United States 

Department of 

Agriculture

Forest Service 

Pacific Northwest 

Research Station 

General Technical 

Report

PNW-GTR-432 

December 1998

Proceedings,

Western Juniper Forum '97

This file was created by scanning the printed publication. 

Text errors identified by the software have been corrected; 

however, some errors may remain. 
EDITORS

SCOTT LEAVENGOOD is an Oregon State University wood products extension agent

based in Klamath Falls, OR; and LARRY SWAN is the informal U.S. Forest Service

liaison for the Western Juniper Commercialization Project, Winema National Forest,

Klamath Falls, OR.

The information provided in this proceedings is in the form of extended abstracts or short

notes. The intended audience is forest and range managers with responsibility for

managing lands where western juniper grows; corporations, small businesses,

entrepreneurs, and community groups with an interest in developing and marketing

western juniper products; and local governments interested in encouraging job creation or

promoting ecosystem health. It is not intended as a primary source of new scientific

information, though some of the information contained here is of scientific value. It

should generally be considered preliminary and observational in nature. Authors were

responsible for obtaining technical review of their work prior to submission of abstracts

and notes for this publication. The views expressed in each paper are those of the author

and not necessarily those of the sponsoring organizations or the USD A Forest Service.

State and Private Forestry, U.S. Forest Service provided funding for printing this

publication, and the Social and Economic Values Program at the Portland Forestry

Sciences Laboratory, U.S. Forest Service provided support with the editing and

compilation of this report.
Proceedings, Western Juniper Forum '97

Bend, Oregon

April 21, 1997

Scott Leavengood and Larry Swan, Editors

Sponsored by:

Hessel Tractor

Oregon State University Extension Service

USDA Forest Service:

Pacific Northwest Region

Ochoco National Forest

Deschutes National Forest

Fremont National Forest

Modoc National Forest

Bureau of Land Management:

Burns District

Lakeview District

Prineville District

Vale District

Oregon Economic Development Department and Eastern Oregon Regional Strategy

Boards

Northwest Wood Products Association

Published by:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Portland, Oregon

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-432

December 1998

i
ABSTRACT

Leavengood, Scott: Swan, Larry, eds. 1998. Proceedings, western juniper forum '97:

Proceedings of a meeting; 1997 April 21; Bend, OR. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-432.

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

Research Station. 97 p.

This proceedings is a compilation of 30 articles on various aspects of the management

and commercialization of western juniper. The topics are split between commercial and

industrial topics, and science and management topics. Presenters were asked to provide

abstracts, not full papers, and to include who to contact for more information or a copy of

the complete paper, or when and where the information or study was expected to be

published.

Keywords: Western juniper, western juniper proceedings, western juniper marketing and

utilization, western juniper biology and management.

ii
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Contents

WESTERN JUNIPER FORUM '97 OPENING SESSION 1

PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION 2

SETTING THE STAGE: WHAT HAS CHANGED AND WHAT HAS REMAINED THE SAME SINCE

THE 1993 WESTERN JUNIPER FORUM? 3

SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT ABSTRACTS SESSION 1 13

WESTERN JUNIPER WOODLANDS: IS MINE LIKE YOURS? 14

OVERVIEW OF JUNIPERS IN THE WORLD, AND IN THE U.S. WEST; RECENT INVENTORIES OF

WESTERN JUNIPER AND PLANS FOR OREGON 16

WESTERN JUNIPER IN THE INTERIOR COLUMBIA BASIN: LANDSCAPE TRENDS AND MANAGEMENT

DIRECTION 19

WESTERN JUNIPER MANAGEMENT: A RESOURCE CONSERVATION ORGANIZATION'S PERSPECTIVE

20

SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT ABSTRACTS SESSION II 22

FIRE AND JUNIPER EXPANSION IN THE CHEWAUCAN BASIN, OREGON 23

UNDERSTORY SUCCESSION AND NITROGEN DYNAMICS IN RESPONSE TO JUNIPER CUTTING 26

SMALL MAMMAL AND BIRD INVENTORIES 29

OTHER WESTERN JUNIPER PROJECTS AT THE EASTERN OREGON AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

CENTER 31

GENETIC STRUCTURE AND RELATIONSHIPS AMONG POPULATIONS OF UTAH AND WESTERN

JUNIPER: EVIDENCE FROM NUCLEAR RIBOSOMAL AND CHLOROPLAST DNA 32

GAS EXCHANGE OF JUNIPERUS OSTEOPERMA AND JUNIPERUS OCCIDENTALIS ACROSS LOCAL AND

REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL GRADIENTS IN THE GREAT BASIN 34

RELATIONSHIP OF HYDROGEN AND OXYGEN STABLE ISOTOPES IN CELLULOSE AND DROUGHT

SEVERITY 36

GROWTH OF UTAH AND WESTERN JUNIPER ALONG THREE CROSS-BASIN TRANSECTS 38

INFLUENCE OF WESTERN JUNIPER INVASION AND DEVELOPMENT ON NUTRIENT ACCUMULATION

PATTERNS IN SAGEBRUSH/GRASS ECOSYSTEMS 40

CAMP CREEK PAIRED WATERSHED STUDY 42

CYRUS BUTTE SITE: IMPROVING UNDERSTORY VEGETATION IN WESTERN JUNIPER WOODLANDS 44

ASHWOOD DEMONSTRATION AND RESEARCH PLOTS 47

WARM SPRINGS DEMONSTRATION/RESEARCH PLOTS 49

UNDERSTANDING THE BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY OF WESTERN JUNIPER 51

SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT ABSTRACTS SESSION III 53

STEENS MOUNTAIN COOPERATIVE PRESCRIBED BURNS AND JUNIPER CUTS (A BEGINNING) 54

JUNIPER MANAGEMENT - CROOKED RIVER NATIONAL GRASSLAND (CRNG) 57

iii
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

RESULTS FOLLOWING JUNIPER CUTTING IN A KEY CIRCLE 5 RANCH SUB-BASIN 59

INDUSTRY TOPICS ABSTRACTS AND INFORMAL NOTES SESSION I 61

WESTERN JUNIPER HARVEST SYSTEMS COMPARISONS PROJECT 62

WESTERN JUNIPER LOG STORAGE PROJECT 67

WESTERN JUNIPER DEBARKING PROJECT 69

WESTERN JUNIPER OIL DISTILLATION AND MARKETING PROJECT 71

WESTERN JUNIPER DRYING PROJECT 76

SUMMARY: 1993-1996 76

OTHER "NON-COMMODITY" WOOD PRODUCT INDUSTRIES: EASTERN REDCEDAR INDUSTRY 79

INDUSTRY TOPICS INFORMAL NOTES SESSION II 82

OTHER "NON-COMMODITY" WOOD PRODUCT INDUSTRIES: OREGON MYRTLEWOOD 83

PRODUCT INTRODUCTIONS: INFORMAL PRODUCT REVIEW BY WESTERN JUNIPER

MANUFACTURERS AND EXHIBITORS 84

MARKETING WORKSHOP 87

WESTERN JUNIPER FORUM '97 CLOSING SESSION 93

CLOSE-OUT NOTES COMBINED SESSION 94

iv
Western Juniper Forum '97

Opening Session

1
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

PROCEEDINGS

INTRODUCTION

The one-day, Western Juniper Forum '97

took place April 21st, 1997, in Bend,

Oregon. The purpose of the Forum was to

encourage information exchange, and

expand and improve communication

between those interested in the management

and commercialization of western juniper.

The Forum was divided into two combined

sessions {Setting the Stage and Wrap-Up)

and seven concurrent sessions. The

concurrent sessions were split between

commercial and industrial topics, and

science and management topics. Fifteen

manufacturers displayed a full range of

western juniper products.

More than 140 people attended Western

Juniper Forum '97. Close to 50 percent were

scientists or from government agencies.

Another 50 percent of the people

represented private businesses or private

landowners and there was a smattering of

representatives from economic development

and environmental organizations.

Presenters were not requested to provide full

papers - only abstracts, who to contact for

more information or a copy of the complete

paper, and where and when the information

or study was expected to be published. The

questions used to structure presentations are

included at the beginning of each session

where relevant.

