 

10 percent of the inventory, the reliability of these estimates is correspondingly low. Removals estimates for limited areas may be better approached through 

the use of severance tax information, 

These hybrid surveys offer today's 

best insight i nto resource trends between 

major surveys. The verification of 

trends will come when the next full-scale 

survey of the State is completed, sometime in the mid-1980~~ 

PAST RESOURCE TRENDS 

At the timeof the first survey, 

Louisiana was 56 percent forested. About 

one-fifth of the forests were old growth. 

Charles E. Thomas is Research Forester, Carl V. By1 in is Forester, Southern Forest 

Experiment Station, Forest Service--USDA, New Orleans, La. 70113. 
Louisiana had 7,6 mi 11 ion acres of 

bottom-land hardwoods, more than any 

other state in the South, In the 1953-54 

survey, total forest area was about the 

same, but softwood acreage was up 2 

percent and hardwood acreage was down 4 

percent. Growi ng stock i ncreased, 

By 1964, total forest land in 

Louisiana had changed very little, but 

sizable shifts were reported among resource regions, The Delta continued to 

decline while other units grew in forest 

acreage. Softwood inventories were up 43 

percent over 1954 while hardwood volume 

fe1 1 20 percent. 

The latest full survey of Louisiana 

was in 1974, Forest area had declined 9 

percent since 1964, and totaled 14.5 

mil lion acres, Softwood growing stock at 

9 bi 11 ion cubic feet showed an increase 

in 1974 of 31 percent over 1964, Loss of 

hardwood forests in the Delta was largely 

responsible for a 7-percent decl i ne in 

hardood inventory, Gommerci a1 forest 

area declined in a11 regions, but especially in the northern part of the Delta, 

Loui siana Mi d-cycl e Survey Shows Change 

- - 

Louisiana's forests show a 1-percent 

decrease in inventory volume since 1974, 

and almost a 4-percent decl in@ in area, 

These new estimates are based on a lowintensity sample designed to produce re1 iable results for the State. 

The mi d-cycl e survey of Louisiana 

shows a decline in volume but some easing 

in the clearing of bottomland hardwood 

forests, Overall, the growing stock inventory decreased about 1 percent since 

1974, Har&ood inventories fell 8 percent; softwood rose 4 percent, Two units 

showed a loss in volume. The Delta 

declined because of extensive losses in 

hardwood forests (Table I). In the 

Northwest, both pine and hardwood volumes 

fell, Roughly 460 thousand acres in the 

Delta region changed from commercial forest land to other land uses, 

The primary objective of the midcycle survey was to assess trends in 

softwoods in the southeast, southwest and 

northwest units of the State, These 

units contain the vast majority of the 

oftwood resource in the state, In the 

Southeast, forest area decl ined about 6 

percent, but pine inventories gained substantial lye In southwest Louisiana there 

was a slight increase in forest area and 

substantial gains in softwood inventory, 

In the Northwest, heavy cutting sf softwood growing stock has reduced supplies 

10 percent, 

The 31 parishes (figure 1) in these 

units reflected a decline of less than 1 

percent 5n forest area since the 1974 

survey. The inventoky is still expanding, but at a slower rate, There was a 4 

percenL increase in softwood growing 

stock ir the past 6 years versus a 31 

percent increase in the preceding 10 

years, Softwood sawtimber volume conti nued to accumulate in the 31 parishes with 

a 17 percent increase since 1974 compared 

to a 29 percent accrual for the 10 years 

prior to 1974, 

The mid-cycle survey indicated a 

slight decline in the net annual growth 

on softwood growing stock. There were 

487.8 mi 11 ion cubic feet per year added 

Ta bl e I. Louisiana ?fin-cycle forest resource estimates 

M acrea P~rcent :.l;vi $e3 Percent MV fd3 Percent 

Delta 3232.1 - 12 1191.2 + 2 3132.4 - 8 

Southwest 4573.2 + 1 3824-0 +15 1443,8 -12 

Southeast 1679.3 - 6 1378-8 +16 717,2 - 2 

Northwest 4444.4 --- 2997.8 -10 1785.0 -5 

Tot a 1 13989.0 - 4 9391.8 + 3 7078,4 - 8 
to the inventory while in 1974 the comparable figure showed 567.5 million. 

