United States 

Department of Incidence and Impact of 

Agriculture 

Southeastern Forest Damage to South Carolina's 

Experiment Station Timber, 1979 

Forest Service 

Resource Bulletin 

SE-56 
Couer photo: Paul A. Moore, 

Tenn. Conservation Dep, Nashuiile 

June 1981 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station 

Asheville, North Carolina 
INCIDENCE AND IMPACT OF DAMAGE TO 

SOUTH CAROLINA'S TIMBER, 1979 

by 

Robert L. Anderson,' Joe P. ~c~lure,' William H. Hoffard,' 

and Noel D. Cost2 

'Supervisory Pathologist, Entomologist. Southeastern Area. 

State and Private Forestry, Asheville, North Carolina. 

'Resource Analysts, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station, Ashcville, North Carolina. 
CONTENTS 

Pout' 

FOREWOR i i 

INTRODUCTION I 

SAMPLING PROCEDURE 1 

COMPUTATIONS ............... ........................................................................................ I 

INCIDENCE OF DAMAGING AGENTS 2 

MORTALITY, ASSOCIATED CULL, AND QUALITY LOSS 4 

PAST TREATMENT OR DISTURBANCE 4 

DEFINITIONS ................. 4 

Damaging Agents and Their Symptoms .............. ... ......... ..... ........................................ 4 

Forest Survey Terms ..................................................................................................... 5 

REFERENCES .................... .... ..... 6 

FIGURES ........... 7 

TABLES ................ 20 
FOREWORD 

This Bulletin reports survey data on agents 

damaging trees in South Carolina's forests. Data 

were collected in 1977 and 1978 by the Renewable 

Resources Evaluation Work Unit of the Southeastern Forest Experiment' Station. 

This effort was part of the fifth inventory of the 

State's forests. Considerably more information was 

gathered in this than in previous inventories. This 

additional information makes possible publication 

of reports on forest resources other than timber as 

well as this specialized report on timber damage. 

The Southeastern Forest Experiment Station in 

Asheville, North Carolina, periodically inventories 

and evaluates forest resources in Florida, Georgia, 

North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia. The 

Southeastern Area, State and Private Forestry, 

Forest Insect and Disease Management Staff unit, 

headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, provides training and field support and helps evaluate the data on 

forest insects, diseases, and other damaging agents. 

While damage is described here, appropriate 

measures for preventing damage are not described. 

Residents of South Carolina requiring technical 

assistance with forestry problems on State and private land should contact: 

Leonard A. Kilian, State Forester 

South Carolina State Commission of Forestry 

P.O. Box 21707 

Columbia, South Carolina 29221 

INTRODUCTION 

During the fifth inventory of South Carolina's 

forests in 1977 and 1978, damage to treeson sample 

plots was noted. Where possible, a cause or damaging agent was specified. This Bulletin reports and 

interprets these observations. 

Since plots are visited only once and at all times 

of year, it is only possible to keep records on agents 

that produce symptoms or signs in all seasons. On 

the basis of these "durable" symptoms and signs, the 

agents defined on pages 4 -5 were recognized. 

Prior to the field survey, people from the Southeastern Area, State and Private Forestry, Forest 

Insect and Disease Management, developed a handbook for identifying damage types. During the 

survey, they field-checked data collected by crews to 

ensure accuracy and consistency. It should be 

recognized, however, that the data reported here 

were not gathered by people with expertise in 

entomology or tree pathology. Rather, crew members are trained and experienced inforest inventory. 

They received training, specimen kits. and forms to 

help them identify types of damage. 

South Carolina is the third Southeastern State 

to have a damage inventory. Agents selected for the 

survey were required to be (I) easily identifiable, (2) 

present year-round, and (3) present on trees at least 

1 inch in diameter at breast height. Therefore, small 

trees with problems such as brown spot and trees of 

all sizes with damage such as defoliation (which is 

not apparent in winter) are not accounted for in this 

report. 

Acres of forest types, timber removals, and mortality by species and size class are taken from the 

Resource Bulletin "South Carolina's Forests" 

(Knight 1979). The remaining data were analyzed 

by Forest Insect and Disease Management to 

develop the tables presented here. 

Many damaging agents: such as insects and fusiform rust, are easy to identify; others, such as root 

rot and littleleaf disease, are sometimes difficult to 

recognize. Consequently, the data for easily 

recognizable and persistent damage types are very 

reliable, whereas the data for damage types that are 

difficult to recognize are probably underestimated. 

SAMPLING PROCEDURE 

: The inventory employs a sampling procedure 

designed to provide reliable statistics primarily for 

the whole State, for large groups of counties, and 

for species with relatively large total volumes in the 

State. Accordingly, the errors associated with relatively minor species like cottonwood exceed those 

for such major species as loblolly pine. Procedures 

were as follows: 

1. Initial estimates of forestand nonforest areas 

were based on the classification of 67,524 sample 

clusters systematically spaced on the latest aerial 

photographs available. A subsample of 6,466 of the 

16-point clusters was groundi.hecked, and a linear 

regression was fitted to the data to determine the relationship between the photo and ground 

classification of the subsample. This procedure 

provides a means for adjusting the initial estimates 

of area for change in land use since date of 

photography and for photo misclassifications. 

2. Estimates of timber volume and forest classifications were based on measurements recorded at 

4,038 ground sample locations systematically 

distributed on forest land. A 10-point cluster of 

plots, measured with a basal-area factor of 37.5 

square feet per acre, was established on an acre at 

each of these sample locations. Trees less than 5 

inches d.b.h. were tallied on a portion of the fixedradius plots around the point centers. 

3. Equations prepared from detailed measurements collected on standing trees in South Carolina, 

and similar measurements taken throughout the 

Southeast, were used to compute the volume of 

individual tally trees. A mirror caliper and sectional 

aluminum poles were used to obtain the additional 

measurements on these standing trees required to 

construct volume equations. 

4. Felled trees were measured at 93 active cutting operations. These data were pooled with 

similar measurements taken in other Southeastern 

States to supplement the standing-tree volume 

study and to generate utilization factor sfor product 

and species groups to be analyzed at the State level. 

