United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest Service 

southeastern Forest The Hardwood Resource 

Experiment Station 

Research Paper . 

SE-236 

1983 

on Nonindustrial Private 

Forest Land in the 

Southeast Piedmont 

William A. Bechtold and Douglas R. Phillips 
1983 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station 

Asheville, North Carolina 
The Hardwood Resource on Nonindustrial Private Forest Land 

in the Southeast Piedmont 

William A. Bechtold, Resource Analyst 

Asheville, North Carolina 

and 

Douglas R. Phillips, Mensurationist 

Clemson, South Carolina 

Abstract 

More than half of the commercial forest 

land in the Southeast Piedmont supports 

hardwood stands held by small nonindustrial private landowners. Total 

biomass production would increase 15 to 20 

percent if these stands were fully 

stocked, and much of the present production could be shifted to more desirable 

species. Only 21 percent of all nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) stands are 

fully stocked with growing-stock trees. 

Piedmont hardwood stands contain an 

average of 75.5 tons per acre of aboveground tree biomass. When these stands 

are harvested, 39.1 tons of living residues are left behind in the form of rough 

or rotten cull trees and noncommercial 

saplings. It is this practice which has 

caused the large number of poor-quality 

stands we have today. If the timber 

remaining after harvest is not marketable, 

it should be felled to encourage the 

natural regeneration of more desirable 

species. 

Only 37 percent of all hardwood biomass 

harvested (standing and felled) is 

currently being utilized, The product 

output from the hardwood resource could at 

least be doubled with no threat to conventional hardwood supplies by improving utilization. Dramatic increases in hardwood 

production can be expected if NIPF owners 

can be persuaded to employ relatively 

inexpensive management techniques. 

Keywords: Nonindustrial private forest 

land, forest trends, hardwood forest land, 

Piedmont forest land, forest biomass, 

hardwood timber volume, hardwood silviculture. 

Introduction 

Biological, economic, and social forces 

occurring between 1945 and 1965 led to the 

establishment of much of the vast southern 

pine resource we know today (Boyce and 

Knight 1979). Forest industry has provided the capital and technology needed to 

use the pine resource, and forest managers 

have devoted their efforts to its maintenance and improvement. Because of the 

numerous advantages associated with pines, 

hardwood management has been discouraged 

for decades. Long rotations, low stumpage 

values, expensive cultural treatments, and 

the absence of dependable hardwood markets 

have limited options available to those 

willing to improve the quality of their 

hardwood stands (Sosbe 1966). A common 

management approach has been to eradicate 

and convert hardwood stands to pine 

(Kellison 1971). Despite decades of such 

obstruction, hardwoods have been gaining 

ground on southern pines for at least 10 

years and are likely to continue to do so, 

Current biological, social, and economic 

forces favoring hardwoods outweigh the 

cultural practices that favor pine (Boyce 

and Knight 1980). 
The front line of this hardwood advance 

is on nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) 

land. For a variety of reasons, many NIPF 

owners have opted against the intensive 

cultural treatments required to regenerate 

pine after harvest, Many NIPF owners cannot profitably employ expensive industrial 

management techniques, or do not share the 

same management objectives as forest 

industry (Kingsley 1980). Oftentimes 

landowners are simply willing to accept 

whatever nature offers, and low-quality 

hardwood stands are permitted to develop 

by default. This passive or wcustodialn 

approach to forest management is becoming 

increasingly costly to NIPF owners in 

terms of lost opportunities. Many can 

profitably improve their hardwood stands 

and still satisfy their nontimber needs. 

The marginal productivity of NIPF hardwood stands is partially attributable to 

unfavorable market conditions but, as pine 

supplies decline, hardwoods can be used to 

supplement or replace pine in many products. Soft-textured hardwood species are 

being peeled into veneer for the inner 

plies of southern pine plywood. ~ardwoods 

are also being substituted for pine in 

board products, in paper, and in some 

solid-wood products. 

As opportunities to use low-quality 

hardwoods materialize, management options 

available to the NIPF owner will expand 

accordingly, Improved hardwood management 

guidelines are needed to help the small 

landowner grow more and better timber 

while meeting needs for firewood, good 

wildlife habitat, and esthetic values. 

This paper describes the status of the 

NIPF hardwood resource in the Piedmont of 

the Southeast, It identifies areas with 

potential for major improvement, outlines 

a few inexpensive management practices the 

NIPF owner might adopt to make improvements, and provides a database for continuing hardwood research in the area. 

Procedures 

The Southeast Piedmont ranges from North 

Carolina to Georgia and encompasses 44 

million acres The Piedmont boundaries 

delineated in figure 1 follow Survey Unit 

boundaries used by the USDA Forest Service 

for statewide multiresource inventories, 

Data collected during the latest inventories of these six Units over a 5-year 

period were pooled for presentation in 

this report. Additional information and 

inventory procedures are outlined in the 

latest Resource Bulletins for the Piedmont 

Units of each State: Central and North 

Central Georgia (Cathey 1972; Knight 

1972), the Piedmont of North Carolina 

(Welch 1975), the Southern and Northern 

Piedmont of Virginia (Sheffield 1976, 

1977), and the Piedmont of South Carolina 

(Snyder 1978). 

Initial estimates of forest-and nonforest land area were based on the classification of 150,947 16-point sample 

clusters systematically spaced on the 

latest aerial photographs available. To 

adjust for changes since photos were taken 

and for errors in photo interpretation, 

10,693 of these clusters were then examined on the ground. 

Estimates of timber volumes and forest 

classifications were based on measurements 

recorded at 6,573 ground sample locations 

systematically distributed on commercial 

forest land. At each sample location, 

trees 5.0 inches d.b.h. and larger were 

selected for measurement at 3 to 10 points 

with a basal area factor of 37.5 square 

feet per acre. Trees less than 5-0 inches 

d.b.h. were tallied on fixed radius plots 

.around the point centers. 

Plot tallies were converted to volumes 

through a series of volume prediction 

equations derived from detailed measurements of over 35,000 trees throughout the 

Southeast (Cost 1978). Area statistics 

were then used to expand the per-acre 

volumes measured on the sample plots to 

volume estimates for the entire study 

area. 