This finding tends to confi rm the dec1 i ni ng rate of accumul ation of growing 

stock (Table 25). 

Net annual growth rate of softwood 

sawtimber a1 so decl i ned from the 1974 

survey rate, In 1974, growth was reported to be 2469 million board feet. 1/ 

Since then the sawtirnber growth has averaged 1971 mi 1 lion board feetiyear, The 

decline portends future slowing in the 

accumulation of sawtimber similar to the 

one currently apparent in growing stocks 

(Table 26). On the whole, the report 

confirms the trends observed in the 1974 

Louisiana survey. Land continues to be 

diverted to other uses, though not as 

rapidly as in the past. The volume of 

softwood timber in the state continues a 

healthy accumulation, however the rate 

has slowed, A continuation of current 

harvest rate could soon show actual declines in inventories. Current economic 

conditions may re1 ieve some of the pressure on softwood sawtimber stocks and 

allow a recovery of this softwood resource. 

FOREST STATISTICS FOR LOUISIANA PARISHES 

Information in these tables was derived from a 1980 midcyde inventory sf 

the State of Loujsiana, Estimates of 

acreage, growl ng stock volume, growth, 

removals and mortality were made for a1 l 

parishes, Tables 3, IQ, 25, 27, and 29 

present these individual Parish statistics, 

The last complete survey of Louisiana 

was published in 1974, In table 2, 

changes between the two surveys are sumnarized in terms of current measurement 

standards, Some columns and rows may not 

sum exactly, but a1 1 totals have been 

cheeked to be within rounding error 

1 hits for the subunits, 

A more detailed breakdown of inventory is rep~rted for Parishes in Southeast, Southwest and Northwest Louisiana 

(Units 3, 4, 5). Data for forest acreage 

e: 

i n these units were obtained from high ! 

# 

a1 titude photography taken especially for 

the midcycle survey. Standard RRE sample j 

locations were photo-interpreted using @ 

8 

this photography. A 10 percent subsample of the forested locations was I 

I 

drawn with probabi 1 i ty proportional to 

the 1974 inventory volumes, I 

At each location 10 sample points 

were remeasured using a 37.5 BAF prism. 

Three of the 10 points also have 1/300 ! 

acre fixed area samples. The sampling I methods are those used in the most recent 

complete inventory of the State of 

Loui si ana, 

For convenience, the tables in this 

report correspond to those used in the 

1974 "Forest Statistics for Louisiana 

Parishes", RB-SO-52. Some tables however, were excluded for various reasons, 

Table 4 was omitted because ownership was 

not resurveyed. Insufficient data 

limited the reliability of Tables 12, 24, 

31, & 32; so they were not included. 

Tab1 e 9 is excluded because it can be 

obtained by converting cubic feet (Table 

10) to cords. Appropriate factors can be 

derived from the 1974 report state totabs, 

The sampling methods were developed 

to provide suitable unit estimates, 

Estimates for smaller areas are presented, but sampling error increases as 

the area considered decreases, Sampling 

errors given in table 1 are based on one 

standard deviation or a probability sf 

two chances out of three, To estimate 

the sampling error for a combination of 

parishes one can use the following: 

where: 

SE = Sampling error 

X = variable of interest (area, 

volume) 

G = group of counties tc be 

cornbi ned 

Y = total for the uult 

DEFINITIONS OF TERMS 

.--Growing-stock 

species that neet 

specified standards of size and quality 

but do not qualify as desirable trees. 

.--Forest l and 

Pr producing crops of withdrawn from 

timber utj7 ization, 

Be trees,--Growing-stock trees 

commercial species, have no 

defects in quality for tiinber products, 

are of relatively high vigor, and contain 

no pathhogens that inay result in death or 

serious deteri oratjo~ before rotation 

aae, 4 - 

Forest type.--A classification of 

d upon the species forming a plurality of i ive-tree stocking. 