5. Estimates of growth, removals, and mortality were determined from remeasurement of 

4,231 permanent sample plots which were 

established in the fourth survey. 

COMPUTATIONS 

1. All field data were sent to Asheville for 

editing and were punched into cards andstored for 

machine computing, sorting, and tabulation. Final 

estimates were based onstatistical summaries of the 

data. 

2. Tree data were categorized as follows: saplings, 1.0 to 4.9 inches d.b.h.; softwood poles, 5.0 to 

8.9 inches d.b.h.; hardwood poles, 5.0 to 10.9 inches 

d.b.h.; softwood sawtimber, 9.0 inches and above; 

and hardwood sawtimber, 11.0 inches and above. 

3. The symptoms that were used to identify the 

cause of damage to living trees on the sampled plots 

are presented on pages 4-5 .The percent incidence 

and cull associated with each damage class were 
estimated. Percentage of species volume and total 

volume loss attributable to all agents damaging a 

species were also estimated. Note that data on 

percent incidence and cull associated damage do not 

imply total tree loss. Only a part of the volume in 

associated cull would fail to qualify for some 

commercial use such as firewood. This poletimber 

volume loss was determined by multiplying the 

percent incidence by the total wood volume in a tree 

species. This figure, in turn, was multiplied by the 

percent cull associated with the damaging agent to 

obtain wood fiber loss. The sawtimbervolume was 

calculated in the same manner but multiplied by 4.5 

to convert to thousand board feet. 

4. Quality loss was determined by taking the 

number of trees that were sufficiently large but did 

not qualify as sawtimber trees because of damage. 

The cubic-foot volume in the saw-log portion of 

these trees was computed. This volume is taken as 

the quality loss. Note, however, that the losses in 

quality in trees that were not damaged enough to be 

withdrawn from the sawtimher category are 

excluded. 

5. Mortality could not be attributed to damaging agents because it was often impossible to 

determine the cause of death. In many cases, a tree 

tallied in the last survey 10 years ago was simply 

missing. It was possible, however, to determine 

volume loss to mortality for each tree species on 

each plot. By using total mortality by tree species, it 

was possible to arriveat a total volume loss for poles 

and sawtimber by tree species. 

6. Economic impact was determined by multiplying the total wood fiber and quality loss for each 

tree species by the stumpage value per unit. These 

dollar estimates were taken from an average of all 

timber sales on National Forest land in South 

Carolina in 1979. The estimates were received by the 

State forest pest specialists and modified slightly. 

INCIDENCE OF 

DAMAGING AGENTS 

Detailed tables in this report show numbers of 

damaged trees and volumes of damaged timber by 

tree species. In examining these figures, some 

people may also he interested in the acreages in 

various forest types and stand-size classes. Table 1 

provides these numbers. 

Tables 2 and 3 show percentages of trees 

damaged by the agents recorded by size class and 

tree species. Overall, hardwoods had more damage 

than softwood, and saplings had moredamage than 

poletimber or sawtimber. Among softwoods, slash 

pines were most frequently damaged. Black cherry, 

black walnut, black locust, and red oak seemed to 

have the highest occurrence of damage among 

hardwoods. Significant damage for many of the 

major species is represented in pie charts (fig. 1). 

Tables 4 and 5 provide a detailed listing of damagr 

by species and damaging agent. 

For susceptible species of softwoods, fusiform 

rust was the most common damaging agent. Crews 

tallied insect damage on pines but found relatively 

little. Since the incidence data are for living trees 

only and southern pine beetle was at a low level 

during the survey, low occurrence was not 

surprising. However, during a southern pine beetle 

outbreak the occurrence would be markedly higher. 

Fusifonn rust was recorded only if the gall was 

on or within 12 inches of the main stem. If galls 

farther out on limbs had been recorded, occurrence 

of fusiform rust would have been higher. Annosus 

root rot, which occurs after thinning, was not 

abundant. With increased thinning in South Carolina, however, occurrence of this disease can be 

expected to increase. (In future surveys, root rot on 

all species will be recorded.) Littleleaf, which occurs 

on shortleaf pines over 20 years old and on clay 

soils, was less prevalent than expected. It was 

identified on less than 3 percent of living shortleaf 

pines. Incidence of cankers was low on most tree 

species. Black locust was an exception; over 30 percent of the sawtimber-size trees of this species had 

cankers. 

Damaging branch stubs were rare on softwoods 

but fairly common on hardwoods with black cherry, 

beech, and black walnut having the highest 

occurrence. Most of this damage occurred onlarge, 

old trees. Top breakage also occurred infrequently 

on softwoods but was very common in hardwoods. 

Among softwoods, basaldefects were common only 

on baldcypress and Atlantic white-cedar; 6 percent 

of the sawtimber trees of these species were affected. 

Basal defect was one of the most common damage 

types for hardwoods. 

Fire damage was found in almost all species and 

age classes, but the percentage of trees affected was 

low. Fire damage was most often found on young 

trees. Animal damage was also found on all species, 

but very few trees were affected. More than 50 

percent of the basswood sawtimher trees of this 

species were damaged by weather. Suppression and 

stagnation affected about 2 percent of the State's 

trees. Slash pine saplings, cottonwood saplings, 

sycamore poles, and chestnut oak saplings were 

most severely affected. The damage, as expected, 

was confined primarily to small, young trees. 

Logging and related damage was highest in spruce 

pine, beech,.and black walnut, with damage concentrated in saplings and poletimber. Form damage 

was severe on both hardwoodsand softwoods, hut it 

was much more common on hardwoods. On both 
Logging and related damage Fire-caused damage 

Other hasal damage Hardwood canker 
hardwoods and softwoods, frequency of form 

damage decreased as tree size increased. Ironically. 

form damage incidence was worst in black walnut 

and black cherry-two species in which good form 

is especially important. 

In reviewing the incidence, we see separate 

patterns for softwoods and hardwoods. Softwoods 

of all sizes are affected most often by form damage 

and fusiform rust. Weather and loggingdamageare 

also significant. Among hardwood saplings, form is 

clearly the most serious problem, with suppression, 

stagnation, and logging damage next in frequency. 