The utilization of hardwood removals was 

determined by merging information from 

several sources. Primary wood-using mills 

were canvassed to obtain information on 

wood receipts destined for industrial products. Timber volume removed for fuel, 

removed due to cultural operations and 

land clearing, and volume left standing in 

1/1ncludes 389,000 acres of water 

according to Survey standards of area 

classification but defined by the Bureau 

of Census as land. 
Figure 1,--Forest survey units in the Southeast Piedmont, 
areas where classification changed from 

commercial forest to nonforest were estimated from the permanent remeasurement 

samples. Felled trees were measured at a 

sample of active harvesting operations to 

develop a measure of logging residues. 

Results of an earlier study, also based on 

the remeasurement of permanent samples and 

active cutting operations, were used to 

estimate volume in residual trees (living 

residues) left on commercial forest 

following harvest (Welch 1980). 

Biomass, as used in this paper, is 

defined as the aboveground green weight of 

wood and bark in all live trees 1.0 inch 

d.b.h. and larger, including limbs greater 

than 0.5 inches at the base, but excluding 

all foliage. Tree volumes were converted 

to weight with equations developed by the 

Utilization of Southern Timber Research 

Unit of the Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station in Athens, Georgia (Saucier 1979). 

Included with the hardwood forest types 

referred to in this gaper is the oak-pine 

type. This type generally results from 

harvesting pine stands and leaving a,residual of nonmerchantable hardwoods and 

pines. In this class, pines make up at 

least 25 percent of the stocking, but not 

more than 50. Oak-pine figures for 

Georgia may be slightly distorted because 

sample plots were allowed to straddle two 

or more conditions. If one portion of the 

plot was in an oak-hickory stand and the 

other in a pine stand, the area was often 

typed as oak-pine. Since the last Georgia 

survey, straddling has been eliminated. 

The NIPF Hardwood Perspective 

More than 28 million acres, or some 64 

percent of the total land area in the 

Southeast Piedmont, are classified as commercial forest. Of these 28 million 

acres, one-half support hardwood stands 

held by nonindustrial private owners. 

Although this assessment is largely confined to the forest biomass on these 14 

million acres, it is important to 

understand the relationship of NIPF hardwood stands to all other stands in the 

Piedmont. Tables 1-3 provide the breakdown of the total Piedmont timberland 

acreage and associated biomass by State, 

ownership, and broad management class. 

About 17 million acres, or 59 percent of 

the Piedmont commercial forest acreage, is 

allocated among the three hardwood types-- 

oak-pine, upland hardwood, and lowland 

hardwood (table 1). The remaining acres 

are in pine forest types, 16 percent of 

which have been planted. Moving through 

the Piedmont from north to south, the proportion of total timberland acreage in 

hardwood types decreases from a high of 74 

percent in Virginia to a low of 50 percent in South Carolina and Georgia. 

NIPF owners possess over 23 million 

acres, or 82 percent of the Piedmont commercial forest. They own 94 percent of 

the Piedmont timberland in North Carolina, 

83 percent in Virginia, 78 percent in 

Georgia, and 77 percent in South Carolina. 

The distribution of biomass throughout 

the Piedmont is similar to the allocation 

of acreage (table 2). Nearly 1.3 billion 

tons, or 62 percent of the total Piedmont 

biomass, occurs in the hardwood classes. 

Planted pine accounts for only 4 percent 

of all Piedmont forest biomass. As with 

acreage, the relative amount of biomass in 

hardwood forest types decreases from north 

to south. NIPF landowners own 1.7 billion 

tons, or 83 percent of the total biomass 

in the Piedmont. Their portion ranges 

from 93 percent of the biomass in the 

North Carolina Piedmont to 77 percent in 

South Carolina and Georgia. 

Nearly 53 percent of the total forest 

biomass in the Southeast Piedmont occurs 

within NIPF hardwood stands. NIPF upland 

hardwood stands by themselves contain over 

one-third of the total Piedmont biomass. 

NIPF oak-pine stands, which are very simil a r t o upland hardwood stands, account for 

another 12 percent. Only 6 percent of the 

total Piedmont biomass is in NIPF lowland 

hardwood stands. 

Tons of biomass per acre in NIPF stands 

are very close to State averages because 

these averages are heavily weighted by 

large numbers of NIPF acres (table 3). 

More biomass per acre is on public land 

because stands there are generally older 

than NIPF stands. Conversely, less 

biomass has accumulated on forest industry 

land because its stands are younger and on 

shorter rotations. The same logic holds 

when examining the broad forest types. 

Lowland hardwood stands have accumulated 
Table 1.--Area of commercial forest land by State, year, ownership group, and broad forest type, 

Southeast Piedmont 

State Broad forest type 

: Ownership : ------------- --------- and 

groupa All : Pine : Natural : 3ak- 1 Upland : Lowland 

year classes plantation 1 pine . pine 1 hardwood hardwood -------- --- ----------- ---- - 

----------- - Thousand acres - - - - - - - - - - - - --- 

I 

Georgia Public 449.0 28.7 247.0 79.0 64.5 29.8 

1972 Forest industry 1,995.6 352.2 741.8 308.5 390. 202.7 

Other private 8,876.4 619.5 3,620.7 1,616.3 2,106.5 913.4 

------ -- -- 

Total 11,321.0 1,000.4 4,609.5 2,003.8 2,561.4 1,145.9 

South Carolina Public 428.8 20.0 235.8 50.9 107.9 14.2 

1977 Forest industry 628.2 192.9 195.2 59.5 153.4 27.2 

Other private 3,471.1 193.1 1,419.0 563.2 1,208.7 87.1 

Total ' 4,528.1 406.0 1,850.0 673.6 1,470.0 128.5 

North Carolina Public 143.3 .5 40.6 27.1 41.9 33.2 

1975 Forest industry 237.2 58.1 57.7 42.8 74.4 4.2 

Other private 5,647.5 111.7 1,827.3 757.5 2,572.3 378.7 

Total 

Virginia Public 

1976 Forest industry 

Other private 

Total 

All States Public 

Forest industry 

Other private 

Total 28,207.6 1,884.5 9,718.0 4,211.7 10,471-8 1,92186 

a~orest industry figures include 337.9 thousand acres of commercial forest land legsed from NIPF 

owners. 
Table 2.--Total green weight of aboveground biomass (excluding foliage) by State, year, ownership group, and 

broad forest type, Southeast Piedmont 

--------_1_----_ - ---- 

State Broad forest type 

and ." ownership j ---- -- - 

year groupa All Pine . Natural : 3ak- : Upland 1 Lowland 

- classes : plantation 1 pine . pine hardwood 1 hardwood ------------ --------I---------- ----- 