The Steering Committee for Western

Juniper Forum '97 consisted of Larry Swan,

U.S. Forest Service, Scott Leavengood,

Oregon State University Extension, Bill

Breedlove, Western Juniper Industry

Facilitator, and Candice Richard, Klamath

County Economic Development

Association.

The Steering Committee extends its sincere

thanks to the Federal sponsors and Hessel

Equipment whose cash contributions kept

registration costs affordable for everyone,

Jerry Haugen (U.S. Forest Service) for his

accurate and thorough notes, Forum '97

exhibitors and presenters who collectively

drove thousands of miles at their own

expense to help out, and finally, to all those

who attended and participated. The

contagious enthusiasm and dedication of

those who study, manage and work with

western juniper are what made this meeting

a success. In the words of one participant it

"gives hope that maybe we'll do it right the

first time."

2
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

SETTING THE STAGE:

WHAT HAS

CHANGED AND

WHAT HAS

REMAINED THE

SAME SINCE THE

1993 WESTERN

JUNIPER FORUM?

Presented by: Larry Swan, U.S. Forest

Service

Background

As most of you know, this is not the first

time a western juniper conference has been

held in the Bend area. During the last 20

years, four major western juniper

conferences or field days have taken place,

one in this very same room. The first two

were conference formats (1977 and 1984),

and the third was a field day (1987).

Proceedings or Summaries were compiled

and distributed (Martin, Dealy, and Caraher,

1978; Bedell 1984; Oregon Agricultural

Experiment Station 1987). The emphasis of

these meetings and field day was on the

ecology and management of western

juniper.1

1

 Ecology and management of western

juniper have also been major topics at

two conferences outside of Oregon:

Reno, NV (1987), and more recently,

Provo, UT(1997).

A very different western juniper conference

took place in September 1993 - the format

changed to a "forum" atmosphere, where

interaction between the speakers and the

participants was a central objective, and

topics covered were expanded to include

commercialization issues, which attracted a

much more diverse audience. More than 130

people attended and an informal set of notes

were taken and distributed by Haugen

(1993). Due to its success and continued

relevance, the format used at the 1993

"forum" is used again for today's meeting.

As context and introduction to today's

session, I will attempt to compare and

contrast commercialization and management

progress and issues since the 1993 Western

Juniper Forum. This will be a muchabbreviated version of what has actually

happened and is currently in progress.

The outline for my talk is based on my

personal experience in dealing with underutilized or non-commercial forest products

species over the last six years. There are

basically 11 separate, but interconnected

activity categories:

Inventory (Resource Itself and

Industry Infrastructure)

Private Business Interest and

Motivation

Markets and Products Distribution

Channels

Science (Biology and Forest

Products Technology and

Processing)

Harvest

3
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Management (Private, Public, and

Non-Profit)

Primary Processing

Secondary Processing

Technology Transfer

Public Awareness, Input, and

Involvement

Government Agency Awareness,

Input, and Involvement

I use an engine analogy to give some idea of

what must happen within and between these

categories to make the commercialization

process work.

In the case of an engine, all cylinders must

work together and be timed just right to

make it run smoothly. Efficiency and speed

are lost if one or more cylinders are not

working together. Over time, if a problem or

oversight is not corrected, the engine breaks

down.

The same principles apply to the process of

commercializing a new species while trying

to accomplish management objectives. If

one of the above categories are neglected or

not integrated with the rest, the whole

process will eventually breakdown.

Inventory

A 40-year veteran of the Forest Products

Industry raised fundamental questions about

western juniper inventory at the 1993

Western Juniper Forum:

How much is there?

Where is it?

What is the quality?

How accessible is it?

Similar questions were raised by biologists.

I will devote some time to this issue because

of its link to all aspects of management and

commercialization.

It quickly became evident after the 1993

Western Juniper Forum that no one had ever

tried in an integrated manner to determine

just what the right questions were for a

western juniper inventory. Funding was

obtained from the State of California and

U.S. Forest Service, and a contract issued

for a Western Juniper Inventory

Methodology Plan.

It appears there are low-cost, data collection

field methods and criteria, which can

provide information pertinent to many of the

major inventory questions identified by

commercial and biological interests (based

on results of the investigations conducted for

the Western Juniper Inventory Methodology

Plan [Artemisia Systems 1997]). The issue

then becomes "How do you convince

government agencies to collect the "right"

data in a way that will allow statistical

comparisons?"

The government agency charged with largescale, forested land inventories is the U.S.

Forest Service. Inventory data for California

and Idaho have been published (Bolsinger

1989; Chojnacky 1991). According to Don

Gedney, retired inventory scientist for the

Pacific Northwest Forest and Range

Experiment Station, data gathered in the late

4
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

1980s for Eastern Oregon have not yet been

published and no date has been set for when

the data will become available to a wider

audience. Discussions are already underway

though, concerning a follow-up inventory

for Oregon. Chuck and Don are here today

and can address any questions you may

have.

There is another large-scale inventory effort

that should be mentioned - the National

Forested Lands Survey. This inventory, also

undertaken by the U.S. Forest Service,

assesses the objectives, management actions,

and management timelines of private

woodland owners.

Western juniper woodlands were included

for the first time because of input from both

state and Federal scientists after the 1993

Juniper Forum. Unfortunately, no analysis

has been completed and none is planned

(Birch personal communication). I have

taken an initial look at the charts and tables,

but due to statistical sampling methodology

and limitations, it will take someone better

qualified than I to analyze and interpret the

wealth of information available. Anyone

interested?

Private Business Interest and

Motivation

During the last six years, I have personally

worked with at least 50 different private

companies in western juniper manufacturing

and marketing trials. Bill Breedlove,

Western Juniper Industry Facilitator, has

worked with at least 50 more. There is no

lack of interest; however, working capital

and marketing expertise are often limited.

There has been a substantial increase in

private business interest, beyond simply

trying out a substitute species in existing

markets or manufacturing processes. A little

more than 12 months ago, there were

probably 10 manufacturers of western

juniper products. Now there are more than

35 manufacturers (primary and secondary)

who process western juniper on at least a

part-time basis. In addition, juniper lumber

production probably averaged 3,000-5,000

board feet per month a year ago, and it now

averages at least 12,000 board feet per

month. This kind of production is of course

tiny by current industry standards, but I like

the looks of the growth curve.

Markets and Products/Distribution

Channels

Along with an increase in manufacturer

interest and involvement has come an

increase in markets and distribution

channels. The emphasis during the last

couple of years has been on finding niche

specialty markets for solid wood products.

Product lines now range from high-end

rustic roundwood furniture to doors, and a

full line of available products is now on

display here. Store displays are a success

story that have come out of the work

subsidized by Oregon lottery dollars and the

U.S. Forest Service. A full line of store

display products is now in use in over 35

Pendleton Woolen Mill retail stores

nationwide.

5
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

One of the major issues facing the industry

is the lack of fiber markets. It is estimated

that over 80 percent of the standing

inventory of western juniper cannot be

economically made into acceptable lumber

with current technology. The continuous

supply of logs necessary for a fiber

operation would make the costs of obtaining

sawlogs more economical and increase

supply reliability. During the next year, the

Western Juniper Industry Steering

Committee will be taking a hard look at

animal bedding markets. Oregon State

University is an active partner in addressing

the many issues involved in entering

established markets with a new species.

(Special Note: A market research-oriented

report was completed since Western Juniper

Forum '97 and is now available - Western

Juniper Furniture Market Research and

Design Project [Swan 1997b].)

Science

Research projects related to western juniper

woodland ecosystem science have increased

from between 5-10 in 1993, to more than 20

today. Short synopses of many of these will

be presented during the concurrent sessions

today. Key issues highlighted at the 1993

Forum are starting to be addressed by these

studies, including wildlife and watershed

responses to treatment, fire history of

juniper woodlands, and aspen/bitterbrush

vegetation communities treatment and

response.

One thing I find interesting is that Rick

Miller, OSU, has enlisted the support of

individual agency offices in two states to

support many of these studies. This is in

contrast to five years ago when Oregon State

University was the primary source of

whatever funding could be squeezed out for

work in western juniper woodlands.