This trend continues into poletimber, witb top 

breakage and basal defects beginning to show 

increased significance. Hardwood sawtimber is frequently damaged by basal defects, top breakage, 

branch stubs, and cankers. These damaging agents 

are typical of mature and overmature trees. 

MORTALITY, ASSOCIATED CULL, 

AND QUALITY LOSS 

Table 6 shows estimated volumes of mortality, 

cull, and quality loss for major species groups in 

South Carolina. Annual harvests are also shown to 

place the volume losses in perspective. The mortality figures(table6) used in this report are the total 

for the resource. No discounting has been done for 

trees whose death represented no economic loss. 

The accumulated cull is that associated with the 

damage type and may not have been caused by the 

damaging agent. The quality loss occurs when a 

sawtimber tree associated with a damaging agent is 

dropped from the sawtimber classification. 

Annual mortality amounts to about 6,334 

million board feet of sawtimber and 60 million cubic 

feet of poletimber. Sixty-three percent of the sawtimber mortality loss and 74 percent of the.poletimber mortality occur in softwoods. Sawtimber 

mortality is about 17 percent of annual removals, 

and poletimber is 69 percent (table 6). 

Although mortality is heavier in softwoods, 

volume losses to cull are greater in hardwoods. The 

total cull of softwood sawtimber is equal to about 

only 4 percent of thesoftwood sawtimber mortality, 

while cull in hardwood sawtimber is about equal to 

the hardwood sawtimber mortality. It must be 

noted that the mortality figures areannual, whereas 

the cull is the total volume divided by 10. Distributing the cull losses over a 10-year period' shows a 

total annual loss of 3,475,000 cubic feet for poles 

and 119,423,000 board feet for sawtimber. 

'l)istiibuting the loss over a 10-year period is arbitrary. The 

reader may wish to consider another method for converting total 

cull LO annual cull. 

The quality loss is reported when a tree 

associated with a particular damage shifts from the 

sawtimber to nonsawtimber category. Distributing 

the loss over a 10-year period yields a 255.000 

board-foot annual loss for softwoods and a 3.4 

million hoard-foot loss for hardwoods. 

The greatest economic impact occurs in softwood sawtimber, for which the annual loss is 

$25,557,775 (tahle 7). This figure is almost double 

that for hardwood sawtimber-$14,740,812. In 

poletimber, the difference is even greater, with the 

$786,562 softwood loss exceeding that of hardwood ($96,756) by more than eight times. In all, 64 

percent of all economic impact occurs in softwoods. About 98 percent of the total economic impact is in sawtimber-size trees. 

PAST TREATMENT OR 

DISTURBANCE 

In stands that have been significantly disturbed 

since the last survey, the cause of the disturbance 

and any needed corrective treatment are noted. 

Table 8 summarizes these observations. Only those 

disturbances classified as "damage types" are 

included. Other disturbances such as thinning are 

excluded. 

Diseases head the list of damaging disturbances. Of the 141 sample stands witb significant disease, 84 required no remedial treatment, 16 

required salvage, 0 needed harvesting, 21 needed 

thinning, 6 needed cleaning, 6 needed to be converted, and 8 needed to be regenerated artificially 

(table 8). Wildfire caused the second most damage. 

The relative ranking of nine treatment or disturbance types is shown in table 8. Under treatment 

needed, wildfire and diseases required the greatest 

amount and largest variety of treatments. 

DEFINITIONS 

Damaging Agents and Their Symptoms 

Insects.-All pines. Loose hark, insect galleries 

in inner hark, exit holes. 

Fusiform rust.-Slash, loblolly, pitch, and pond 

pines. Spindle-shaped galls on stem or within 12 

inches of stem, canker on stem with sunken rotten 

center encircled by callus ridge, witches' broom, 

orange fruiting structures in spring. 

Annosus root rut.-Pines and redcedar. 

Diseased trees frequently occur in groups (centers) 

which usually contain dead or wind-thrown trees; 

diseased trees with thin, tufted crowns: windthrown trees exhibit stringy, white root rot: perennial shelflike or flat conks against base of trees in 

litter or under roots of wind-thrown trees; conks are 

rubbery with tan-to-brown upper surface and white 

pore-bearing undersurface. 
Littleleaf disease.-Shortleaf pine. Affected 

trees occur in groups. Short yellow needles,reduced 

shoot growth on trees over 20 years old, large crops 

of undersized cones, usually occur on heavy soils of 

poor internal drainage. 

Hardwood cankers.-All hardwoods. Dead 

sunken area on stem, frequently showing annual 

callus ridges. 

Other diseases.-All species. Damage due to 

diseases other than those indicated. For example, 

eastern gall rust, pitch canker, and red heart on 

pines. 

Branch stubs.-All species. Branch holes or 

stubs greater than 4 inches in diameter on stem. 

Top breakage.-All species. Broken stem 

greater than 4 inches in diameter. 

0therbasaldefects.-Allspecies. Butt rot due to 

causes other than fire or logging damage (root rot, 

parent stump, frost seam, low stubs, butt bulge). 

Cause of cull is below breast height. 

Fire.--All species. Fire scar usually at base of 

stem, widespread in stand, usually on uphill side of 

slope, charring or rehurned stems. 

Antma1.-All species. Beaver, bear, bird, 

rodent, rabbit,, etc. 

Weather.-All species. Wind-thrown, lightning 

strikes, ice and snow, hail. 

Suppression and stagnation.-All species. 

Overtopped tree with poor form. 

Logging and related.-All species. Logging scar 

on stem, callus ridges within I to 2 years after 

wounding, scattered in stand, no charring, limb 

breakage, and/ or stem scar near crown resulting 

from tree felling. Look for skid trails, stumps, etc. 

Damage from turpentining.-All pines. Scars 

left during collection of gum. Naval stores. 

Form (dnmaging).-All species. Deformed due 

to unknown causes. 

Forest Survey Terms 

Acceptable trees.-Growing-stock trees of commercial species that meet specified standards of size 

and quality, but not qualifying as desirable trees. 

Accumulated volume loss.-Percentage of trees 

affected times the percent cull times the volume for 

the species. 