Georgia Public 37.1 1 .7 22.5 5.8 3.8 3.3 

1972 Forest industry 124.5 12.8 50.4 17.2 22.7 21.4 

Other private 554.1 27.3 215.3 100.9 135.6 75.0 

Total 

2 

South Carolina Public 45.7 -7 24.8 3-7 13.7 2.8 

1977 Forest industry 33 - 9 7 7 14.3 2.2 6.5 3.2 

Other private 273.4 14.6 106.0 42.0 102.5 8.3 

Total 353 0 23.0 145.1 47.9 122.7 14.3 

North Carolina Public 14.4 -- 5.2 3. 1 3.3 2.8 

1975 Forest industry 18.9 1 .O 6.6 4.0 6.6 .7 

Other private 445.9 8.3 143.1 57.3 205.4 31.8 

Total 479.2 9-3 154.9 64.4 215.3 35.3 

Virginia Public 31.2 -- 6.4 2.4 21.8 .6 

1976 Forest industry 49.2 4.3 11.4 5.4 25.9 2.2 

Other private 402.6 4.7 84.4 39.8 260.2 13.5 

Total 

All States Public 128.4 2.4 58.9 15.0 42.6 9.5 

' Forest industry 226.5 25.8 82.7 28.8 61.7 27.5 

Other private 1,676.0 54.9 548.8 240.0 703.7 128.6 

Total 2,030.9 83.1 690.4 283.8 808.0 165.6 

aForest industry figures include 14.4 million tons of biomass on commercial forest land leased from 

NIPF owners. 
Table 3.--Average green weight of aboveground biomass (excluding foliage) per acre by State, year, ownership 

group, and broad forest type, Southeast Piedmont 

State Broad forest type 

Ownership -- - 

and 

groupa 1 All Pine 1 Natural 1 Oak- Upland : Lowland 

year 1 classes plantation pine pine hardwood 1 hardwood 

Georgia Public 

1972 Forest industry 

Other private 

All owners r 

South Carolina Public 

1977 Forest industry 

Other private 

All owners 

North Carolina Public 

1975 Forest industry Other private 

All owners 

Virginia Public 

1976. Forest industry 

Other private 

All owners 

All States Public 

Forest industry 

Other private 

All owners 

aForest industry figures include lands leased from NIPF owners. 
high average amounts of biomass due to 

long rotations, while pine plantations are 

younger and have accumulated significantly 

less biomass. 

NIPF Hardwood Stand Composition 

Quality, species, and size distribution 

of the 1.1 billion tons of forest biomass 

in NIPF hardwood stands are given in 

tables 4 and 5. Totals shown include 147 

million tons of biomass in softwood species in these hardwood stands. Not 

included are 120-million tons of hardwood 

biomass occurring 'in NIPF pine stands. In 

NIPF hardwood stands, total green weight 

of all forest biomass exceeds the weight 

of conventional growing stock by 66 percent. Only 60 percent of total biomass is 

in the bole portion of growing-stock 

trees; 14 percent is in the stumps and 

tops of growing-stock trees, 11 percent in 

rough or rotten tr,ees, and 15 percent in 

saplings. These averages do not vary 

significantly by State. 

On the average, oak-pine stands tend to 

have a lower proportion of biomass in 

rough and rotten timber than do pure hardwood stands. Since oak-pine stands have 

usually been more heavily cut, and thus 

more open than the two other hardwood 

types, they have a higher proportion of 

biomass in saplings. Lowland Hardwood 

stands have the highest percentage of 

biomass in rough and rotten trees, because 

these stands are generally older and 

receive less treatment than upland stands. 

Oaks account for more forest biomass 

than any other species group (table 5). 

At 126 million tons, more biomass has 

collected in white oak than any other 

single species. White oak, yellow-poplar, 

sweetgum, and hickory together account 

for more than one-third of the total tree 

biomass in NIPF Piedmont hardwood stands. 

Nearly two-thirds of the biomass in 

these stands is concentrated in trees between 5 and 15 inches in diameter, and the 

greatest accumulation is in the 10-inch 

class. One-half of the total green weight 

of forest biomass is in sawtimber-size 

trees, 35 percent in poletimber, and the 

remainder in saplings. 

Hardwood Stand Performance 

Two variables important to the performance of all timber stands are stocking 

and site quality. In this analysis we 

demonstrate the effects that varying 

degrees of site and stocking have on the 

performance of NIPF hardwood stands. Oakpine, upland hardwood, and lowland hardwood stands were grouped because no 

significant 'differences were observed when 

these stands were examined separately. 

Georgia data were omitted because stand 

age information collected during the 

fourth survey of Georgia was weakened by 

plots straddling more than one condition 

and the grouping of some stands into mixed 

age classes. We assume hardwood stands in 

Georgia perform similarly to those in the 

rest of the Piedmont. 

Stocking levels are based on all live 

trees, and stocking standards are defined 

in table 6. Stands 100 percent or more 

stocked are fully stocked; stands 60 to 99 

percent stocked are medium stocked; and 

stands less than 60 percent stocked are 

poorly stocked. 

Site class is a measure of the inherent 

capacity of land to grow crops of 

industrial wood based in fully stocked 

natural stands. Sites capable of producing more than 85 cubic feet (roughly 3 

tons) of wood per acre per year are good 

sites. Sites able to produce 50 to 85 

cubic feet per acre annually are medium 

sites, and sites capable of producing only 

20 to 50 cubic feet are poor sites. 

Figures 2 and 3 isolate the effects of 

stocking on stand performance. These 

graphs represent the net results of all 

past treatments and disturbances, and 

therefore show how NIPF Piedmont hardwood 

stands are performing collectively. Care 

is advised in the interpretation of these 

figures, because a particular stand may 

not necessarily follow the delineated performance patterns throughout its entire 

lifespan. Depending on what treatments or 

disturbances a stand experiences, it could 

easily jump from one stocking level to 

another during its development. Indeed, 

there is a tendency for both fully stocked 

and poorly stocked stands to drift toward 

medium stocking as they get older. 