Considerable progress has been made in

defining the physical and mechanical

properties of western juniper wood, as well

as its drying and manufacturing

characteristics. Ed Burke, University of

Montana, is not here today, but deserves

most of the credit for undertaking the basic

wood science studies, mostly without any

funding. He actually put his first sample

collection trip on his family credit card,

hoping to get reimbursed later. This is the

kind of initiative that goes unnoticed most of

the time, but is greatly appreciated by those

who know.

Real progress also has been made in drying

western juniper. Mike Milota, Oregon State

University, was involved in completing the

basic drying studies. Full production trials

were later conducted, involving commercialsize kilns (40,000 board feet) and substantial

public investment. Mike also completed

moisture meter correction factors -

something that is taken for granted for other

species, which had never been done for

western juniper (Leavengood and Swan

1997b).

6
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Harvest

Harvest was an important issue in 1993, and

continues to be a critical factor today. The

cost of harvesting averages two to three

times more than that of other commercial

species. A Harvest Systems Comparisons

Project was recently completed and

although results were promising, much work

remains to be done (Swan 1997a). The crux

of the issue is how to thin western juniper

economically and in a manner that leaves

the landowner or land manager the option of

leaving slash evenly scattered? This project

will be discussed more thoroughly later

today.

A pull-through delimber, provided by Hessel

Equipment, one of the sponsors of this

Forum, is on display outside. This particular

delimber model showed more promise to

reduce costs than just about anything else

tried during the last six years.

Management

In the early 1990s, Federal subsidies for

western juniper woodland and other

rangeland habitat improvement projects

were reduced. Private landowners continued

to thin juniper woodlands, but on a greatly

reduced scale. Some people estimate the

acres treated have dropped from the "low

tens of thousands" per year in Eastern

Oregon to "below ten thousand acres" per

year.

There has been a slight upward trend in total

woodland acres treated due to private and

government partnership projects since 1993.

Fred Otley and Jim Buchanan will discuss a

good example from the Steens Mountain

area this afternoon. Their emphasis is on

thinning juniper before it has out-competed

its understory and thereby eliminating

prescribed burning as a low-cost treatment

option. Five dollars an acre for prescribed

burning versus $50 dollars an acre for

mechanical or manual treatment is the kind

of cost spread that gets your attention!

No real progress has been made on the

million plus acres of 20 percent plus canopy

cover in Oregon, Idaho, and California,

where the understory is greatly reduced or

sparse, and more expensive treatment

options are necessary.

Primary and Secondary Processing

There will be plenty said about primary and

secondary processing today in various

concurrent sessions. Two recently

completed studies should be mentioned

since they were designed specifically to

address issues brought-up in the 1993

Forum: Can you debark juniper effectively?

How does storage affect lumber recovery?

(Leavengood and Swan 1997a).

Debarking was considered important

because of the chip market requirements.

Most of the wood products industry thought

you could not debark juniper sufficiently to

meet specifications for even "dirty chips,"

like those suitable for something like

hardboard (less than 3 percent bark content).

Several debarkers were tried and all worked

7
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

well enough to meet those specifications.

Whether or not a particular debarker is

economical for a particular operation is

another story.

Log storage study results were not nearly so

clear, mainly due to the design of the study.

It appears that if you follow standard

recommendations, such as using logs within

30 days of harvest or at least end-coating to

prevent or reduce end-checking, recovery

will improve.

Between 1993 and 1996, the chip market hit

a historic high point. Several operators

actually tried to make a living chipping

juniper. It appears that if prices were ever

again to reach at least $70-$80/bone dry ton,

it may be feasible to chip juniper.

Unfortunately, prices have not recovered,

and even if they were to recover, other

species are readily available at less cost.

More extractive oils recovery and market

research have been performed since the

1993 Forum. A project was conducted in

collaboration with The Confederated Tribes

of the Warm Springs Reservation and with

the assistance of Oregon lottery dollars

(Yesnofski 1996). It does not appear that

economics will permit competition with oil

derived from other juniper species, but there

does appear to be niche market

opportunities. Work continues on this topic

in collaboration with Joe Karchesy and

others at Oregon State University.

A couple of problem-oriented, technical

investigations have been completed since

1993, and probably should be mentioned

because of their impact on commercial

operations: Wood borers and air-dried

lumber; problems with certain polyurethane

finishes and certain wood fillers; and design

adaptations needed because of inherent

strengths and weaknesses of juniper.

Information about these investigations is

available in the 1996 and 1997 issues of the

Western Juniper Newsletter.

Technology Transfer

A complex web of cooperation is involved

in research, field trials, and the transfer of

information to those who want and need it,

both in terms of rangeland science and

management, and wood science.

The main research and technology transfer

agents for western juniper woodland science

and management continue to come from

Oregon State University's (OSU)

Department of Rangeland Resources, and

the OSU Extension Service. Most of you in

this room are personally acquainted with

many of the players, such as Lee Eddleman,

Rick Miller, Clint Jacks, Tim Deboodt, John

Buckhouse, and Steve Fitzgerald.

There are now more than 20 woodland

science research projects underway as

compared to 5 to 10 in 1993. Funding has

not kept up with commercialization fundraising efforts, but it has increased from the

single digit thousands to tens of thousands.

One reason for this increase is the approach

Lee Eddleman, Rick Miller, and John

Buckhouse have taken in working directly

8
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

with individual Federal agency offices in

two states, rather than relying solely on

grants or state money.

There is also an informal network of

demonstration sites, which you will hear

about today. These sites, often tied to ongoing research projects, have expanded from

around 5 to close to 10. Training sessions

for government personnel appear to happen

every year, but management training

sessions for private landowners are

scheduled much less frequently.

More funding is available for projects with

direct commercial application than scientific

research through state and federal economic

development programs. A noticeable effect

is that studies and field trials in the

discussion phase in 1993 have been

completed and results are now available (see

partial list under References).

Another major change since 1993 is that

additional personnel are involved with

technology transfer, including Scott

Leavengood, OSU Wood Products

Extension Agent, based in Klamath Falls,

and Bill Breedlove, Western Juniper

Industry Facilitator (Bill's role is funded

through Oregon lottery dollars).

Information is also now available to people

through a well-received, semi-annual

Western Juniper Newsletter. This newsletter

is obviously filling a need. When the first

issue was published in 1996, there were

about 150 people on the mailing list; now

there are over 800. Each newsletter has

articles on topics ranging from management

to marketing, which reflect the integrated

approach being taken by the Western

Juniper Commercialization Steering

Committee.

Scott Leavengood also helped to create and

maintain a non-commercial western juniper

Internet site at

www. orst. edu/dept/kcoext/juniper/juniper. ht

m. There is another western juniper web site

devoted to private business

(www. westernjuniper. org), which is hotlinked to the OSU site. Scott reports adding

at least one person per week to the mailing

list because of the web site. At least 20

information requests have been generated as

a result of the year-old site, including some

from foreign countries. Many of the

unpublished reports in this Proceedings are

available on the website

www.orst. edu/dept/kcoext/iuniper/juniper. ht

m.

Public and Government Agency

Awareness, Input, and Involvement

This particular area is critical to

management and commercialization success,

and a tough one to plan and maintain. Based

on my personal experience, a full-time

liaison is necessary to do an adequate job,

however, the liaison role has probably

received less attention than any of the other

categories discussed today. There has been

progress though.

Media attention is usually easy to attain,

maybe too easy. The Juniper Newsletter

9
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

seems to be helping, and elected officials

awareness about juniper issues and

commercialization is greatly improved since

1993. Input into commercialization issues by

the forest products industry appears good,

and based on the focus of current rangeland

science research, input from public and

other scientists is evidently being heard.

Probably one of the most significant

indicators of support for the efforts of the ad

hoc Western Juniper Steering Committee, is

that Western Juniper Forum '97 has 10

sponsors, compared to just one in 1993.

Forum sponsors include all major federal

land-managing units in Eastern Oregon

(BLM and U.S. Forest Service), the Modoc

National Forest in California, and Hessel

Equipment.

Conclusion

I want to emphasize the unique, integrated

approach to commercialization taken by the

ad hoc Western Juniper Steering Committee.

It encompasses everything from biology to

marketing. As far as I know, it is the only

public and private collaborative regional

partnership effort of its type in the United

States. Other partnerships take on specific

issues or segments of a problem, but this

group has tackled the "whole enchilada."