Associated cull.-Percentage of affected trees 

containing cull associated with the indicated 

damaging agent. 

, Associated volume loss from sawtimber topoletimber.-Volume in the saw-log portion of trees 

sufficiently large to qualify as sawtimber but unsatisfactory for sawtimber because of damaging 

agent. 

Easal area.-The area in square feet of the cross 

section at breast height of a single tree or of all the 

trees in a stand, usually expressed as square feet of 

basal area per acre. 

Commercial forest land.-Forest land producing or capable of producing crops of industrial 

wood and not withdrawn from timber utilization. 

Commercial species.-Tree species presently or 

prospectively suitable for industrial wood products. 

Desirable trees.-Growing-stock trees of commerical species having no serious defects in quality 

limiting present or prospective use for timber products, of relatively high vigor. and containing no 

pathogens that may result in death or serious deterioration before rotation age. 

Diameter class.-A classification of trees based 

on diameter outside bark, measured at breast height 

(4% feet above the ground). D.b.h. is the common 

abbreviation for "diameter at breast height." Twoinch-diameter classes are commonly used in Forcst 

Survey, with the even inch the approximate 

midpoint for a class. For example. the 6-inch class 

includes trees 5.0 through 6.9 inches d.b.h., 

inclusive. 

Growing-stock trees.--Live trees of commercial species qualifying as desirable or acceptable 

trees. 

Incidence.-Percentage of susceptible trees affected by the agent. 

Poletimber trees.-Growing-stock trees of commercial species at least 5.0 inches d.h.h. but smaller 

than sawtimber size. 

Saplings.-Live trees 1.0 to 5.0 inches in 

diameter at breast height. 

Saw log.-A log meeting minimum standards of 

diameter, length, and defect, including logs at least 8 

feet long, sound and straight, and with a minimum 

diameter inside hark for softwoods of 6 inches (8 

inches for hardwoods). 

Sawtimber trees.-Live trees of commercial 

species containing at least a 12-foot saw log, or two 

noncontiguous saw logs, each 8 feet or longer, and 

with at least one-third of the gross board-foot 

volume between the I-foot stump and minimum 

saw-logtop being sound. Softwoodsmust beat least 

9.0 inches and hardwoods at least 11.0 inches in 

diameter at breast height. 

Sawtimber volume.-Net volume of the saw-log 

portion of live sawtimber in board-foot International 114-inch rule. 

Softwoods. - Coniferous trees, usually evergreen, having needles or scalelike leaves. 

Pines. Yellow pine species which include lohlolly, longleaf, slash, shortleaf, pitch, Virginia 

Table Mountain, sand, and spruce pine. 

Other softwoods. White pine, hemlock, 

cypress, eastern redcedar, whitecedar, spruce, and 

fir. 

Stand-size class.--A classification offorest land 

based on the size class of growing-stock trees on the 

area. 
Sawtimber stands.Stands at least 16.7 percent stocked with growing-stock trees, with half or 

more of total stocking in sawtimber or poletimber 

trees, and with sawtimber stocking at least equal to 

poletimber stocking. 

Po1etimberstands.Standsatleast 16.7percent 

stocked with growing-stock trees of which half or 

more of this stocking is in poletimber and sawtimber trees, and with poletimber stocking exceeding that of sawtimber. 

Sapling-seedling stands.Stands at least 16.7 

percent stocked with growing-stock trees of which 

more than half of the stocking is saplings and 

seedlings. 

REFERENCES 

This publication reports incidence and impact 

of damaging agents on South Carolina's timber. 

It does not discuss their identification or control. 

Some of the references listed below are cited in 

our discussion. Others are provided to assist those 

desiring additional information on causal agents. 

Bennett, William H., Charles W. Chellman, and 

William R. Holt. 

1958. Insect enemies of southernpines. USDA 

For. Serv.,Occas. Pap. 164,35 p. South. 

For. Exp. Stn., New Orleans, La. 

Burns, Denver P. 

1970. Insect enemies of yellow-poplar. USDA 

For. Serv., Res. Pap. NE-159, 15 p. 

Northeast. For. Exp. Stn., Broomall,Pa. 

Craver, Gerald C. 

1979. Forest statistics forthe Northerncoastal 

Plain of South Carolina, 1978. USDA 

For. Serv., Resour. Bull. SE47, 33 p. 

Southeast. For. Exp. Stn., Asheville, 

N.C. 

Filer, T. H., J. D. Solomon, F. I. McCracken, 

and others. 

1977. Sycamorepests: aguide to majorinsects, 

diseases, and air pollution. 36 p. USDA 

For. Serv., Southeast. Area, State and 

Priv. For., Atlanta, Ga. [Unnumbered 

publication.] 

Holmes, Francis W., Clifford S. Chater, and 

William B. Becker. 

[n.d.]. Culture, diseasrs. injuries. and pests of 

maples. Univ. Mass.. Coop. Ext. Serv., 

Puhl. 443, 44 p. 

Johnson, W. T., W. A. Sinclair,and J. L. Saunders. 

[n.d.] Insects and diseases of willow and poplar. CornellUniv., Pest Leafl. A-10,37 p. 

Ithaca, N.Y. 

Knight, Herbert A,, and Joe P. McClure. 

1979. South Carolina's forests. USDA For. 

Serv., Resour. Bull. SE-51,66 p. Southeast. For. Exp. Stn., Asheville, N.C. 

Lockard, C. R., J. A. Putnam, and R. D. Carpenter. 

1963. Grade defects in hardwood timber and 

logs. USDA For. Serv., Agric. Handb. 

244, 39 p. U.S. Gov. Print. Off., Washinton, D.C. 

Morris, R. C., T. H. Filer, J. D. Solomon, F. 1. 

McCracken, N. A. Overgaard, and M. J. Weiss. 

1975. Insects and diseases of cottonwood. 

USDA For. Serv., Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-8, 

37 p. South. For. Exp. Stn., New Orleans, 

La. [In cooperation withSoutheast. Area, 

State and Priv. For.] 

Sheffield, Raymond M., and Joanne Hutchison. 