Figure 2 shows how biomass accumulates 

over time. Stands are grouped into 

10-year age classes, and the average 

biomass is plotted at each age-class midpoint. By age 30, stands at each stocking 

level have accumulated well over half of 

the biomass they are likely to accumulate 

if allowed to proceed to age 100. Across 
Table 4.--Total green weight of aboveground biomass (excluding foliage) on NIPF hardwood stands in the Southeast Piedmont by 

State, year, hardwood broad f0res.t type, and tree components 

Trees 5.0 inches d.b.h. and larger Abnveground State _______-----_--I----------------

: Broad forest : biomass and Growing stock Rough and rotten j S:::::gS type year --- ----- ----------------- _-------------_---- --------------------- Total Role 3therb Total j Role j Other Total : Bole Other : ----- ------- ----- --- -------- --------------------,---------'-,------------------

Georgia 

1972 

Total 

South Carolina 

1977 

Total 

North Carolina 

1975 

Total 

Virginia 

1976 

Oak-pine 100.9 56.3 34.6 74.3 60.7 13.6 7.5 5.6 1.9 19.1 

Upland hardwood 135.6 89.1 46.5 95.6 77.0 18.6 16.3 12.1 4.2 23.7 

Lowland hardwood 75.0 52.8 22.2 55.8 45.7 10.1 - 9.4 7.1 2.3 9.8 

Oak-pine 42.0 28.3 13.7 30 -4 24.8 5.6 4.7 3.5 1.2 5.9 

Upland hardwood 102.5 71.7 30.8 77.. 5 62.4 15.1. 12.4 9.3 3.1 12.6 

Lowland hardwood 8.3 6.5 1.8 6.4 5.3 1.1 1.4 1.2 .2 .5 

Oak-pine 57.3 37.8 19.5 42.9 35.0 7.9 3.7 2.8 .9 10.7 

Upland hardwood 205.4 140.5 64.9 155.7 126.0 29.7 19.1 14.5 4.6 30.6 

Lowland hardwood 31.8 23.3 8.5 23.7 19.8 3.9 4.6 3.5 1.1 3.5 , 

Oak-pine 39.8 25.1 14.7 27.5 22.3 5.2 3.8 2.8 1.0 8.5 

Upland hardwood 260.2 181.5 78.7 195.2 158.2 37.0 30.9 23.3 7.6 34.1 

Lowland hardwood 13.5 10.1 3.4 9.8 8.1 1.7 2.5 2.0 .5 1.2 

Total 313.5 216.7 96.8 232.5 188.6 43.9 37.2 28.1 9.1 43.8 

All States i 

Oak-pine 240.0 757.5 82.5 175.1 142.8 32.3 19.7 14.7 5.0 45.2 

Upland hardwood 703.7 482.8 220.9 524.0 423.6 100.4 78.7 59.2 19.5 101.0 

Lowland hardwood 128.6 92.7 35.9 95.7 78.9 16.8 17.9 13.8 4.1 15.0 

Total 1,072.3 733.0 333.3 794.8 645.3 149.5 116.3 87.7 28.6 161.2 

aDoes not include biomass on NIPF lands leased to forest industry. 

b~ncludes all stumps, tops, and limbs, plus total sapling weight. 
Table 5.--Total green weight of aboveground biomass (excluding foliage) on NIPF hardwood stands in the Southeast Piedmont, by species and diamdter classa 

: All : Diameter class 

Species diameter :---------------------------------_---------------------------_--------- j classes : 2 j 4 j 6 j 8 i 10 j 12 j 14 i 16 j 18 i 20 i 22-28 : 30+ ------------- -------- ---------------------- -2 2 ----

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

Southern yellow pines: 

Loblolly pine 57.0 .6 2.5 5.4 6.8 8.7 10.0 8.6 5.9 3.7 2.1 2-5 .2 Short leaf pine 43.8 .7 2 6.3 10.2 10.1 7.4 3.7 1.8 1.0 .3 .I -- Virginia pine 78.0 1.1 3.8 5.6 6.7 5.7 3.2 1.3 .5 1 -- -- -- Other yellow pines 6.2 .I .5 .6 .8 1.0 1.3 .9 .5 .2 1 .2 -- 

Total yellow pines 135.0 2.5 9.0 17.9 24.5 25.5 21.9 14.5 8.7 5.0 2.5 2.8 .2 

Other softwoods , ,12.3 1.2 1.7 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.0 1.0 .8 .9 -5 .4 1 

'6 -- ------_-_--_--_-_-__________________________---_----------------------- - --- -- -- --- - -------------- ------ -- --- 

Total softwoods 147.3 , 3.7 10.7 19.8 26.0 26.8 22.9 15.5 9.5 5.9 3.0 3.2 -3 

Soft hardwoods: 

Sweetg~m 92.3 6.3 9.8 12.3 13.3 14.0 12.5 8.5 6.4 3.6 2.3 2.9 .4 

Yellow poplar 101.8 2.8 5.2 7.6 9.3 12.8 15.8 14.7 11.6 8.0 5.7 6-8 1.5 

Tupelo and blackgum 28.3 2.8 2.7 2.9 3.8 4.5 4.3 2.7 2.1 .9 .5 .9 .2 

Bay and magnolia 3.9 .3 .4 .5 .6 .5 .4 .6 .2 .1 .1 .1 1 

Soft maples 67.6 6.5 8.9 9.4 9.0 9.4 6.8 5.5 4.1 2.7 1.9 2.8 .6 

Other soft hardwoods 32.4 2.5 3.6 3.8 4.2 3.6 4.0 3.1 2.4 1.5 1.0 2.2 .5 

Total soft hardwoods 326.3 21.2 30.6 36.5 40.2 44.8 43.8 35.1 26.8 16.8 11.5 15.7 3.3 

Oaks: 

Black 

Chestnut 

Laurel 

Northern red 

Scarlet 

Southern red 

Water 

White 

Other oaks 

Scrub oaks 

Total Oaks 402.9 13.4 '25.3 41.4 47.8 55.6 56.1 49..3 38.5 25.7 16.6 26.7 6-5 

Other hardwoods: 

Ash 17.6 1.2 1.8 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.2 1.8 1.1 .8 .4 .6 .1 

Hickory 78.6 4.6 6.5 7.9 9.1 10.5 10.8 9.5 7.9 5.0 2.5 3.8 -5 Other hard hardwoods 70.8 12.5 13.5 5.6 5.8 6.4 7.5 5.7 3.9 3.4 2.0 4.0 .5 