Growi ng-stock trees.--Li ve trees that 

are of commerc~ai species and qualify as 

desi rabl e or aceeptabl e trees, 

Growing-stock volume.--Net volume in 

cubic feet -stock trees at 

least 5,0 inches in diameter at breast 

height, from a 1-foot stuap to a 

mi nimurn 4,0-inch top biam2ter outside 

bark of the central stem, or to the point 

were the central stem breaks into limbs, - Noncomnlerii a! speci es. -- ! ree spec3 es 

of typically %ma! i size, poor form, or 

i nf&\or 4ual-i ty which normal iy do not 

develop into trees saitaale for "idustrial wood productsa 

-4 c l assj fj caccopdiny to its 

suitability for growing certain specjes 

groups--pi ne, up1 and hardwood, or bottom1 and hardwood, 

Pol etimber trees,--Growi ng-stock 

dre pecies at least 5,0 

inches in diameter at breast height, but 

smaller than sawtimber size, 

Rotten trees, --li ve trees of comrnercia7 do not cantain at least 

one 82-foot saw log, now 0" prospective1 y , psimar% ly because sf rs$, 

--Live trees of commercia; % do not contain at least 

one 12-foot sa~ fog, now or prospectively, primarily because sf roughness or 

poor form. (includes all l ive trees of 

nonco~nmerciai species. ) 

wtimber trees,--Ll ve trees that 

a re pecles, csntaf n a% 

I east a 12-host saw log, and meek regional specifications for freedom from defect, Softwoods must be at least 9,C 

inches in diameter at breast height and 

hardwoods at least 11,O i nenes, 

==-Net volume of the 

-- cl assi fi cat1 on 

on the size G~~SS of 

grcwiog-stock trees on the area; that is, 

sawtirilber, poletimber, or sap1 i ng and 

seed! i ng, 

For more complete coverage of defini- 

%ions used in this report, see USCA 

Forest Servi ce 2esource BL:~ : eti n SO-53, 
Item SampS i ng error 

-- 

oerceni; 

Commercial forest land %,3 

Growing stock vojume 4,8 

5a;dt irnber vol urn@ 5,7 
lab1 e 3, Total Wea, i?om~eri?ial forest land$ ',in 19 1174 ax4 19RC, 

an; proportion owe total area $2 2980 

-___------.---- Commerci a1 forest 

Parish -------- 

- - - - - 'qoidgnfid acres - - - - - - - -Percent- - 

Beauregard 757,8 614.8 614.6 8 1 

Bienville 536,3 453,6 447,2 83 

Rossi er 556-8 368,5 374.7 6 7 

Caddo 

Ca 1 casi eu Gal &el 1 

Cameron 2 

Catahoul a 

Cl ai borne 

Goncordi a 

East Baton Rouge 302,1 186.4 108,3 3 6 

East Carroll 291.8 51.7 22,O 8 

East Fel i ci aria 290.6 162.8 112.7 39 

Evangel i ne 435-2 200.6 214.7 49 

Grant 335,8 355.4 371.7 85 

Iberia 

Ibervil le 

Jackson 373,1 336.6 351.8 9 4 

Jefferson 3 415.4 - - - - - - 

Jefferson Davi s 423,O 68,2 66-5 16 

Lafayette 2 

Lafou rche 

La Salle 

Li ncol n Livingston 

Macii son 

Morehouse 

Orleans 3 232.3 - - - - - - 
* d d = Table 3, 3tal avsa, cgWzrz-,cc fo*~s"; :ax+& &r 2P74 n,n? I'ii??, 

and prepc~tio~ sf cgtn7 gren <c 1980 (Continued) 

$7 aqueni res 2 ;i95,4 - - - - - - Poiate Csupee 376-3 ;54, 12",5 5 4 

Rapides 

Ped i?-i'-ser 

RI ch1 and 

SaSi ne 658,6 47 19-9 4.66-3 7 1 

SE, Bernard 3 527,1 - - - - - - S"t ,wales 278,7 75- E 70,s 26 

55 Pibe er~a 258,3 198, C 179,% 6 7 

St* -James 9Q5,13 85-5 89,J 48 

St, Jchn Sagtist 238,l 99-6 8 34 

S", ~aadrj 59&,4 220,3 173-5 29 

St, iddiart~n 514,6 305, F 234,6 46 

St, Mary 453,8 148, F 84,6 2 0 

S", T~arqaia PJ 738-6 378-2 328-2 B o 

'deeenS1ion 2 %i13,3 25,5 Z2,6 1 

Vernon $370~4 748, i: 186,2 Q A i; u 

washi ngtsc 425,6 298-9 259,g 6 1 

\*JeSs"cer n~l, 9 290, Q 269,9 6 7 

biest Bator Rouge 135, ; 62, G 62,6 4 6 

%est Carroll 227, :3 19-5 21, Fj 9 

Wzs: Fel j ci aria 292,6 163-6 129, e; 