This has been quite a lengthy discussion of

what has changed and what has remained

the same since 1993.I hope I have as much

progress to report at the next Juniper Forum!

Questions and Answers

Q: Is there a Juniper Association?

A: The idea has certainly been

discussed. At this point, the industry

is looking for ways to make money

to support one, instead of forming

one and having to find ways to

support it after the fact. The

association envisioned would include

all the players, not just industry by

the way.

Q: What is being done with silviculture

to improve juniper tree form?

A: Byron Cheney, from the Crooked

River National Grasslands, has been

looking at this. He may talk about it

during his presentation today. Also,

there are on-going informal trials

involving juniper response to

pruning (limbing lower branches).

Other than that, I do not have

anything to report. Anyone else

know of anything?

Q: One of our watershed councils is

getting pressure to stop harvest of

juniper. Is anyone working on

getting a consensus on juniper

management?

A: Nothing organized is happening. In

some areas we lack definitive

answers to serious questions about

how much to remove. Although

research is underway, peer-reviewed

publication of research results is not

as far advanced as all of us would

like to see.

10
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Q: Does the Juniper Newsletter show or

list how to find the demonstration

sites?

A: No...but it's a good idea for an

article. Are you interested?

Q: Will there be another Forum next

year?

A: Probably not unless someone wants

to volunteer to head it up. The need

and interest are obviously there, a lot

more help would be necessary

though.

References

Artemesia Systems 1997. Final report -

western juniper woodland inventory plan

and budget. Unpublished report submitted to

Ore-Cal Resource Conservation and

Development Area, Dorris, CA. On file

USDA Forest Service, Winema National

Forest, Klamath Falls, OR.

Bedell, T.E. (compiler) 1984. Proceedings

of western juniper short course, October 15-

16, 1984, Bend, OR. Unpublished

compilation. On file Oregon State

University, Department of Rangeland

Resources, Corvallis.

Birch, Thomas 1995. Personal

communication regarding unpublished

results for National Forest Lands Survey.

USDA Forest Service, Northeast Forest

Research and Experiment Station.

Bolsinger, Charles L. 1989. California's

western juniper and pinyon-juniper

woodlands: Area, stand characteristics,

wood volumes, and fence posts. Resource

Bulletin PNW-RB-166. Portland, OR:

USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Research Station.

Chojnacky, David C. 1991. Southern Idaho's

Forest Land Outside National Forests.

Resource Bulletin INT-RB-82. Logan, UT.:

USDA Forest Service, Intermountain

Research Station. (Idaho data revised per

telephone conversation with Sharon

Woudenberg, Supervisory Forester,

Intermountain Research Station, Logan, UT

[July 9, 1997].)

Haugen, Jerry 1993. Proceedings - western

juniper forum, September 1, 1993, Bend,

OR. Compilation of informal notes. On file

USDA Forest Service, Winema National

Forest, Klamath Falls, OR.

Leavengood, Scott and Larry Swan

1997a. Final report - western juniper

log storage and debarking project.

Unpublished report. On file Oregon

State University Extension, Klamath

Falls, and USDA Forest Service,

Winema National Forest, Klamath

Falls, OR. Also on the website

www. orst. edu/dept/kcoext/juniper/ju

niper.htm.

1997b. Western juniper drying

project summary: 1993-1996.

Unpublished report. On file Oregon

State University Extension, Klamath

Falls, and USDA Forest Service,

Winema National Forest, Klamath

11
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Falls, OR. Also on the website

www.orst.edu/

dept/kcoext/juniper/juniper.htm.

Martin, R.E., J.E. Dealy, and D.L. Caraher

1978. Proceedings of the western juniper

ecology and management workshop

(January, 1978), Bend, Oregon. USDA

Forest Service, General Technical Report

PNW-74. Pacific Northwest Forest and

Range Experiment Station, Portland, OR.

Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station

1987. Range field day, Prineville, 1987.

Research in Rangeland Management,

Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station,

Special Report No. 803. Oregon State

University, Department of Rangeland

Sciences, Corvallis, OR.

Swan, Larry

1997a. Final report - western juniper

harvest systems comparisons project.

Unpublished report. On file USDA

Forest Service, Winema National

Forest, Klamath Falls, OR. Also on

the website

www.orst.edu/dept/kcoext/juniper/ju

niper.htm.

1997b. Final report - western juniper

furniture market research and design

project. Unpublished report. On file

USDA Forest Service, Winema

National Forest, Klamath Falls, OR.

Also on the website

www.orst.edu/dept/kcoext/juniper/ju

niper.htm.

Yesenofski, Joe 1996. Final report -juniper

oil distillation and marketing project.

Unpublished report. On file The

Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs

Reservation, Warm Springs, and Oregon

State University Extension, Klamath Falls,

OR.

12
Science and Management

Abstracts

Session I

Moderator: Steve Fitzgerald,

Oregon State University Extension Service, Redmond, Oregon

13
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

WESTERN JUNIPER

WOODLANDS: IS

MINE LIKE YOURS?

Presented by Tim DeBoodt, Oregon State

University Extension Service, Prineville,

Oregon

There is increasing interest in management

of landscapes referred to as "juniper

woodlands." Based on countless hours of

conversation with numerous private citizens

and public land managers, it is my

experience that visions of what should

happen are profoundly affected by exposure

to particular sites. Communication becomes

difficult and conflicts arise when reference

points differ.

Are We Talking About the Same

Thing?

Not all western juniper woodlands are alike.

Differences in soil types, slope, aspect,

precipitation, understory vegetation and

current management practices influence how

a stand has developed and how it will

respond to management activities. Current

research is focusing on how these factors

interact and influence a specific site. Shared

terminology and concepts are needed to

facilitate discussion and communication.

Rick Miller and Jeff Rose, with the help of

others and the Eastern Oregon Research

Center in Burns, Oregon, are developing

terminology and concepts that will enhance

our ability to communicate with each other,

and classify woodlands and their

successional stages based on identifiable

characteristics. These characteristics include

canopy cover, leader growth of dominant

trees, degree of crown lift (die-off of lower

branches), potential berry production, tree

recruitment, growth of young trees, and

condition of the shrub layer. The Key

Characteristics Table (at end of this section)

offers a preliminary description of this

classification system.

Old Growth and Tablelands

Classification

In addition to the woodland development

stages illustrated below, classification

systems for old-growth and juniper

tablelands are also being developed. These

stands have unique attributes. For example,

old growth stands are mainly found on

shallow soils underlain by fractured

bedrock. Old growth can also be found on

deeper soil sites, such as Juniper Mountain

in Lake and Harney Counties, and the

pumice soils of the Mazama ecological

province in Central Oregon. Old growth

trees are considered to be those established

prior to 1870 (Anglo settlement). These

trees often have flat tops, massive irregular

trunks, deeply furrowed bark, and few large

basal limbs. A bright yellow-green lichen

also becomes abundant. Although exact age

is difficult to determine due to rot, trees

between 500-800 years are not uncommon.

Juniper tablelands are another type of

woodland not well studied. The tablelands

occur on extensive flats (less than 5 percent

slope) with low sagebrush as the dominant

shrub. Trees that are greater than six feet in

14
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

height typically were established before

1870. The soils are shallow, rocky, and are

high in clay. Plant diversity is greater in the

interspaces, but understory cover is greatest

under the tree canopy. The potential canopy

cover at full occupancy is estimated at about

20 percent. Establishment and growth rates

are slower than on mountain big sagebrush

and aspen sites.

A common classification system that is easy

to understand and that illustrates site

conditions is an important tool for those who

have to manage or want to provide input

about the management of western juniper

woodlands.