Miscellaneous spp. 28.8 6.7 9.7 6.2 2.9 1.8 .7 .4 .2 -- .1 1 -- 

Total other hardwoods 195.8 25.0 31.5 22.3 20.4 21.1 21.2 17.4 13.1 9.2 5.0 8.5 1.1 

Total hardwoods 925.0 59.6 87.4 100.2 108.4 121.5 121.1 101.8 78.4 51.7 33.1 50.9 10.9 

All species 1,072.3 63.3 98.1 120.0 134.4 148.3 144.0 117.3 87.9 57.6 36.1 54-1 11.2 

a~oes not include biomass on NIPF lands leased to forest industry nor stands classified as primarily pine. 
Table 6.--Minimum stocking standards by diameter class, numbers of trees, and 

basal area for fully and medium stocked stands 

Minimum number of trees per Minimum basal area per acre 

acre for-- * for-- D.b.h. 

class Full . Medium Full Medium 

. stocking stocking stocking stocking 

Seedlings 
all age classes, fully stocked hardwood 

stands in the Piedmont are accumulating 15 

percent more biomass per acre than medium 

stocked stands and over three times more 

biomass than poorly stocked stands. 

These graphs originate at age 15 because 

many hardwood stands begin with some 

biomass in residual trees left when the 

previous stand was harvested. Data from 

stands younger than age 15 are heavily 

influenced by these residuals and were not 

included. 

About 63 percent of all NIPF hardwood 

stands in the Piedmont are fully stocked, 

33 percent mediurii stocked, and 4 pecent 

poorly stocked with all live trees. These 

percentages and the biomass production 

values associated with them suggest that 

biomass production could be increased by 

15 to 20 percent if all stands were fully 

stocked. In reality, opportunities are 

much greater if growing-stock stocking is 

considered. Only 21 percent of NIPF hardwood stands are fully stocked with 

growing-stock trees, while 56 percent are 

medium stocked and 23 percent are poorly 

stocked. Obviously, there is much opportunity not only to increase total growth 

but also to shift this growth to more 

desirable trees. 

Dividing accumulated tons of biomass per 

acre in each age class by the age-class 

midpoint yields a measure of annual 

biomass production (fig. 3). In both 

medium and fully stocked stands, annual 

biomass production peaks before age 15 and 

begins to fall sharply as tree crowns 

close and overall growth slows. Poorly 

stocked stands, disadvantaged from the 

start by lack of trees available to fix 

light energy, never experience this early 

surge of growth. These stands start out 

slowly and reach the apex of biomass 

production at about age 30. 

Unlike percent stocking, site quality is 

expensive to improve. Nevertheless, it is 

important to know the full impact of site 

quality on timber growth. The majority of 

Piedmont stands occur on medium sites. 

Figures 4 and 5 depict the influence of 

site class on biomass accumulation and 

production. Performance of a particular 

stand will vary as a result of the treatment it receives, but there is much less 

shifting among site classes than among 

stocking levels. 

As expected, site class also has a 

significant bearing on biomass accumulation (fig. 4). On the average, good sites 

accrue about 26 percent more biomass than 

medium sites and 48 percent more than poor 

sites across all ages. Stands on poor 

sites are not nearly as disadvantaged as 

stands that are poorly stocked. Figure 5 

shows that stands on poor sites experience 

an early surge of growth, whereas poorly 

stocked stands do not (fig. 3). 

Green weight of forest biomass on all 

NIPF commercial forest land supporting 

hardwood stands in the Piedmont averages 

79.5 tons per acre. The weighted average 

age of these same stands is 43.1 years. 

By dividing average age into average 

weight we can determine that the average 

Piedmont hardwood stand is manufacturing 

over 1.8 tons, or nearly 3,700 pounds, of 

biomass per acre annually. Remember that 

these figures do not include any foliage, 

shrubs, vines, forbs, etc. 

NIPF Hardwood Past Treatment 

At each sample location, field crews 

recorded the primary past treatment or 

disturbance that had occurred during the 

latest remeasurement period. Results were 

separated by broad forest type and summed 

for all six Piedmont Survey Units. Since 

the remeasurement periods for the Piedmont 

averaged 10.9 years, one can assume that 

values reported represent conditions 

approximately 5.5 years after treatment. 

Also, they indicate the forest type at the 

time of the new inventory rather than at 

time of treatment. 

Over the remeasurement period nearly 2.3 

million acres of NIPF land in the Piedmont 

experienced a final harvest, were retained 

in commercial forest, and are now classed 

as hardwood types (table 7). Thus, the 

rate of final harvest (including clearcutting, seed-tree cutting, salvage, and 

high-grading) averaged more than 207,000 

acres annually, excluding commercial thinning~, other intermediate cutting, and 

land clearing. The residual green weight 

of forest biomass on these acres averaged 

39.1 tons per acre (table 8). Much of the 

biomass left in the woods after final 

harvest is in rough, rotten, and small 

trees. The high proportion of residual 

biomass left in these hardwood stands 

indicates that many acres are still being 

high-graded. This practice must be curtailed if we are to stem the proliferation 

of low-grade hardwood stands. The poor- 
i FULLY STOCKED 

12,000 -- MEDIUM STOCKED 

---- POORLY STOCKED 

q 10,000 

z 2 8,000 

FULLY STOCKED 

MEDIUM STOCKED 

I 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

I STAND AGE illlllllll I1 11 11 It 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

STAND AGE 

Figure 3,--Mean annual production of biomass per 

acre, by stand age and stocki ng, on al l NlPF hardwood stands, Southeast Piedmont (excluding Georgia), 

Figure 2.--Accumu lat ion of biomass per acre, by 

stand age and stocking, on all NlPF hardwood stands, 

Southeast Piedmont (excluding Georgia). 

GOOD SITES 

-- MEDIUM SITES 

---- POOR SITES - /- 

- 

- 

- 

t 12,000 

- GOOD SITES 

-- MEDIUM SITES 

---- POOR SITES 

10,000 

~~l~ltl~l~lrl

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

STAND AGE 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

STAND AGE 

Figure 5,--Mean annual production of biomass per 

acre, by stand age and site class, on al l NlPF hardwood stands, Southeast Piedmont (exc ludi ng Georgl a). 