bJj nn 6!0,6 545,2 545,2 ci i_i -------------------------.------- - ---.-- 
------ ---- r? - --- a- Z*P- 

?tip- ash- 

- - -- icy cress 1 ccttonwood -- ---- -- - --- 

East gatan Rouge 

East Fei iciana 

Evangel i he 

Jackson 

Jefferson Davi s 

Sabi ne 46 6,4 12,: 242,4 48,7 11". I. 18-1 - - St, Helena 179.2 - - li2,8 26,6 39,8 - - - - St, Tzmmany 328,3 98-5 72,2 1'2 --.-a* i A 33,4 105,i - - 
Tab1 e 6, Come~~"I&1 forest Ian,< hg stand-siza, 1980 

Beauregard 

Bienvi l 'le 

Bossier 

Caddo 

Gal casieu 

Gal dwell 

Cl ai borne 

East Baton Rouge 108.3 50.5 28.9 28.9 - - East Fe1 i ci ana 112.7 87.6 12.5 12.5 - - Evangel i ne 214.6 130.1 65.0 19.5 - - 

Grant 

Jackson 351.8 223.9 74.6 53.3 - - 

Jefferson Davi s 66,4 51,7 7.4 7.4 - - 

Rapides 555-0 277,5 98.3 161.9 17.3 

Red Ri ver 132,5 74-9 40,3 11.5 5.8 

Sa bi ne 466.4 272,2 121,l 72,7 - - St, Helena 179,2 106,"L 26.6 46.5 - - St, Tammany 328,3 177.3 78,8 52,s 19.7 

Vernon 7 86,8 336,3 180,2 258,3 12,O 

Total %0,696,2 5351862 2,62%,2 2,393,2 16?, 3 
nn a ZZ r-rr ma, c w -I.-1.a, 

nw a, r+ (23 

-. O n --'.OW 

2% z 5 Z%?L <V) cr' + w23- 

m orocl-m 7 OO 

2- 3 

LC.., $3 mmm ma, 7 truw -;hO 0, !acnw --t,x- 3 23rtC-b 

mcn rt u3 

7 0 m -nCJ w 3 dm su 0 A. 4 * 3 23 0 

a a, f.= 

131 6 

1. 3 0 ai r LO u3 

m 

)--"m N cn WNW 

mm P N *N*J NU1 a3 R3 PNOl 

MV N UlWW 

?-'f P ,NY? lvcn -4 caw- 
-PIP------ ----- - I liplana Bottomland 

Cadde 

Gal casf eik 

Czl dwel l 

Sl af aorne 

East Gato*~ Ro~ge 1198,3 35,% 3,"s 65,O 

East Fel icia~a lb2,7 87,6 6,3 18,R 

Evangel i fie 214,6 156, : - - 58,s 

3ac4ss~ 351-8 5;4,5 - - 37,3 

Cef ferson Davi s 56-4 43, @ - 22, 2 

2apjgbdes 555,6 570,G - - Lien 

185,O 

Fed River LSL, 5 i!73-7 - - 28,8 

Sa b~ we 465, t ~42,~ - - 24,2 

StI I-ie%er%s 179,2 ls2,tj - - 6,6 

St, lammany 328,3 22s- 3 - - $05, i 


Tab1 e 11, Sclwt<rnbsr stoluwe ort comereial forest land 7ig speciec: poup, 7$8,R 

--- *---------- --- r --T-------- --__LL_ -------- i 

Par-i si? species 1 Sof"t;wood 1 Hardwood I -l_l ------------- L--___ L ------

----- ---

Beauregard 

Bl'envl" 'I le 

Bossier 

Caddo 

@a1 casieu 

Call&ell 

Cl a i borne 

East Baton Rouge 

East Fel i ci ana 

Evangel i ne 

Grant 2645,6 2156-3 489.3 

Jack son 

Jef Ferson Davi s 

La Salle 

ii ncol n 

Li vi ngstor; 