1979. Forest statisticsfor the Southern Coastal 

Plain of South Carolina, 1978. USDA 

For. Serv., Resour. Bull. SE49, 33 p. 

Southeast. For. Exp. Stn., Asheville, N.C 

Solomon, J. D., F. I. McCracken, R. Lewis, 

and others. 

[In press]. Oak pests: a guide to major insects, diseases, air pollution and chemical injury. 

USDA For. Serv., Gen. Rep. SA-GR-I I, 

State and Priv. For., Atlanta, Ga. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 

1972. Insects anddiseasesof treesin ihe South. 

USDA For. Serv., Southeast. Area, 

State and Priv. For. 7,81 p. Atlanta, Ga. 
Figure 1.--Significant types of damage on major species of forest trees 

in South Carolina, 1978. 

HARDWOODS 

- ALL OTHERS 5% 

FORM 72% 

DAMAGE FREE 23% 

ASH 

SAPLINGS 

FORM 1101- - OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 7% 

. TOP BREAKAGE 5% 

'ALL OTHERS 3% 

'BRANCH STUBS 

' DAMAGE FREE 72% 

ASH 

SAWTIMBER 
1 FORM 73%. 

ALL OTHERS 9% 

DAMAGE FREE 18% 

BLACK CHERRY 

SAPLINGS 

CANKERS 5% - - OTHER DISEASES 5% 

ALL OTHERS 15% FORM 7% - 

TOP BREAKAGE 7% - 

u 

- DAMAGE FREE 61% 

BLACK CHERRY 

POLETIMBER 

OTHER BASAL DE 

. OTHER DISEASES 5% 

.ALL OTHERS 1% 

BRANCH STUBS 14% 

BLACK CHERRY 

SAWTIMBER 
BLACK WALNUT 

SAPLINGS 

TOP BREAKAGE 12% 

ALL OTHERS 2% 

- 

' DAMAGE FREE 60% 

BRANCH STUBS 9% 

OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 13% . - LOGGING 3% 

- DAMAGE FREE 6796 

BLACK WALNUT 

SAWTIMBER 

BLACK WALNUT 

POLETIMBER 

Continued 

9 
FORM 

OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 

. SUPPRESSION 5% 

CHESTNUT OAK 

SAPL-INGS 

OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 15% 

-TOP BREAKAGE 3% 

ALL OTHERS 1% 

u DAMAGE FREE 67% 

CHESTNUT OAK 

SAWTIMBER 
ALL OTHERS 5% 

FORM 63 40 . 

DAMAGE FREE 32% 

ELM 

SAPLINGS 

OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 7% . BRANCH STUBS 3% 

. ALL OTHERS 4% 

DAMAGE FREE 65% 

ELM 

SAWTIMBER 

. ALL OTHERS 5% 

HICKORY 

SAPLINGS 
ALL OTHERS 5% 

u DAMAGE FREE 59% 

OTHER EASTERN HARDWOODS 

SAPLINGS 

FORM 7% 

OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 9% - 

BRANCH STUBS 4% 

LOGGING 1% 

' ALL OTHERS 3% 

DAMAGE 

u 

FREE 71%. 

OTHER EASTERN HARDWOODS 

SAWTIMBER 
ALL OTHERS 5% 

DAMAGE FREE 42% 

SELECT RED OAK 

SAPLINGS 

FORM 

OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 8% - . FORM 7% 

OP BREAKAGE 2% 

BRANCH STUBS 2% 

ALL OTHERS 3% 

DAMAGE FREE \J 76%. 

OTHER RED OAKS 

SAWTIMBER 

.L OTHERS 5% 

1. DAMAGE FREE 49% 

OTHER RED OAKS 

SAPLINGS 
1 FORM 37% - 

1 

I . SUPPRESSION 3% 

. ALL OTHERS 4% 

I 

I 

1 

I 

I 

1 DAMAGE FREE 56% 

SELECT WHITE OAK 

SAPLINGS 

FORM 55% 

ALL OTHERS 7% 

- DAMAGE FREE 38% 

OTHER WHITE OAKS 

SAPLINGS 

OTHER WHITE OAKS 

SAWTIMBER 
. ALL OTHERS 7% 

FORM 62%. 

. DAMAGE FREE 31 % 

SOFT MAPLE 

SAPLINGS 

FORM 8% . . OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 59b 

CANKERS 2% 

ALL OTHERS 4% 

OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 

SOFT MAPLE 

FORM 13% . POL 

TOP BREAKAGE 8% 

- BRANCH STUBS 2% 

- ALL OTHERS 5% 

14%. 

SOFT MAPLE 

SAWTIMBER 
FORM 

. ALL OTHERS 7% 

DAMAGE FREE 35% 

TUPELO AND BLACKGUM 

SAPLINGS 

FORM 9% . TOP BREAKAGE 7% 

CANKERS 3% 

OTHER BASAL DEFECTS 13%. ALL OTHERS 6% 

DAMAGE FREE 62% 

TUPELO AND BLACKGUM 

SAWTIMBER 
ALL OTHERS 7% 

DAMAGE FREE 51% 

SWEETGUM 

SAPLINGS 

FORM 30% 

. ALL OTHERS 2% 

DAMAGE FREE 68% 

YELLOW-POPLAR 

SAPLINGS 
ALL OTHERS 4% 

I 

i 

I 

I DAMAGE FREE 66% 

LOBLOLLY PlNE 

SAPLINGS FUSIFORM RUST 17% . 

SOFTWOODS 

FORM 4% 

- LOGGING I% 

' ALL OTHERS 2% 

I FORM 19% . 

. SUPPRESSION 4% 

~ SHORTLEAF PlNE 

I SAPLINGS 

1 18 

LOBLOLLY PlNE 

POLETIMBER 
SUPPRESSION 2% 

ALL OTHERS 2% 

DAMAGE FREE 61% 

SLASH PINE 

SAPLINGS 

FUSIFORM 39%- 

' ALL OTHERS 5% 

DAMAGE FREE 5636 

FUSIFORM 26% 

. FORM 2% 

- ALL OTHERS 4% 

rLDAMAGE FREE 68% 

SLASH PlNE 

SAWTIMBER 

SLASH PlNE 

POLETIMBER 
FORM 20%. 