For more information:

Tim Deboodt

OSU Crook County Extension Service

498 S.E. Lynn Blvd.

Prineville, OR 97754

Phone:(541)447-6228

Table 1—Key Characteristics: Western Juniper Woodland Successional Stages

15

Key

Characteristics

Tree Canopy

Leader Growth

(Dominant

Trees)

Crown Lift

(lower limb dieoff)

(Dominant

Trees)

Potential Berry

Production

Tree Recruitment

Growth

(Understory

Trees)

Shrub Layer

Early

Transitional

Open;canopy

cover <5%;

expanding

Good terminal &

lateral growth

Absent

Low

Active

Good terminal &

lateral growth

Intact

Mid Transitional

Canopy cover 6-

20% actively

expanding;

Good terminal &

lateral growth

Absent

Moderate to

High

Active

Good terminal &

lateral growth

Nearly intact to

showing

mortality around

dominants

Late

Transitional

Canopy cover

21-35%;. canopy

expansion

greatly reduced

Good terminal

growth reduced

lateral growth

Reduced lateral

growth of lower

limbs

Low to Moderate

Reduced; limited

to within drip

line

Greatly reduced

terminal &

lateral growth;

reduced ring

growth

>40% Mortality

Closed Stand

Canopy cover

>35%; canopy

expansion

stabilized

Good to reduced

terminal growth;

no lateral growth

Present (for

Productive sites)

Scarce to Low

Absent

Absent: some

mortality; greatly

reduced ring

growth

>85% Mortality
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

OVERVIEW OF

JUNIPERS IN THE

WORLD, AND IN THE

U.S. WEST; RECENT

INVENTORIES OF

WESTERN JUNIPER

AND PLANS FOR

OREGON

Presented by Charles Bolsinger and Don

Gedney, USDA Forest Service, PNW

Research Station, Portland, Oregon

Junipers grow around the world in the

Northern Hemisphere. More than 35 species

and numerous varieties of tree and shrub

junipers exist. Most of the taller junipers are

native to distant lands, and many, unlike

ours, have been decimated or eliminated in

the wild.

Canary Island juniper (J. cedrus) was so

desirable for lumber that only trees inside

the volcanic crater on the island of Palma

survived. J. excelsa exceeds heights of 100

feet and diameters of three-feet, and ranges

from the Balkans and the Caucasus to Syria

and Lebanon. This juniper is widely-used

for building, crossties, poles, and furniture,

and is thought by some to be the Biblical

"Cedar of Lebanon," rather than Cedrus

libani, whose wood is inferior. Several

species of juniper grow in Asia and uses

include construction, carvings, medicine,

and incense.

Over a dozen species of juniper grow in the

United States. One or more species of

juniper occur in every state with the

exception of Hawaii. In the Western United

States, junipers typically occupy the life

zone between desert or steppe, and closed

forests on moister sites. In many places,

junipers co-exist with pinyon pine. For

example, Utah juniper often grows with

singleleaf pinyon in California, Nevada, and

western Utah. In several states, area

estimates of pinyon and juniper type are

combined.

The total area of the pinyon and juniper type

trees exceeds 50 million acres, and occur in

islands and stringers from Edwards Plateau

in Texas (Ashe juniper) to Oregon (western

juniper) and from the Mexican border

(alligator, California, drooping, one-seed,

and Pinchot junipers) to Canada (Rocky

Mountain juniper).

Recent inventories by the Forest Service

show that western juniper occupies 3.7

million acres in stands with crown closure of

10 percent or more. Ninety-seven percent is

in Oregon (62 percent) and California (35

percent), and the remaining 3 percent are in

Idaho and Nevada. Scattered junipers in

productive and subalpine forests of other

species are not included in the inventories.

One notable example is the Sierra juniper, a

subspecies of western juniper, which often

grows with California red fir and Jeffrey

pine near upper timberline. It can attain

enormous sizes (a tree 152 inches dbh and

86-feet-tall grows in the Stanislaus National

Forest).

16
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Total volume of western juniper trees 3

inches and larger at root collar to a stem or

branch diameter of 1.5 inches outside bark

(ob) is estimated at 1.4 billion cubic feet,

with 1.2 billion cubic feet in Oregon and

California. Mainstem volume from a 1 -foot

stump to a 4-inch top ob in these two states

totals 664 million cubic feet, giving a

mainstem-to-total-tree-volume ratio of 0.57.

A type map and estimate of juniper area in

Oregon were made in 1936. Juniper type has

increased by a factor of five since then. We

approximate that juniper has expanded by a

factor of 10) by adding areas with less than

10 percent closure, and an estimate of

seedling stands, most of which did not exist

in 1936.

This brings the area of juniper to more than

5 million acres, on par with Douglas-fir, the

Oregon state tree. In some counties, such as

Wheeler and Grant, juniper is now present

on most land that is not farmed or growing

pine or fir timber.

Juniper favors certain geologic formations

and soils, which along with elevation, frost

zones, and marine air, influence stand

structure and define the species' range.

Something is now changing though.

Small junipers fill openings between old

trees, making dense, uneven-aged stands out

of formerly open one-aged stands. Fire

exclusion does not totally explain this

phenomenon because many stands lacked

sufficient ground fuel to carry fire before the

recruitment of young trees. In northern

Oregon, young junipers dot the landscape

miles from older juniper trees. It appears

that juniper would spread even further north

if it were not for the agricultural zone.

Junipers are now showing up in untilled

strips in the wheat belt, and along fences

near corn and watermelon fields near

Hermiston.

Information on change in juniper in Oregon

since the 1930s will soon be published,

along with maps, statistics, and details on

site class, stand age and structure. We plan

to begin a new inventory in 1999. One of the

desired objectives is to locate and quantify

juniper recruitment across eastern Oregon.

In many areas, young junipers are no taller

than associated sagebrush, rabbitbrush and

bitterbrush. Juniper is difficult to detect

using conventional remote sensing methods.

We hope to collect more information on

species diversity and gather data to model

possible juniper futures under various

assumptions. The methods to achieve these

objectives are labor intensive and expensive,

and we are looking for partners to help share

the cost.

For more information:

Charles Bolsinger or Don Gedney

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208

Phone:(503)321-5858

17
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Informal Notes

By Jerry Haugen, U.S. Forest Service

Some additional "Juniperus trivious":

- Texas has the most species

- Oregon has three species

- Washington has four species

- California has four or five species

- There are 48 to 50 million acres of

juniper and piny on woodlands in the

U.S.

Much of the biomass of western juniper is in

the branches. For example, the biomass of

juniper in Oregon (calculated down to 1.5

inches in limbs) is estimated at 794 million

cubic feet. When only the main stem from a

4 inch top (with a one-foot stump) is

estimated, the volume in Oregon is about

441 million cubic feet.

Western Juniper Inventory in Eastern

Oregon—The overall inventory involved

69,000 total photo points 0.85 miles apart.

Of these, about 10,000 have juniper. Each

point is now geo-referenced so it can be

linked to other data in a geographical

information system. A 1936 type map,

which showed juniper, was used to show

change over time. When published, the

Eastern Oregon report will include

predictions for the future, area and volume

statistics by owner, and mensurational data

by tree and plot characteristics.

Specific results

BLM Lands:

Private:

NFS:

Other Public

follow:

800,000 acres and

180,000 cubic feet

1,100,000 acres and

200,000 cubic feet

150,000 acres and

<20,000 cubic feet

: 150,000 acres and

<20,000 cubic feet

Juniper woodlands were included if they had

a crown cover of 10 percent juniper or more.

Juniper savannah has crown cover less than

10 percent and that cover is often in seedling

and sapling sizes. The 1936 type map used

crown cover over 5 percent and units had to

be a minimum of 20 acres to be mapped.

The 1988 inventory picked up juniper in

Wasco County that existed in 1936, but was

missed for unknown reasons. Results show

2.2 million acres or more than a 500 percent

increase from 1936. This increase is

attributed primarily to the lack of fire. As

crown density rises, species richness and

diversity decline, but different animals react

differently. Initially thermal cover is helpful,

but later density reduces forage.

In the future we can expect to see 5-to-6

million acres because the savannah types

will become more covered. The Eastern

Oregon report will include statistics by

county as well as site index curves.

18
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

WESTERN JUNIPER

IN THE INTERIOR

COLUMBIA BASIN:

LANDSCAPE TRENDS

AND MANAGEMENT

DIRECTION

Presented by Mike "Sherm " Karl, USDA

Forest Service, Walla Walla, Washington

The geographic extent of western juniper in

the interior Columbia Basin and portions of

the Klamath and Great Basins (i.e, the

Basin) has expanded from about 1 percent

of the Basin (1850 to 1900 period) to about

2.3 percent (circa 1990).