Rapides 

Red Ri vetSabi ne 

St. Helena 

St. Tarnmany 

Tangi pahoa 1672.0 1129.8 542.2 

Union 2008.6 1376.0 632.6 

Vernon 3354.8 2832.4 522.4 

Washington 

Mebster 

Wi nn 

Total 51796.5 38837.7 12958.8 
East Ba?gn Rouge 36,7 - - - - 5,9 7,6 23-2 - - 

East Fel i ei ana 140,2 - - 8t?, 5 2C,3 P2,3 %5,2 - - Evangel "ine 201,8 14 6 128,1 43,8 5- 7 9,7 - - 

Grant ii.22,4 26-5 271,9 81, X 8,9 24-2 - - 

Rapides 38L 8 50-4 190,2 92-3 15,6 32,3 0,9 

Red River 49,1 - - 35-1. %0,4 8- 5 4,4 !Ie 7 

Sabi ne 483,7 3,6 335,3 25,3 49,3 lo, 4 - - St, Helena 158,6 - - 148,7 27,Q E3,0 *em - - 

St, Tammany 279,W %03,0 105,4 134 -a“.s 17,s 41,5 - - 
- - - -- ----- - - - TtKT(j-rj---r Ta j - 0a~- , Elmpar1 sh types slash j snortiezq ; ~ine : i~cnorj qcm- asn- I b~ne c;ne --- ..-----____--__..'------- k-- r1p.k ss ~t0n~oi4d -JL-l-LLp--.. 

Beau reg2 re 1G8, IL 3-5 13,8 10-9 9 1J9-4 

51envif 'ie 142, S 0-6 34, @ 40-3 25-2 4r), 2 - - 

BCSSIFPP 14i, e - - 3E, 5 37-7 18,2 38,7 i,7 

Caddo 139-6 - - l8,4 36-7 27,; 55,l 2,O 

Calcirs~eii 39-4 S,,9 0,s 9-5 $3-4 54,s 

Cal &el 1 117,3 - - 10-2 28,Q V', J I 6 - - 

Cl a i borne 147,s - - $0, ri 42,7 21-2 43-7 - - 

East Batan Rouge 52-8 - - - - 3,s Is,!? 34-3 - - East Fel iciana 65-7 - - P2* ! $2,3 16-9 22,4 - - Evangel i ne 92-3 O,% 94,G 26,C 13-6 37-8 - - 

Jack son $23,2 1,s 25,2 31,s 25,9 39-6 - - Jef Ferson Dak{i s 33-4 - - 5,8 d3,B 4-3 "1* 3 - - 

Ray i des 

Red R-i ver 

Sabi ne 

St, Helena 

St, Tarnnanj 

Union 
Cxg * 

U7 I 

I 

Cnfv 

. 

Cnh 

mu7 

r-4 

OW 

8. d-m 

h m 

wm 

4,. 

wc) 

NV-4 

a: la 

. . -3.- 

-3-cn 

M 

(r? 

e 

I m 

l(33 4 

-t m 

* * O1N 

Cncn ha3 

.F 0.J 

m 0 nJ v u -aru m C;) 13 

I I 

I I 

Lor. 

e. 

-.@.I mu? 

MCX 

. . 

am 

r--03 

ah 

11. 

w UJ ah 

AN 

r-4'43 

4;c'a; 

4 ul PJh 

I I I I 

ma 

0. 

mm 

a303 Ln 4 

4 

a - c F-- C 

a0 

-8 e F-- Kf mrOU 

I 

I 

c3 * 

V) 

w 

w 

0 

Tr) 

C-! 

w 

LI 

m 

U3 

U3 

. 

Cn 

4 

4 

I 

1 

m * m 

UJ 

N 

W? 

.C. 

2- 

L3 m 

t 

0 

V) 

L 

a, 

LC- 

'+- 

a, 

7 

WW *. 

V-4 "4m 

Lo-'+ *. 

QV;? 