Figure 4.--Accumu l at ion of biomass per acre, by 

stand age and site class, on all NlPF hardwood 

stands, Southeast Pi edmont (exc lud l ng Georgl a). 
. Table 7.--Area of NIPF hardwood stands, by recent past treatment or 

disturbance and broad forest type, Southeast Piedmont 

Recent past 

treatment or 

disturbancea 

All types 

Broad forest type - -- - - -- - - -- - - - 

Oak- Upland : Lowland 

pine - hardwood hardwood 

-----.I-- Thousand acres - - - - - - - - 

Harvesting 2,257.0 533.6 1,532.5 190.9 

Commercial thinning 296.6 112.0 145.3 39.3 

Artificial 'pJ.anting 18.0 13.3 4.7 -- 

Natural disturbance 424.2 119.0 208.5 96.7 

otherb 2,463.4 630.6 1,618.9 213.9 

None 8,743.5 2,097.5 5,609.9 1,036.1 

All stands 

aPrimary treatment or disturbance of the stand during latest survey 

interval in each State. 

b~ncludes cleaning, release, draining, prescribed burning, site preparation, and other miscellaneous treatments. 

Table 8.--Average green weight of forest biomass on NIPF hardwood stands, by 

recent past treatment or disturbance and hardwood broad forest type, 

Southeast Piedmont 

Recent past . Broad forest type 

treatment or All types 

disturbancea Oak- : Upland : Lowland 

pine hardwood hardwood 

---..I...--.I Tons per acre - - - - - - - - 

Harvesting 39. 1 38.5 37.8 51.1 

Commercial thinning 70.1 69.9 70.5 69.3 

Artificial planting 21.6 29.2 0 om 

Natural disturbance 75.2 78 . 7 73.4 74.9 

otherb 76.2 70.5 78.4 75.9 

None 85.0 75 0 87.9 89.4 

All stands 75.5 68.4 77.2 81.6 

aPrimary treatment or disturbance of the stand during latest survey 

interval in each State. 

b~ncludes cleaning, release, draining, prescribed burning, site preparation, and other miscellaneous treatments. 
quality hardwood stands we observe today 

are not so much the result of poor sites 

or inherently poor tree form, but rather 

of the inferior trees left on the site 

after one or more harvest cuts. We cannot 

expect to produce fully stocked, highquality hardwood stands when an average of 

39.1 tons per acre of biomass remain on 

site after harvest in the form of rough 

and rotten cull trees and noncommercial 

understory saplings. Landowners should 

attempt to sell all trees when they make a 

timber sale, but where fuelwood markets 

are poor and firewood is too expensive to 

remove, sale may not be possible. In such 

cases, the residuals should be felled and 

left in the woods. Although this practice 

appears wasteful, the long-range benefits 

of establishing more valuable hardwoods 

far exceed the loss of underutilized 

biomass at the time of harvest. 

Only 2 percent of all NIPF hardwood 

stands experienced a commercial thinning 

over the remeasurement period. On the 

average, these stands had about 15 tons 

per acre, or 18 percent of the biomass, 

removed from them. Relatively few hardwoods have been planted on NIPF land, The 

figures listed in tables 7 and 8 are most 

likely unsuccessful pine plantations which 

resulted in an oak-pine forest type. 

Natural disturbances and miscellaneous 

treatments occurred on 2.9 million acres 

of NIPF Piedmont timberland. These events 

reduced the average per acre forest 

biomass by about 10 tons, 

Hardwood Utilization 

Some people have expressed concern that 

harvesting forest biomass for energy or 

increased fiber production might aggravate 

hardwood procurement problems in the 

Piedmont. Estimates of Piedmont hardwood 

removals show that only 54 percent of all 

felled hardwood biomass (22.9 million 

tons) is used for roundwood products 

(table 9). Since it was not possible to 

isolate removals from only NIPF timberland 

for every item, the figures in table 9 

include estimates of hardwood removals 

from all ownerships in the Piedmont. 

However, the NIPF ownership group holds 

such a high proportion of hardwood acreage 

in the Piedmont that ratios developed from 

table 9 are heavily influenced by harvesting practices on NIPF land. Also, a 

fraction of the hardwood biomass shown 

here came from pine stands. 

Industrial products, along with the 

weight of hardwood biomass harvested for 

fuelwood, constitute the estimate of all 

roundwood products. Traditionally, the 

merchantable volume of a tree has been 

defined as that portion between a 1.0-foot 

stump and a 4.0-inch d,o.b. top, including 

all forks greater than 4.0 inches d.0.b in 

trees 5.0 inches and larger. Logging 

residues are the merchantable portions of 

felled trees remaining in the woods after 

harvest. Logging slash is the weight of 

wood and bark in felled-tree stumps less 

than 1.0 foot above ground, in felled-tree 

tops between 4.0 inches and 0.5 inches 

d.o.b., and in all felled saplings not 

used for timber products. Other removals 

include the unused total-tree biomass of 

all hardwoods destroyed in land clearing 

and cultural operations. Between 1971 and 

1976, an average of 12 percent of the 

total annual felled weight of hardwood 

biomass in the Piedmont remained in the 

woods as logging residues; 17 percent 

remained as logging slash, and 17 percent 

as unused other removals. 

During most harvest operations, some 

trees are judged worthless by the logger 

and bypassed because of size, species, or 

quality (Welch 1980). On NIPF land in the 

Piedmont, some 39 tons per acre of these 

living residues were left in the woods 

following final harvest. Generally these 

living remnants, although counted as part 

of the timber resource, inhibit the development of new stands. At least 7.4 

million tons of hardwood biomass accumulated annually as obstructive living residues on commercial forest land' in the 

Piedmont between 1971 and 1977 (table 9). 

Other standing residues are those trees 

which were once part of the commercial 

forest but, because of land clearing for 

agricultural, urban, or some other land 

use, now stand in a nonforest condition. 

In many Instances, these trees are beneficial because they encourage wildlife, have 

esthetic value, provide shade, or reduce 

erosion and siltation. In any case, they 

do not inhibit the establishment of new 

stands on existing timberland. About 2.9 
Table 9.--Total green weight of annual removals of all hardwood live timber on all 

ownerships by item, State, and year, Southeast Piedmont 

State and year 

Item All : 

: States : Georgia : North Carolina . South Carolina Virginia . . . : 1971 1973 . 1977 : 1976 

All roundwood 

produc tsa 12.3 3.2 

Logging 

residuesb "; 2.7 7 

Logging slashC 3.9 1.2 

Other removalsd 4.0 1.1 

Total felled 22.9 6.2 6.4 3.0 7.3 

weight 

Commercial 

forest living 

residuese 

Removed from 

commercial 

forestf 

Total standing 10.3 3.4 2.8 1.6 2.5 

residues 

Total all 33.2 9.6 9.2 4.6 9.8 

aGreen weight of merchantable and unmerchantable portions of all live hardwoods 

5.0 inches d.b.h. and larger, plus all hardwood saplings used to produce all roundwood products. 

b~reen weight of merchantable portions of all live hardwoods 5.0 inches d.b.h. 

and larger destroyed and not utilized during harvest operations. 