Data were gathered using historical data and

remote sensing, and mapping to a 1 km2

resolution. Midscale (4 ha) resolution data,

collected for the historical (1930s to 1960s)

and current period (1985 to 1993), support

the broadscale (1 km2) data, for western

juniper expansion in eastern Oregon and

southwest Idaho.

Mean patch size of the juniper cover type

has increased from historical to current,

suggesting an increase in connectivity of

western juniper. The structure of western

juniper patches has become more

homogeneous from historical to current. The

dominant structure being the "stem

exclusion" structure, characterized by an

open canopy juniper stand with below

ground restriction of both further seedling

recruitment and further increase in canopy

cover.

Management direction for western juniper

emphasizes use of prescribed burning or

cutting (with slash left on site, but bole

removal permitted) for control of western

juniper in the "active management"

alternative in the draft Environmental

Impact Statement (EISs) for the Interior

Columbia Basin Ecosystem Assessment

Project. These methods work particularly

well where understory native vegetation is

declining in abundance or nearly all

understory vegetation has been lost.

For more information:

Mike "Sherm" Karl

P.O. Box 162

Waitsburg, WA 99361

Phone: (509) 522-4014

19
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

WESTERN JUNIPER

MANAGEMENT: A

RESOURCE

CONSERVATION

ORGANIZATION'S

PERSPECTIVE

Presented by Tim Lillebo, Oregon Natural

Resources Council, Bend, Oregon

Presenter did not submit a written summary.

The following are informal notes taken at

the session.

Informal Notes

By Jerry Haugen, U.S. Forest Service

Western juniper is a new area of interest for

many people including conservation groups

so we need to determine what values were

there in the past and what values are there

now. The Eastside Ecosystem Assessment

has now accomplished this in a big picture

sense.

The forest is more than just wood, it also

offers wildlife, recreation, water and other

resources. Oregon Natural Resources

Council (ONRC) wants to make sure that

whatever is done recognizes effects upon

these resources. A broad look is needed

before embarking on large-scale activities.

Everything about juniper should be laid out

in one document. There have been many

changes in the way conifers are managed

and perhaps we can get juniper management

right the first time.

Old growth juniper offers wildlife values

such as homes for cavity nesters, but more

study is needed to determine which species

are dependent on this type of habitat. The

conservation community is less

knowledgeable about these issues, but it is

still learning. Even wildlife experts do not

know what wildlife needs are relative to old

growth because more research is needed to

determine how much should be preserved

and where.

Restoration areas, where nature is emulated,

could include native grass seeding along

with other management. Grazing seems to

have had some effect in removing grass,

which lead to less fire and expansion of

juniper. Prescribed fire is another area of

interest and some efforts have gotten

interesting results. Historic burn patterns

seem desirable. All of this information needs

to be lined out in a comprehensive overview.

ONRC has proposed a Juniper Grassland

Reserve of 30,000 acres on BLM lands

within the triangle formed by Sisters, Bend

and Redmond. Some restoration work may

be necessary, but the reserve should be

managed to mimic nature and further studies

could be done there.

A series of reserves in other soil types is

also desired. The effects of off-road vehicles

and other activities need to be determined,

and a management plan, probably using a lot

of fire, needs to be developed. Thinning and

grass seeding are also proposed. No

response has yet been received from BLM

on this proposal.

20
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

ONRC believes there are a number of areas

for further research:

- What are the effects of juniper harvest on

the cryptobiotic layer?

- Why does bunchgrass sometimes stay

only in a ring around a juniper and other

times there is no bunchgrass around the

juniper, but it exists farther away?

- Are rabbits affecting juniper?

- Juniper encroachment seems to correlate

to grazing, climate change and perhaps

other things. What are these

relationships?

For more information:

Tim Lillebo

16 N.W. Kansas Ave.

Bend, OR 97701

Phone:(541)382-2616

21
Science and Management

Abstracts

Session II

Field Research Updates:

What's Going on Where, and When Will It Be Published?

Moderator: Steve Fitzgerald,

Oregon State University Extension Service, Redmond, Oregon

Each presenter was asked the following questions:

1. Research Project Name and Location?

2. Purpose?

3. Results or Preliminary Results?

4. Publication Schedule and Publication?

5. Implications for Management?

6. Who to Contact for More Information?

22
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

FIRE AND JUNIPER

EXPANSION IN THE

CHEWAUCAN BASIN,

OREGON

Presented by Jon Bates, Oregon State

University, Eastern Oregon Agricultural

Research Center, Burns, Oregon

Research Purpose

The study was designed to (A) document the

establishment pattern and age distribution of

western juniper; (B) assess plant community

structure and diversity in woodlands; and

(C) document pre-and post-settlement fire

intervals and fire size (see fig. 1).

Preliminary Results

Western juniper expansion began between

1875 and 1885, and rates peaked in

mountain big sagebrush communities

between 1905 and 1915. Juniper expansion

has been steady since 1915.

Mountain big sagebrush sites dominated by

juniper had average tree densities of 185 per

acre, canopy cover exceeding 50 percent,

and trees averaging 86-years-old.

Understory cover and diversity in these

closed stands have declined.

Open stands of juniper in mountain sage

communities had tree densities averaging 45

trees per acre, canopy cover of about 5

percent, and trees averaging 63-years-old.

Understory cover in open juniper stands is

sufficient for fires to carry and achieve a

good kill of juniper.

Fire return intervals of 40-50 years in

mountain sagebrush communities, and 80-

100 years on low sagebrush sites is probably

sufficient to prevent juniper invasion. The

fire record spans 1520-1996. Fires occurred

in the basin about every 11 years prior to

1903. On individual study sites, fire

intervals ranged from 16 to 22 years. Half

the fires between 1654 and 1903 were large

fires. No fires have occurred on the study

sites since 1903.

The lack of fire appears to be a major factor

for the expansion of juniper in sagebrush

and aspen communities the past 100 years.

A combination of prescribed fire and juniper

cutting will be necessary to restore

sagebrush grasslands and aspen stands in the

basin.

23
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Figure 1—Study Area and locations of the Four Fire Scar Locations, I-IV,

and the Low Sagebrush

24
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Management Considerations

Mountain big sagebrush communities—(A)

Where the understory is in good condition

and the shrub layer intact, fire will return

these sites to a grassland community. The

majority of trees will be killed, particularly

those less than 12-feet-tall; (B) Fire in

closed stands with little understory and lack

of a shrub layer will be difficult to burn

except under severe conditions. Cutting

some trees a year prior to burning will

increase the probability of fires carrying

under moderate burning conditions.

Reseeding may be necessary if perennial

plant density is less than one per 10 square

feet; (C) Mountain big sagebrush sites on

south slopes tend to have a severely depleted

understory and signs of surface erosion.

Management on these sites is generally

limited to cutting and leaving the slash. The

slash will increase protective groundcover

and provide safe sites for establishment of

grasses and forbs. Reseeding is usually

necessary.

Low sagebrush sites—Juniper will increase

slowly in low sagebrush communities.

Understory response to tree removal has not

been established. If cutting is used to thin

trees on these sites, a suggestion has been

made that pre-settlement trees and some

replacement trees be left to maintain

structural diversity and provide cavities for

wildlife.

Publications

A paper on the fire history and woodland

chronology is being submitted to Ecology.

Publication is expected in 1998.

For more information:

Rick Miller or Jeff Rose, Eastern Oregon

Research Center

EOARC-Burns, HC71 4.51 Hwy 205,

Burns, OR. 97720.

Phone: (541) 573-2064

Jon Bates

EOARC-Burns, HC71 4.51 Hwy 205,

Burns, OR. 97720.

Phone: (541) 573-2064

25
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

UNDERSTORY

SUCCESSION AND

NITROGEN

DYNAMICS IN

RESPONSE TO

JUNIPER CUTTING

Presented by Jon Bates, Oregon State

University, Eastern Oregon Agricultural

Research Center, Burns, Oregon

Research Purpose

The study assessed understory response and

soil nitrogen (N) dynamics after tree cutting

in a western juniper woodland at Steens

Mountain in southeast Oregon (see fig. 2).