ON 

M 

MCU 

0 

4 h 

Nd- 4 

UJM 

I (L 

Cna 

4c) 

07-4 

4 r. . 

i-. r. 

mcn 

a3 

r\. 

* C? I 

4 8 N 

d ol 

Gcn" 

Oh 

ON 

Cli 

C 

V) a, > 

(2, .r 

U N .C 

a-a 

cn at cx cT 

t 1 

I I 

'43 * I 

cO I u? 

s;r r-- 

. . =3-d 

@.I'43 

M 

CVm 

. Z 

meGOm d-4 

m-' 

. . has 

mco 

ed-0" 

7-4 

0 * OT I 

-4 1 

Ti- -t 

N"r;o" 

a0 

m k 

w 

rCI 

c 

- a, 

BJ a) c ZE .r 

L1 a 

w wv) 
Table 16, nSix~*.i";imhsr vo7,uwe c,C' %d;r~~z~ood~ on eommer~?taL yorest Lam 

hy forest type, 1980 

Parish 

------------- - !l?:l,lion P?r,nrd feet - - - - - - - - - - - 

Beau regard 475+9 28.0 36.6 29.7 25.5 356,1 - .. Bienville 475,6 3.0 124.7 124.1 80-3 143.6 - - Sossier 446.3 - - llR,7 125.9 76.7 118.2 6,7 

Caddo 

Calcasieu 

Cal &el 1 

Cl a i borne 

East Baton Rouge 199.3 - - - - 11-7 37.7 149.9 - .. East Fel i ci ana 258,8 - - 45-9 41.5 69.3 102.1 - - Evangel ine 330,2 2.4 51-6 93.8 55.5 126,9 - - 

Grant 489.3 5.6 104,6 122.1 114.0 143'1 - - 

Jack son 399.8 5-7 94.3 106.4 54.5 138.9 - - Jefferson Davi s 124,s - ., 18.9 50,9 15.4 39.3 - - 

La Salle 486.8 0.6 46,2 62.8 25,6 351,6 - .. 

Li ncol n 203.9 - ... 62.0 84.8 9.6 47,s - - 

Li vi ngston 630.5 - - 81,l 124.5 29.6 386.9 6.4 

Natchitoches 553.0 2.5 120.8 119.1 120,3 353.0 40.3 

Rapi des 584.0 

Red Ri ver 183.1 - 

Sa bi ne 442.5 1,7 103,4 135.2 135.8 66'3 - - St. Helena 168,5 - - 71.6 49.5 47.3 - - .. - St. Tammany 513.8 53-1 41.3 30.9 70.0 268.6 - - 

Tangi pahoa 542.2 23.3 64.5 71.6 112.9 258.0 12.0 

Vernon 522.4 18,4 80,1 72.5 85,2 249,6 13,6 

Washington 300.4 23,O 52,8 30.5 33.3 150,8 - - Webs t er 389.8 - - 53,2 106,2 126.3 103-1 - - 

Wi nn -- 918,9 2,9 174.5 150,5 282,9 308.1 - - --- ---- -- ---- ----- --- 

Total 12958,R 232,4 2276.7 2558,6 2358.9 5472,5 99-3 
P 'C c. G z *a1 o -QL P "591 6 "092 ~sy~d !Sued 

9*S S "ZI v "59 O "SEE a "Zlb ") 11 1 +bed3 
-- 

5 "6 

6 "T'! 

b "ST 

Jaw hy pag 

sap kd~~ 
Caddo 

Cal casieti 

Cai the1 1 

Cf di hrne 

East Batori 2o;i~e 178-3 82.5 57-1 38. - - East fel icidna 6611.4 615.4 28,O 17- 0 - - Evangeline 378.3 786,9 I53,8 36,6 - - 

Grant 2256.3 1773-0 266,7 103,7 12.9 

Jackson 1282, I l039,5 174,9 63, '? - - Jefferson Davi s 265.5 233.9 23. 2 13,4 - - 

Rapides 

Red River 

Sani ne 23(12,4 1775,i? 378,i 148,1 - .. 