CGreen weight of unmerchantable portions of all live hardwoods 5.0 inches d. b. h. 

and larger, plus all hardwood saplings destroyed and not utilized during harvest 

operations. 

d~otal green weight of all live hardwoods 5.0 inches d.b.h. and larger, plus all hardwood saplings destroyed and not utilized during cultural operations and land clearing. 

eTotal green weight of all live hardwoods 5.0 inches d.b.h. and larger, plus all hardwood saplings still standing in commercial forest on acres which experienced a final 

harvest . f~otal green weight of all live hardwoods 5.0 inches d.b.h. and larger, plus all 

hardwood saplings still standing but no longer in a forest condition. 
million tons of hardwood biomass were 

added to this category annually (table 9). 

When both standing and felled residues 

are considered,- only 37 percent of the 

hardwood biomass in harvested stands is 

being utilized. The remaining 63 percent 

is left in the woods because, to date, 

loggers have not been able to make these 

residues pay their way out of the woods. 

This situation may be changing. Currently, hardwood whole-tree chips bring 

an average delivered pulpwood price of $12 

per green ton in the Piedmont (Timber 

Mart-South 1982). Based on cost comparisons with NO. 2 fuel oil, the Office 

of Technology Assessment has estimated 

that economic conditions in the foreseeable future suggest that wood energy 

users could afford to pay up to $90 per 

dry ton of wood delivered, or about $45 

per green ton (U.S. Congress 1980). Even 

if the value of this wood waste does not 

quadruple, the potential for increased 

value along with the magnitude of the 

resource clearly indicates substantial 

economic opportunity. In addition to the 

potential delivered value of logging waste 

and living residues, the removal of these 

materials from the forest would substantially reduce the landowner's cost of site 

preparation and replanting. 

It is not reasonable to expect that all 

harvested biomass can or should be utilized. The economic, ecological, and 

social impacts of total utilization are 

complex and differ greatly with local 

situations. If hardwood stands in the 

Piedmont were properly harvested, however, 

the product output from the hardwood 

resource could at least be doubled with no 

threat to conventional hardwood supplies. 

With proper regeneration and maintenance 

after harvest, increased yields of better 

quality hardwoods are certain. 

Hardwood Treatment Opportunity 

As long as vegetative cover is present, 

biomass will be produced. It is the task 

of the forest manager to maximize and 

channel this growth onto the most beneficial species that circumstances permit, 

On 14 million acres of NIPF in the 

Piedmont, hardwood management is a logical -choice because it can produce good 

returns at much lower costs than pine 

management, and because it can provide 

the multiple benefits many small landowners desire. As the hardwood resource 

on NIPF land plays a role of increasing 

importance, it becomes critical that this 

resource be managed more productively. 

In contrast to pine management, hardwood 

silviculture need be neither expensive 

nor intensive. Although research on 

hardwood management in the Piedmont has 

been rather limited, results applicable 

to the Piedmont are available from other 

regions of the country (Kellison, 

Frederick, and Cardner 1981; McGee, Beck, 

and Sims 1979; McGee and Hooper 1970). 

Several silvicultural options available 

to the hardwood manager at minimal cost 

are : 

1. After final harvest, clearcut all 

residuals 1.0 inch debohm and larger. 

Residuals need to be removed because they 

do not respond favorably to release after 

being in the understory so long; they 

shade out new sprouts and seedlings, and 

the stumps of these small stems prove to 

be the best sprouters. Salvage the residuals for firewood where possible but, 

even if the wood is not recoverable, fell 

the stems so a new vigorous even-aged 

stand can begin. 

2. Strive to maintain full stocking. 

This condition is easily achieved at 

harvest by applying proper regeneration 

techniques; it is much more difficult to 

increase the stocking of established 

stands. Landowners should have their 

stands assessed for natural regeneration 

potential. Some of the better oak 

stands, with most of the stems larger 

than 15 inches d.b.h., will not regenerate naturally because the stems do not 

sprout. In these stands, enrichment 

plantings may be needed to obtain full 

stocking. Fortunately, most hardwood 

stands do not need enrichment plantings. 

Sprouts from small stumps, and seeds that 

remain viable in the soil litter for long 

periods of time, normally provide sufficient regeneration. 

3. Deadening of undesirable species 

may be helpful on certain sites where 

strong competition from unwanted species 

will severely restrict or eliminate 

'desirable species. Landowners should 
weigh the cost of treatment against the 

probable improvement of species composition. They should be reminded that 

many undesirable species will drop out 

through natural mortality as the stand 

develops. Discretion should be used so 

that a tree is not killed where no other 

tree is available to occupy the site. 

4. In fully stocked or overstocked 

stands, thinning and timber stand 

improvement (TSI) cuts are possibilities. At present, these operations are 

economical only where a heavy thinning 

is possible and-markets are favorable. 

In the future, it'. is hoped the biomass 

removed in light thinnings and TSI 

operations will return enough revenue to 

offset operating costs. Landowners 

should be reminded that returns from 

management efforts are usually greatest 

on the best sites and that all stands do 

not need treatment. Some young stands 

just need time to develop on their own. 

If NIPF owners would apply some of the 

treatments suggested here and put their 

land under management, several important 

benefits would logically follow. In the 

short run, the demand for energy wood 

and some other products would be met 

through the conversion of poor-quality 

stands to young, vigorous stands. In 

the long run, the hardwood resource 

would be improved in both quantity and 

quality; landowners would make more 

profit from timber sales; and some of 

the demand pressure now placed on 

southern pines could be relieved. 

Literature Cited 

Boyce, Stephen G.; Knight, Herbert A. 

Prospective ingrowth of southern pine 

beyond 1979. Res. Pap. SE-200. 

Ashevvle, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station; 1979. 48 p. 

Boyce, Stephen G.; Knight, Herbert A. 