.OTHER DISEASES 4% 

'A- ALL OTHERS 2% 

DAMAGE FREE 71% 

VIRGINIA PINE 

SAPLINGS 

Table 1.-Area of commercial forest land, 

by stand-size class and forest type 

Forest 

classification Acres 

I 

Stand-size class: 

Sawtimber 5,454,246 

Poletimber 3,552,830 

Saplings-seedlings 3,223,313 

Nonstocked areas 272,517 

All stand sizes 

Forest type: 

Loblolly pine 

Oak-hickory 

Oak-gumxypress 

Oak-pine 

Shortleaf pine 

Slash pine 

Longleaf pine 

Pond pine 

Elm-ash-cottonwood 

Southern scrub oak 

Virginia pine 

Eastern redcedar 

White pine-hemlock 

Spruce pine 

Pitch pine 

Chestnut oak 

All types 
Table 2. Percent of susceptible softwood trees damaged, by species and tree size 

Host 

Loblolly pine 

Shortleaf pine 

Redcedar 

Slash pine 

Longleaf pine 

Virginia pine 

Pond pine 

Baldcypress 

White pine 

Spruce pine 

Pitch pine 

Atlantic white-cedar 

Total population 

(thousands) 

Table 3.-Percent of susceptible hardwood trees damaged, by species and tree size 

.. Percent .---------.. 

1,419,136 34 24 20 

535,107 24 8 8 

253,583 22 8 8 

193,131 39 44 32 

128,954 16 16 13 

120,536 29 11 13 

103,058 4 1 31 26 

27,420 27 11 17 

6,344 16 0 7 

4,469 57 16 22 

1,348 100 0 13 

429 0 0 24 

Trees damaged 

Host 

Saplings Sawtimber 

---- -. -- - - -- percent - - ---- ------ 

Other eastern hardwoods 2,750,458 41 19 29 

Sweetgum 1,226,273 49 18 22 

Other red oaks 962,620 5 1 17 24 

Soft maple 815,196 69 25 42 

Tupelo & blackgum 730,767 65 29 38 

Ash 287,671 77 23 28 

Hickory 259,151 53 16 22 

Select white oaks 209,061 44 13 17 

Elm 189,199 68 15 3 5 

Other white oaks 151,737 62 20 25 

Yellow-poplar 122,951 32 16 17 

Black cherry 106,928 82 29 43 

Select red oaks 55,563 58 15 18 

Bay & magnolia 34,116 57 5 38 

Hard maple 30,187 75 22 54 

Chestnut oak 16,136 57 15 33 

Beech 12,053 77 8 52 

,cottonwood 8,694 65 23 29 

Sycamore 4,661 58 20 21 

Black walnut 2,706 72 40 33 

Black locust 1,628 100 36 48 

Basswood 285 -. 12 5 1 

Total population 

(thousands) 

Poletimber 

Trees damaged 

Saplings Poletimber Sawtimber 
Table 4Damage incidence and associated cull in softwoods in South Carolina. 1478 

I ~,&~~

LOBLOLLY PINE (1,419.136,000 susceptible trees) 

Agent 

insect 0 

Other disease .05 

Fus~form rust 16.07 

L~ttleleaf 

disease 0 

Branch stubs 0 

Top breakage .I6 

Other basal 

defects 0 

Fire .36 

Animal 0 

Weather .I1 

Suppression & 

slagnation 1.99 

Logging & 

related .YO 

Form 1419 

Insect 

Other disease 

Fusiform rust 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Supprcsslon & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Turpentining 

Form 

LONGLEAF PlNE (128.954,000 susceptible trees) 

Incidence of damaee 

PITCH PlNE (1,348,000 susceptible trees) 

Saplings 

Animal 0 0 2.21 0 0 0 0 0 

Weather 0 0 8.58 0 0 0 0 0 

Form 100.00 0 2.70 0 0 0 0 0 

Associated cull 

Continued 

Poletimber Poletimber 

volume 1095 

from sawtimber to 

Sawlimber Sawtimber polerimher 

Accumulated 

volume loss 

Poletimber Sawtimber 
lable 4.-Damage incidence and assoflated cull lii sottwoods in South Carol~na. 1978 ('i,nliiiocd 

- 

1 I I 1 Associated 

POND PINE (103,058.000 susceptible trees) 

Agent 

Insect 0 

Other disease 0 

Fusiform rust 12.73 

Top breakage 0 

Other basal 

defects 0 

Fire 3.46 

Animal 0 

Weather 1.38 

Suppresslon& 

stagnation 1.45 

Lagging & 

related 93 

Form 21.51 

SLASH PlNE (193.131.000 susceptible trees) 

lnsect 

Other disease 

Fusiform rust 

Top breakage 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Turpentining 

Form 

Incidence 01' damage 

SPRUCE PlNE (4,469,000 susceptible trees) 

Associated cull 

Saplings Poletimber Sawtimber 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

SHORTLEAF PINE (535.107.0W susce~tible trees) 

Poletimber 

Insect 

Other disease 

Fusiiorm rust 

Littleleaf 

disease 

'Top breakage 

Other basal 

*defects 

Fire 

Anlmal 

Weather 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

~olurne loss 

from sawtimber lo 

Sawtimber polelimber 

Accumulated 

volume loss 

0 0 

0 0 

Continued 

Poletimber Sawt~mbrr 
l.able 4.-llamagr incidence and associatcd cull in softwoods in South Carolina. 1978-Continocd 

-Iszed 

Accumulated volume loss 

irom sawlimhrr lo 

Agent Saplings Poletimber Sawtimber Poletimber Sawtlmber Poletimber Sawtlmhrr poletlmber 

............ percenr .....--........... 