St, Helena 708.1 5992.3 68.9 46. !! - - St. Tammany 1330.1 1013.8 179.9 110, 3 26-1 

Washington 946.9 302, 0 7. 9 123.0 7,9 

Nebstet- 161,6 414.6 1:13,15 109.0 - - i4-i nn 2348,2 205r3,"i -- ---- 202,4 -..-- - - 87.7 - - --- - - - --- 
Tab i e 20, Sa:~-tCmAer -~olm~me OJ ~arc3,?aons /;n sorrmerc;aL To.rsst Land 

?xy st2nd-srze ??ass, 1986 

---- - ------- 

Parish 

All err 395,O 344,s 25.2 24.6 0,s 

Caddo 

Galcasieu 

Caf dwel l 

CSai borne 

East Baton Rouge 1W. 3 138.4 34.3 26.5 - - East Fei i ci ana 258.8 226.6 13.4 18,3 - - Evangel i ,1e 330.2 245,2 64.4 20,6 - - 

Grant 489.3 428.4 36.1 24.2 0,; 

Jackson 399.8 301.8 60.4 37.6 - - 

Jefferson Davi s 124.5 117.1 6.7 0.6 - - 

La Salle 

Li ncol n 

Li vi ngston 

Natchitoches 

Ouachi ta 

Rapi des 

Red River 

Sahi ne 

St. Helena 

St. Tammany 

Tangi pahoa 

Un i on 

Verrlon 

Washi ngtort 

Web5 ter 

!.ii nn 

Total 
--- 

Pars sit 

- 

East Baton 2ouge e9,5 1%,9 15-8 1,6 2-6 23-2 34,: 

East "el ltiana $S5,9 iii?,2 38,6 1,9 4,1 15-2 22, 4 

Evangel I ne 294, "147,O 50,4 - - - - Id, 8 d!,9 

Jacksor: 389-2 258,1 84-2 - - - - 7,9 3,9 

Jefferson Davl r 83,; 39,4 15,R - - - - 14-5 17-7 

Rapides 5Se, S 305,? T7,2 - - - - 76, i iC9- i 

Red RI ver :;a?, 0 64-0 92-3 - - - - 5, 'h 2!,6 

Sabtne 644-8 462,3 137,8 -- - - 21,2 23,d 

St, Helena 202,4 i46,9 38,8 - - - - 11,; 5-0 

St- Piammany ill%.?? 238-3 $8,6 - - - - 4:, 5 95,4 

'Vernon 756,2 527,8 93,6 - - - - 50,7 84-2 

Total 12143,d 7295,6 2195,3 1~-8 42,% 894,7 16133,3 
Table 22, Cprfrtrfrtii~y-c?ccP 3clur-e gap si3i3f"5woo& on ~0fp?me~3:~7 forest 12x1 

?l,xsa o,f t6qFq-a> :9EC 

r---------- 

Parish -- -- -- ------ Sawt -iri;ber ------ 

- -- - --. - - -- - - ~f*~~~<gq .seuh<e fee? - - - - - - - - 

Beauregard 

8i'er;ti-i 1 ie 

Bossier 

East Baton Rouge 

East FeSiciava 

Ev3ngeline 

Grant 422,4 61,3 361,O 

Jackson 

Jefferson Davi s 

Rapides 

Red Ri vek 

Sa bl" ne 

St, i-Be?ena 

SL Tarnmany 

Vernon 578,5 %60,7 417,8 

Total 8200,6 2615-2 6i85,5 
------- ----- --I__------ 

Parish ber Sawtimber ------- 

Beaurega rd 

Bienvi 1 le 

Boss ;er 

Caddo 

Calcasieu 

Galdwell 

C1 ai borne 

East Baton Rouge 52.5 

East Feliciana 65-7 

Evangel i ne 92.3 

Grant 149.1 32.5 116.6 

Jackson 

Jefferson Davi s 

La Salle 

Li ncol n 

Li vi ngston 

Natchi toches 210.9 60.13 150.1 

Rapides 

Red River 

Sa bi ne 

St. Helena 

St, Tammany 

Tangi pahoa 

Union 

Vernon 177.7 45.4 132.3 

Tot a l 3946.6 922-3 3024,2 
Table 25, Net annual graziith of growing .stock on eommereial forest 