Results and Implications

The site prior to juniper dominance was a

mountain big sagebrush and Thurbers

needlegrass community. Because of juniper

dominance, 95 percent of the mountain big

sagebrush had died, and understory cover

was less than 5 percent. The understory

biomass was about than 40 lbs/acre

(equivalent to 38 acres/AUM). Nitrogen tied

up in aboveground juniper biomass and

needle litter was 143 lbs/acre (equivalent to

12.5 percent of total soil N, 0-4"). In 1991,

juniper trees in eight, 1-acre-sized plots

were cut to measure understory response and

N availability. Eight, 1-acre-sized plots were

left uncut for comparative purposes.

Density, cover, and diversity were

significantly greater in the cut treatment than

in adjacent uncut woodlands two years after

cutting understory biomass. Biomass on the

cut plots averaged 300 lbs/acre (5

acres/AUM) and was primarily composed

(greater than 90 percent) of native perennial

bunchgrasses. The results indicate that

bunchgrass densities of two plants per 1 acre

were sufficient for perennial grasses to

dominate after juniper cutting. The positive

response by the understory was due to

increased soil moisture availability and

reduced competition for available soil N in

the cut treatment. Leaf water potentials were

less negative and plant N concentration was

greater in the cut treatment than in the

woodland.

Soil N availability and mineralization were

greater in the cut treatment in 1992. Dry soil

conditions in 1992 meant that most available

N went unused by plants. In 1993, available

soil N levels did not differ between

treatments, however, N uptake by

understory plants was significantly greater

in the cut treatment. The improved N status

of the understory in the cut treatment was

not due to an increase in soil N availability,

but by the elimination of juniper competition

for available soil N. The results also

indicated that there is little concern that

cutting will lead to increased N losses via

leaching or denitrification.

Cut trees left on the site had several impacts.

Soil water storage was increased under slash

due to reduced evaporative loss and lower

moisture demand by plants. Species

26
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

characteristic of intercanopy zones were

reduced under cut trees while species

characteristic of canopy zones and whose

seeds are wind dispersed increased under cut

trees.

Vegetation surveys are continuing in this

study.

Publications

Papers are being submitted to Ecological

Applications, Soil Science Society of

America Journal, and Great Basin

Naturalist. Publication is expected in 1998.

For more information:

Rick Miller or Jeff Rose, Eastern Oregon

Research Center

EOARC-Burns, HC71 4.51 Hwy 205,

Burns, OR. 97720.

Phone:(541)573-2064

Jon Bates

EOARC-Burns, HC71 4.51 Hwy 205,

Burns, OR. 97720.

Phone:(541)573-2064

27
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Figure 2—Steens Mountain Project With Some Results From 1993

28
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

SMALL MAMMAL

AND BIRD

INVENTORIES

Presented by Jon Bates, Oregon State

University, Eastern Oregon Agricultural

Research Center, Burns, Oregon

Mountain, Harney and Lake Counties, all in

Oregon.

Preliminary Results and

Implications: Small Mammals

Page Ranch (1993, 1995-96)—Sampling

began in 1993, the first year after cutting

and was a late transition woodland of about

40 percent canopy cover. There were no

Figure 3—Location of Small Mammal and Bird Surveys

Research Purpose

These studies are designed to assess small

mammal and bird populations and diversity

in cut and uncut juniper woodlands, mid-tolate transitional juniper woodland, and shrub

steppe and old growth juniper stands at Page

Ranch, Grant County; Krumbo Ridge,

Steens Mountain, Harney County; Juniper

treatment differences in small mammal

species abundance the first year.

Significantly more captures were made in

cut plots in 1995 and 1996, and the diversity

of small mammals were greater in the cut

treatment.

White-footed deer mice were the most

abundant species on this site and on the

29
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Krumbo Ridge and Juniper Mountain study

plots.

Krumbo Ridge (1350 m) (1995-96)—

Woodlands were mid-to-late transitional.

Cutting of trees began in fall 1994 and was

completed in spring 1995. There were no

differences in small mammal populations

between the cut and uncut treatment in 1995

and 1996. The lack of differences between

years and treatments may be due to the short

lapse between cutting and sampling.

Juniper Mountain (1400 m) (1996)—Old

growth woodlands were compared to

adjacent shrub steppe. Significantly more

Great Basin pocket mice were captured in

the shrub steppe, otherwise no differences

were observed between the two

communities. Some bias was introduced

since methods excluded wood rats, and their

nests were common in the old growth.

Small mammal populations appear to

respond well after cutting juniper woodlands

in mid-to-late successional stages. This is

probably due to increased structural

diversity and cover provided by downed

trees, and an improved food supply brought

about by greater understory production.

Bird Census

Bird data have not been analyzed, but

indications are that the largest differences in

avian populations occur where structural

diversity is greatest, especially on Juniper

Mountain and Krumbo Ridge. Thresholds of

vegetation change where bird populations

and diversity are affected are not well

identified.

Publications

These studies are continuing to take in more

sites and include some invertebrates (e.g.

butterflies). Some data can be found in the

1996 "Annual Report of Preliminary Results

and Progress." (History, Ecology,

Management of Western Juniper Woodlands

and Associated Shrublands.) [Miller and

others.]

For more information:

Mitch Willis or Rick Miller, Eastern Oregon

Research Center; Address: EOARC-Burns,

HC71 4.51 Hwy 205, Burns, OR. 97720.

Phone:(541)573-2064

30
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

OTHER WESTERN

JUNIPER PROJECTS

AT THE EASTERN

OREGON

AGRICULTURAL

RESEARCH CENTER

Additional western juniper research projects

are being conducted by the Eastern Oregon

Agricultural Research Center. They include:

A.) Fire history of mountain big

sagebrush communities in northeastern

California.

Work started in 1996. In 1997, further

collection and cross-dating of samples is

planned along with the location of additional

areas with the potential for fire history

reconstruction.

B.) Development of juniper stands in

aspen and bitterbrush plant communities.

At the same time investigate age structure of

aspen and bitterbrush stands.

C.) Vegetation response on large scale

juniper cuts on Steens Mountain.

Pre-cutting vegetation data were taken in

1994, and post-cutting data were taken in

1996. Additional measurements are planned

in 1997. Data includes plant density, cover,

and diversity.

D.) Woodland classification based on a

soil water availability index, plant

community type (dominant understory

components), and maximum possible

juniper cover for a closed stand.

E.) Cedar Creek prescribed burn in

northeastern California. Pre-fire data

were taken in 1995. Post-burn data taken in

1996, and monitoring is ongoing.

These projects were made possible by the

interest and financial contributions of the

Burns and Lakeview BLM Districts in

Oregon; the BLM Alturas Resource Area,

California; Modoc National Forest, Alturas;

Fremont National Forest, Paisley Ranger

District; North Cal-Neva Resource

Conservation and Development; and the

Oregon Field Office of the Nature

Conservancy.

For more information:

Rick Miller, Jeff Rose, or Jon Bates at the

Eastern Oregon Research Center

EOARC-Burns, HC71 4.51 Hwy 205,

Burns, OR. 97720.

Phone:(541)573-2064

31
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

GENETIC

STRUCTURE AND

RELATIONSHIPS

AMONG

POPULATIONS OF

UTAH AND WESTERN

JUNIPER: EVIDENCE

FROM NUCLEAR

RIBOSOMAL AND

CHLOROPLAST DNA

Presented by Robin J. Tausch,

USDA Forest Service, Intermountain

Research Station, Reno, Nevada

Restriction fragment length polymorphisms

in nuclear ribosomal (nrDNA) and

chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) were used to

examine genetic structure and relationships

among 14 populations of Utah {Juniperus

osteoperma) and western juniper {Juniperus

occidentalis) from the western Great Basin

and eastern Sierra Nevada. Genetic variation

is high within and among populations of

both species, with mean heterozygosity and

Gst based on nrDNA variation being 0.74

and 0.19 respectively. Differences in

population heterozygosity and

differentiation compared between species

and subspecies are attributed in part to

variation in population size, density, and

mating system.