Prospective ingrowth of southern hardwoods beyond 1980. Res. Pap. SE-203. 

Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1980. 33 p* 

Cathey, Robert C. Forest statistics for 

Central Georgia, 1972. Resour. Bull. 

SE-22. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1972. 34 p. Cost, Noel D. Multiresource inventories: a 

technique .for measuring volumes in 

standing trees. Res. Pap. SE-196. ' 

Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1978. 18 pa 

Kellison, Robert C. Hardwood management 

philosophies and practices. In: 

Proceedings: Symposium on southeastern 

hardwoods; 1971 September 15-16; Dothan, 

AL; 1971: 8-16. Available from: 

Southeastern Area State and Private 

Forestry, Atlanta, GA. 

Kellison, Robert C.; Frederick, Douglas 

J.; Gardner, William E. 1981. A guide 

for regenerating and managing natural 

stands of southern hardwoods. Bull. 463. 

Raleigh, NC: NC State University 

Agricultural Experiment Station; 1981. 

24 p. 

Kingsley, Neal P. The nonindustrial 

forest-land owner: Who? Where? Why? In: 

Proceedings: Eighth annual hardwood symposium of the Hardwood Research Council; 

1980 April 23-26; Cashiers, NC: Hardwood 

Research Council Sponsored Publication; 

1980: 13-31. Available from: Hardwood 

Research Council, Asheville, NC. 

Knight, Herbert A. Forest statistics for 

North Central Georgia, 1972. Resour. 

Bull. SE-24. Asheville, NC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station; 1972. 34 p. 

McGee, Charles E.; Beck, Donald E.; Sims, 

Daniel A. Natural regeneration of upland 

hardwoods in the South. (Unnumbered 

brochure.) Asheville, NC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station; 1979. 

McGee, Charles E.; Hooper, Ralph M. 

Regeneration after clearcutting in the 

Southern Appalachians. Res. Pap. SE-70. 

Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1970. 12 p. 

Saucier, Joseph R. Estimation of biomass 

production and removal. In: Proceedings: 

impact of intensive harvesting on forest 
nutrient cycling; 1979 August; Syracuse, 

NY; 1979: 172-189. Available from: 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, 

Broomall, PA. 

Sheffield, Raymond M. Forest statistics 

for the Southern Piedmont of Virginia, 

1976. Resour. Bull. SE-35. Asheville, 

NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southeastern Forest 

Experiment Station; 1976. 33 p. 

Sheffield, Raymond M. Forest statistics 

for the Northern Piedmont of Virginia, 

1977. Resour. Bull. SE-39. Asheville, 

NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southeastern Forest 

Experiment Station; 1977. 33 p. 

Snyder, Nolan L. forest statistics for the 

Piedmont of South Carolina, 1978. 

Resour. Bull. SE-45. Asheville, NC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station; 1978. 33 p. 

Sosbe, Em H. The status of growing and 

marketing hardwoods on short rotations. 

In: Proceedings: 1966 Symposium on hardwoods of the Piedmont and Coastal Plain; 

1966 October 26-27; Macon, GA: Georgia 

Forest Research Council Sponsored 

Publication; 1966: 56-58. Available 

from: Georgia Forestry Commission, 

Macon, GA. 

Timber Mart-South, Inc. U.S. Forest 

Service timber sales report: In summary 

form - for Southeastern States. Timber 

Mart-South 7(5) :var. pg. ; 1982. 

U.S. Congress, Office of Technology 

Assessment. Energy from biological 

processes. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Congress, Office of Technology 

Assessment; 1980. 196 p. 

Welch, Richard La Forest statistics for 

the Piedmont of North Carolina, 1975. 

Resour, Bull. SE-32. Asheville, NC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station; 1975. 33 p. 

Welch, Richard L. Living residues in the 

South Atlantic States. For. Prod. J. 

30(6):37-39; 1980. 
I Bechtold, Wi l 1 iam A,; Phi l lips, Douglas 8, I Bechtold, WilliamA,; Phillips, DouglasR, 

The hardwood resource on nonindustrial private forest land in the The hardwood resource on nonindustrial private forest land in the 

Southeast Piedmont. Res, Pap, SE-236, Ashevl l le, NC: U.S. Depart- Southeast Piedmont, Res, Pap, SE-236, Ashevi l le, NC: U,S, DepartI 

I ment of Agr i cu l ture, Forest Servi ce, Sou thea~tern Forest Experimnt I ment of Agr l cu l ture, Forest Serv i ce, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station; 1983. 19 p, Station; 1983, 19 p, 

I I 

I More than half of the commercial forest land in the Southeast Piedmont More than half of the commercial forest land in the Southeast Piedmont 

supports hardwood stands he1 d by sma l l non i ndustr i a I pr ivate landowners. supports hardwood stands he l d by sma l l non i ndustr i a l pr ivate landowners, 

Only 21 percent of al l NlPF stands are ful ly stocked with growing-stock Only 21 percent of a1 1 NlPF stands are ful ly stocked with growing-stock 

1 trees, Only 37 percent of all hardwood biomass harvested from these 

I trees, On ly 37 percent of a l l hardwood bi mass harvested from these 

I 

stands is currently being utilized, As these stands are harvested, 

abut 39 tons of l i vi ng res i dues per acre are left stand i ng, I stands is currently being utilized, As these stands are harvested, 

about 39 tons of living resldues per acre are left standing, I 

KEYWORDS: Non industr ial private forest land, forest trends, hardwood KEYWORDS: Nan i ndustr la 1 pr i vat0 forest land, forest trends, hardwood 

forest land, Piedmont forest land, forest biomass, hardwood timber I forest land, Piedmont forest land, forest biomass, hardwood timber I 

volume, hardwood s i l vi cu I ture, vo l urn, hardwood s I l vi cu l ture, 

I I 
The Fore\t Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture, is dedicated to the principle of multiple 

u\e management of the Nation's 

forest resources for sustained 

yields of wood. water, forage. 

wildlife, and recreation. Through 

fore\try research, cooperation 

with the States and private forest 

owners, and management of the 

National Forests and National 

Gra5\lands, it 4trives-as directed by Congress-to provide 

increasingly greater 4ervice to a 

' growing Nation. 

USDA policy does not permit discrimination because of 

race, color. national origin, sex or religion. Any person 

who believes he or she has been discriminated against in 

any USDA-related activity should write immediately to 

the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington. D.C. 20250.