land hg qec-ies group, 7980 

-7------ ---I-------- -- Parish I species I Softwood 1 Hardwood 

Acadi a 

A1 1 en 

Ascension 

Assumption * 

Avoyell es 

Beaurega rd 

Bienvi 1 le 

Bossier 

Caddo 

Cal casieu 

Caldwell 

Catahoul a 

Ci ai borne 

Concordi a 4.1 - - 4.1 

East Baton Rouge 8.2 

East Carrof 1 - East Feliciana 12.9 

Evangel i ne 14.2 

Grant 27.7 20,4 7.3 

Iberia 

Ibervi? le 

Jackson 21,s 13.6 7.9 

Jefferson Davi s 4-6 2.9 1.7 

Lafoiirche 

La Salle 

Li ncol n 

ki vi" ngs ton 
Psi nte Coupee * 3,6 1,3 2-3 

Fiapides 

Red River 

2i ch7 and 

Sabi ne 36,9 

St, Charles 1,2 

St, Aelena 87,4 

St, James 1, B 

St, John Baptist *a - 

St, Landry 

St, B4aatin 

St, Mary 

St, Tarnmany 

Vernon 43,2 22,4 10,8 

Washi" ngto. 23,2 

Webster i6,6 

West %atm Rougo - - &st GarroJ 4 - - 

Wese Fel i ci ana 6- 9 

Tab1 e 27, Avemge annual rerovats from groairg stock on eom~rc~al foreu"t land 11974 - ISRGI 

- - - - - - - - ,&fillion cubic feet - -. - - - - - - 

ficadi a 

A1 ien 

Ascension 

Assumption 

Avoye1 1 es 

Beaurega rd 

Bienvi 1 le 

Boss i er r/ 

Caddo 

Galcasieu 

Caldwell 

Catahoul a 

C1 ai borne 

East Baton Rouge 5.3 

East Carroll 3.3 

East Feliciana 3.4 

Evangel i ne 5.1 

Grant 10.8 8,1 2,7 

Iberia 

Ibervi 1 l e - 

Jackson 1/ 44-1 

Jef Ferson Davi s 2.5 

La fou rche 

La Salle 

Li ncol n Livingston :/ 

Madi soa 

Morehouse 

Natchi toches 

Poi nte Coupee 
Tab1 e 27, t3ue~age a~~^cldat 7ae'?:i?uaZg p*sa~iri;p r;tsick GM 

eomnercfal forest land il S 94 - 2.9891 (Cont i nbted) 

---------- ----me------- 

A7 1 I 

~..-pp~vp Parish I species L ------- i-ba rdwood --- ------- - 

Rapides 

Red R-i ver 

Ri chl and 

Sab-i no 28-4 

St, Charles 8,9 

St, Helena 40,4 

St* James 1,1 

St, John Baptist 5,1> 

St, Landry 

St, Martin 

St, Mary 

St. Tammany 

Tangi pahoa 

Tensas 

Terrebonne 

Union 24-4 18,5 4,9 

Vernon 26-53 21,l 5,7 

Washington 9-3 

Webster L/ 20,3 

West Baton Rouge - - West Carroll - - West Fel iciana 6, 4 

Total E81,1 453,O 228, X 

I/ These parishes had an unusually large sampling error "- associated with their softwood reinoval volume, 
Jab* ["ria8 

sap ide~ 

6 "6E 2 "~6 s "LEI saq3c~iq33e~ 

b -8%: 9 *;a 

0 "*Z E "lli 

Q "ZT 9 -66 
2 "a; 

9 "PC 

i ""a 9 -S E "01 s -9: P *Z 51-c ~0s aa 

THOMAS, C, E, AND C. V. BVLIN. 

1982. Lousiana mid-cycle survey shows change in 

forest resource trends. U.S. Dep, Agric. For, 

Serv. Resour. Bull. SO- 86 33pSouth. For. Exp. 

Stn,, New Orleans, La. 

The first extensive mid-cycle update of Louisiana 

forest resources shows a 1% decrease in inventory 

volume between 1974 and 1980. Forested area 

declined by about 4% during the same period. 

Softwood i nventory , however, conti nued to show a 

modest gain. 

Additional keywords: Area, forest type, stand 

size growth, removals, mortality.