I LVlRClNlA PINE (120,536,000 susceptible trees) 

18 1.54 0 0 

M ft' M hf 

insect 

Othcr disease 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Animal 

Weather 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

BALD CYPRESS (27.420.000 suscept~ble creel) 

Other disease 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

ATLANTIC WHITE-CEDAR (429,000 susceptible trees) 

Other basal 

defects 

Logging & 

related 

HEMLOCK (605,000 susceptible trees) 

Logging & 

related 
POND CYPRESS (41.036.000 susceptible trees) 

l.ablc 4Damage lncidence and associared cull in softwoods in South Carolina. 1978-Contlnt~rd 

Other disease 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Loeing & 

related 

Form 

Agent 

REDCEDAR (253.583.000 susceptible trees) 

Other disease 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Weather 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Farm 

Insect 

Tap brcakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Incidence of damage 

Saplings 

Associated cull 

Poletimber Poletimber 

Associated 

volume loss 

from rawIlmhrr lu 

Sawtimber Sawtimber poletimber 

Accumulated 

volurn~ IOSS 

Poletlrnher Sawtlmber 
Table 5.-Damage incidence and associated cull in hardwoods in South Carolina. 1978 

... ... ." 

Ageni / Saplings / Poletirnkr 1 Sawtlmber / Poletimber 1 Saut~mber 1 Paletimber / ~awtimberl poleumber 

lncldence of damage 

BASSWOOD (285,000 susceptible trees) 

Top breakage 0 11.67 0 5.00 0 5 0 0 

Weather 0 0 51.11 0 0 0 0 0 

?;Ahpr in 

Associated cull 

Oiher disease 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defccts 

Fire 

Weather 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

BLACK CHERRY (106,928,000 susceptible trees) 

4.52 5.62 0 0 0 0 0 

Accumulated 

volums loss 

Other disease 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Weather 

Animal 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Farm 

volume loss 

lrom sawCOTTONWOOD (8,694,000 susceptible trees) 

0 0 1.35 0 13.33 

ELM (189,199.WO susceptible trees) 

Other disease .92 0 3.33 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Weather 

Animal 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Table 5.-Damage incidence and associated cull in hardwood? in South Carolina. 1978 Cont~tl~lsd 

lnc~dence of damage 

Branch stubs 

Tap breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Farm 

Agent 

BEECH (12,053,000 susceptible trees) 

0 0 318 0 15.00 0 932 506 

0 0 2.18 0 36.67 0 1.559 20 

tlmhcr to 

Associated cull 

BLACK LOCIJST (1,628,000 susceptible trees) 

Hardwood 

cankers 0 13.48 30.43 6.00 20.00 28 547 0 

Other basal 

defects 0 14.78 17.39 40.00 5 00 206 XI 0 

Wcather 0 5.02 0 5.00 0 I 11 0 

Form 100.00 2.79 0 0 0 0 0 0 

......-.......---.....- percent ........---.....---.. M/Z' M bf M hf 

ASH (287.67 1,000 susceptible trees) 

Other disease 0 0 .07 0 40.00 0 344 0 

Hardwood 

cankers .I9 .42 .70 0 4.17 0 364 0 

Branch stubs .32 52 219 1000 13.96 45 3.868 182 

Top breakage 2.31 4.76 5.38 19.50 29.10 809 19.784 421 

Other basal 

defects 29 4.07 6.76 15.31 17.00 543 547 20 

Fire 0 36 0 7.50 0 0 0 0 

Weather .12 .I9 I5 0 0 0 0 0 

Animal 0 .74 .76 0 0 0 0 0 

Suppression & 

stagnation 1.36 2.01 .30 0 0 0 0 0 

Logging & 

related .57 2.30 1.06 1.25 83 25 101 0 

Form 71.96 7.69 10.82 0 07 0 101 0 

Saplings 

BLACK WALNUT (2,706,000 susceptible trees) 

Accumulated 

volume loss 

Branch stubs 0 0 8.68 0 I000 0 405 0 

1-op breakage 0 11.89 0 12.50 0 33 0 0 

Other basal 

defects 0 0 13.22 0 35.00 0 2.187 XI 

Suppression & 

stagnation 0 1.73 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Logging & 

related 0 25.73 3.31 0 10.00 0 162 0 

Form 71.80 0 7.85 0 0 0 0 0 

iolume losq 

(rum wwPoletimbei Sawtimber Poletimber Sawtimber Poletimber Sawtimber polet~mhcr 
Table 5.-Damaee incidence and assoctatcd cull in hardwoods in South Carolin;,. 1YiX Conrlni>cd 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Weather 

Animal 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Agent 

HICKORY (259,151,000 susceptible trees) 

CHESTNUT OAK (16,136,000 susceptible trees) 

Branch stubs 0 0 1.97 0 13.75 0 688 6 l 

Tap breakage 0 2.80 2.69 15.00 47.50 59 3.220 0 

Other basal 

Incidence of damage 

defects 

Fire 

Associated cull 

Saplings Poletimber Sawtimber 

Suppression & 

stagnation 5.27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Form 46.72 7.57 13.99 0 0 0 0 0 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Poletimber 

SELECT RED OAKS (55,563,000 susceptible trees) 

YOIU~C 10s, 

from sawtimber to 

Sawtimber poleumkr 

Accumulated 

volume loss 

Poletimber Sawtimber 
Table 5.-Damage mcidence and associated cull in hardwoods in South Clrollna. 1978 Conrinued 

Other dlsease 0 

Hardwood 

cankers 0 

Branch stubs .62 

Top breakage 1.47 

Other basal 

breakage 19 

Fire 0 

Animal 0 

Weather .16 

Logging & 

related 1.94 

Form 37.17 

Suppression & 

stagnation 2.60 

Agent 

--------------- Percen, .......-......------.. M ft ' M bf' 

SELECT WHITE OAKS (209,061,000 suscrptible trees) 

.I5 05 0 0 0 0 

OTHER RED OAKS (962,620,000 susceptible trees) 

Other disease .06 I5 .51 15.22 9.52 117 3.301 I62 

Hardwood 

cankers .I4 1.13 1.97 .70 4.36 40 5.852 223 

Branch stubs 10 28 1.98 33.49 20.30 479 27.398 668 

Incidence of damage 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Suppression & 

sfagnetion 

Saplings 

Other disease 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

- 

Associated cull 

1.85 2.45 20.70 35.01 1,958 

1.48 7.91 20.13 21.82 1.523 

1.17 .88 3.19 17.07 191 

.06 0 0 0 0 

.79 .80 3.09 5.33 125 

1.94 .77 2.55 2.09 253 

7.06 6.87 .20 .08 72 

.64 07 0 11.54 0 

OTHER WHlTE OAKS (151,737,000 susceptible trees) 

.38 .59 13.86 23.8 1 40 

1.96 1.78 3.04 5.56 45 

.37 1.93 816 13.97 23 

1.68 2.18 22.44 64.29 285 

217 5.98 13.40 22.75 220 

1.47 1.63 5.06 3.48 56 

1.16 .55 .68 10.26 6 

4.39 2.76 1.87 4.62 62 

4.74 7.73 0 0 0 

Polet~mber Polet~mbrr 

0 40 

Continued 

volume loss 

from rawtirnher to 

Sawtlmbcr Sawtimber poietlmkr 

Accumulated 

volume IUSS 

Poleilmber Sawtcmbei 
Table 5.-Damage incidence and associated cull in hardwoods in South Parolin;t. 1978 clirit,nr~ed 

1 

Agent 1 Saplings 1 Poleumber 1 Sawtimber / Poletimber I Sawtimber I Poletimber I ~awttmhrrl poletimber 

I Associated 

Incidence of damage 

HARD MAPLE (30.187.000 susceptible trees) 

Top breakage 1.59 0 15.49 0 59.09 0 3.179 101 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

Associated cull 

Other disease 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

SOFT MAPLE (815,196.000 susceptlblc trees) 

.II .31 21.05 2.27 

timber to 

Accumulated 

volume 105s 

Top breakage .75 

Other basal 

defects 0 

Fire 1.00 

Animal .75 

Form 54.27 

Suppression & 

stagnation 0 

volume loss 

from sawBAY & MAGNOLIA (34.1 16.000 susceptible trees) 

2.05 14.69 4.35 57.69 14 6.237 122 
Table 5.-Damage incldsncc and associated cull in hardwoods in Sooth C,irol~ni~. 1978 ~,~ntlt~ur~l 

TUPELO & BLACKGUM (730,767,000 susceptible trees) 

.38 41 0 0 0 

Agent 

Other disease 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Tap breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

OTHER EASTERN HARDWOODS (2,750,458 susceptible trees) 

Other disease .W 0 .20 0 30.77 0 

Hardwood 

cankers 

Branch stubs 

Top breakage 

Other basal 

defects 

Fire 

Animal 

Weather 

Logging & 

related 

Form 

Suppression & 

stagnation 

lncldence of damage 

Sapltngs 

Associated cull 

Poletimber Poletlmber 

volume 10s) 

from rawtlmber lo 

Sawtimber Sawtimber puletimber 

Accumulated 

volume loss 

Pulrumbcr Sawttmbrr 
Table 6.-Timber removals and wood loss to paletimber and sawtimber 

Volume loss due toSpecies Annual timber removals k-- Annual mortality 1 Annual accumulated cull 

SOFTWOODS 

Yellow pines" 58.105 1,330,964 43.298 192.830 I I5 2.106 198 

Annual quaiit" loss 

1 1 from sawtimber 

Eastern whlte pine 0 2,120 0 0 0 69 0 

Cypressb 0 ?3,443 644 76 1 67 5.103 55 

Other eastern 

softwoods' 509 3.967 488 4,724 3 97 2 

Total 58,614 1,360,494 44.430 198.315 185 7.375 255 

Poletimber 

Select white & 

red oaks" 3,244 

Other white & 

red oaks' 9,663 

Hickory 1,427 

Hard maple 0 

Sweetgum 7,000 

Ash, walnut, 

black cherry 618 

Yellow-poplar 354 

Tupelo & 

blackgum 2,898 

Bay & 

magnolia 0 

Other eastern 

hardwoods' 3,144 

HARDWOODS 

M/I' M bf M /iJ M hf Mfr3 M bl M hl 

Sawtimber 

'Loblolly. shortleaf, Virginia, pitch, pond, longleaf, slash, spruce pine. 

bBaldcypress and pondcypress: 

'Cedar and hemlock. 

'White, swamp chestnut, cherrybark, northern red. 

'Chestnut, post, watcr, southern red, scarlet, black. 

'Basswood, cottonwood, elm, sycamore, beech, black locust, and soft maple. 

Poletimber Sawtimber Poletimber 
Table 7.-Annual economic impact of damage on the timber resource 

Species 

Softwoods: 

Sawtimber (M bm)" 

Poles (M ft31b 

Annual 

volume 

wood 

fiber loss 

Hardwoods: 

Sawtimber (M bm) 

Poles (M ft3) 

All species: 

Sawtimber (M bm) 

Poles (M ft') 

Total 

Stumpage 

value. 

per 

unit 

"I it' = 4.5 fbm 

9 cord = 75 ft' 

Dollar 

IOSS 

Table 8.-Past treatment or disturbance as related to treatment needed. by number of samples 

1 Treatment needed 

Wildfire 37 2 I 2 6 5 2h 

Mansaused 

flooding 2 I 0 0 I 0 5 

Grazing 42 0 3 2 2 0 7 

Construction 26 0 3 3 3 0 10 

Salvage cut 6 I I I I 2 4 

Significant 

disease 84 16 0 2 1 6 6 8 

Significant 

insect 32 4 5 3 2 0 I I 

Significant 

natural 20 2 I I 2 4 5 

All others. 

including 

none 2,196 I3 243 148 246 159 687 

Total of all 

samples, including temporary plots' 2,445 39 257 181 269 176 763 

"Total is not the same as the sum of all columns because all damage disturbances are not used in the table. 

Stand 

Item 1 NOLV 1 Salvage 1 Hawest Thinning I Cleaning 1 conversion 

Artificial 

regeneratcon 

rota1 



The Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, is dedicated to the principle of multiple 

use management of the Nation's 

forest resources for sustained 

yields of wood, water, forage, 

wildlife, and recreation. Through 

forestry research, cooperation 

with the States and private forest 

owners, and management of the 

National Forests and National 

Grasslands, it strives-as directed by Congress-to provide 

increasingly greater servlce 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.