Comparisons of observed heterozygosity

and the number of alleles to those expected

under neutral mutation/infinite alleles model

suggest that nrDNA alleles in most

populations are selectively neutral. Thus,

high levels of intrapopulation genetic

variation in nrDNA overall do not appear to

result from the influence of diversityproducing selection. Partitioning of genetic

variation among subpopulations indicates

that levels of gene flow have not been

sufficient enough to appreciably influence

population genetic structure at the nrDNA

locus.

Cluster analysis of nrDNA allele

presence/absence data and the geographic

distribution of chloroplast hplotypes are

consistent with previous hypotheses of gene

flow between populations of Utah juniper

and each of the two subspecies of western

juniper in the western Great Basin. Two

groups of Utah juniper cluster with the

nearest subspecies of western juniper rather

than with each other. These results

corroborate isozyme-based population

genetic studies and paleoecological data,

which predict high levels of intra- and interpopulation genetic variation in relict conifer

populations of the Great Basin.

Current patterns of genetic variation and the

relationships they suggest are likely the

consequence of complex interactions

involving historical biogeography,

population demography, and life-history

characteristics. In response to changing

climate and topographic variability,

numerous zones of sympatry have probably

existed ephemerally over geologic time.

These results suggest complex patterns of

32
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

gene flow between populations of Utah and

western juniper in the western Great Basin

that warrant further study.

Informal Notes

By Jerry Haugen, U.S. Forest Service

Several middens were located in western

Nevada dating back 30,000 years. Evidence

of juniper was found in every layer,

indicating an amazing ability to adapt to a

range of climates. Several multi-state

transects from the Blue Mountains to Sonora

Pass found similar juniper regardless of

elevation.

requires an understanding of the climate

over the last million years.

For more information:

Robin J. Tausch

920 Valley Road

Reno, NV. 89512

Phone: (702) 784-5329

Growth was measured over two years. The

lower elevation juniper grew a little more,

and there was no difference between species

regardless of different environmental

conditions. All of the trees stopped growing

within a few days of each other at the end of

their growth season. Transpiration and water

use showed no difference regionally. Carbon

use was different from north to south,

independent of species.

Research on genetics, using DNA

fingerprinting, revealed that northern

{Juniperus occidentalis var. occidentals)

and southern (Juniperus occidentalis

var.australis) are similar. Hybridization

increased to the west. One tree in northern

California has all but one of the genetic

markers found in the whole study. The

generations of juniper involved are

insufficient to explain the distribution.

Understanding today's genetic distribution

33
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

GAS EXCHANGE OF

JUNIPER US

OSTEOPERMA AND

JUNIPERUS

OCCIDENTALS

ACROSS LOCAL AND

REGIONAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

GRADIENTS IN THE

GREAT BASIN

Presented by Robin J. Tausch, USFS

Intermountain Research Lab, Reno, Nevada

Few studies have investigated the diurnal

patterns of ecophysiological characteristics

of plants along multiple levels of

environmental gradients. An understanding

of adaptation among modern juniper species

along environmental gradients will increase

our knowledge of how plant species cope

with environmental change.

Our goal was to determine how the

differences in ecophysiological

characteristics of juniper relate to

differences in environmental conditions. We

obtained diurnal measurements of leaf gas

exchange and xylem water potential (Ψ)

from Juniperus occidentalis and Juniperus

osteosperma during fall 1994, spring,

summer, fall 1995 and summer 1996 from

elevational and latitudinal gradients in the

Great Basin.

Assimilation (Ad), transpiration (Ed), leaf

conductance (gd), intercellular CO2

concentration (cid) and water use efficiency

(WUEd) were calculated on a per day basis.

Data for Ad, Ed, gd, cid, and WUEd were

analyzed using a 2×5 repeated measures

experimental design. Analysis of Ψ used a

2×5×2 split-split plot design. Overall, we

found no significant difference between

local environmental gradients for Ad, Ed, gd,

Cid, WUEd or Ψ. Time of year was

significant for all AOVs, and Ψ time of day

was significant for the Ψ analysis of

variance.

In general, the three more northern mountain

ranges (Juniper Mountain, Virginia

Mountains, and Monitor Range) were not

significantly different from each other and

the three more southern ranges (Spring

Range, Snake Range, and Sonora Pass) were

not significantly different from each other,

but the group of northern ranges was

significantly different from the group of

southern ranges.

Ad defined two regional groupings for the

six mountain ranges with overlap between

the Monitor Range and Sonora Pass. No

other gas exchange or environmental

variables of leaf temperature and light

quality completely explain the groupings.

Interestingly, these groupings cut across

known species boundaries each group had

one range with J. occidentalis and two

ranges with J. osteosperma. During the fall

1994, which was at the end of a multi-year

drought period, the mountain ranges were

not significantly different from each other.

34
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

We cannot completely reject our null

hypothesis: environment appears to explain

some of the differences in leaf gas exchange

(e.g. seasonal changes), but not others. For

example the grouping of Sonora Pass (J.

occidentalis) with the Spring Mountains and

the Snake Range (J. osteosperma) indicate

similarities in Ad exist between species,

even though Sonora Pass was climatically

more similar to the northern plots.

Nonetheless, the grouping of mountain

ranges by Ad is especially interesting

because the grouping does not appear to be

related to environment and cuts across

species boundaries. One possible

explanation for this grouping is genetic

control. Analysis of DNA fingerprint data

from another portion of the larger project

(Randall G. Terry, personal communication)

shows a general N-S change in genotype

over this study area.

Results will be submitted for publication in

the summer of 1997.

For more information:

Robin J. Tausch

920 Valley Road

Reno, NV. 89512

Phone: (702) 784-5329

35
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

RELATIONSHIP OF

HYDROGEN AND

OXYGEN STABLE

ISOTOPES IN

CELLULOSE AND

DROUGHT SEVERITY

Presented by Robin J. Tausch, USFS

Intermountain Research Lab, Reno, Nevada

Change in environment such as global

warming will undoubtedly affect the

distribution of vegetation. The responses of

plants to climate change are influenced by

changes in key climatic characteristics, and

drought severity is often one of these key

climatic characteristics for Great Basin

vegetation.

As part of a larger study to examine the

effects of environment on Utah and western

junipers, Juniperus osteosperma and J.

occidentalis, the primary goal of this project

was to determine if the hydrogen and

oxygen isotopes in cellulose and xylem

water were predictably related to drought

severity.

Samples of juniper twigs were collected

from 10 sites located across geographic and

topographic environmental gradients.

Cellulose and xylem water were extracted

from these samples, then processed for D/H

and

 18O/16O isotopic composition. Weather

data from official weather stations were

extrapolated to the study sites using a

mountain climate simulator, and drought

severity for the study sites was calculated as

the difference between potential evapotranspiration (PET) and precipitation. The

results suggest that the slope of the

relationship between δD and δ18O for

cellulose and xylem samples at a study site

is a reliable index of drought severity.

Preliminary isotope results for western

juniper and Utah juniper along the three

transects in the Great Basin are published in

ESA 1995 Annual Meeting. For western

juniper, the Sonora Pass 2000m plot had the

greatest δD:δ18O slope(6.971), but that of

the Sonora Pass 2600m plot was the lowest

(0.721). The Juniper Mtn. study plots in

Oregon have similar slopes for both 1600m

and 2000m elevations (1.678 and 1.523

respectively). The climate model results for

1995 show the inverse trend for Sonora

Pass: the study plot at Sonora Pass 2000m

has the lowest integrated value of PET-PPT

(14.404), but the Sonora Pass 2600m has the

greatest value. Drought severity, as

measured by PET-PPT, were similar for the

two Juniper Mtn. plots.

These two kinds of data suggest that there is

a higher drought severity in the Sonora Pass

2600m in 1995. For Utah juniper, the

isotope analyses show that high elevation

study plot in the Spring Mtns. has a higher

δD:δ18O slope value than the lower

elevation plot.

The climate model results show the inverse

trend, and both techniques suggest that in

1995 the low elevation plots in the southern

Great Basin had a higher drought severity

36
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

than the higher elevation plots. For the

Virginia Mtn., both slopes of the stable

isotope and the difference PET-PPT were

similar. Both of elevation study plots in

Snake Range show a very low slope for

isotope ratio δD:δ18O. Also, the climate

model integrated data show very high values

(30.501 and 27.743).

Comparing these two techniques for drought

severity, there is a non-linear relationship

between isotope data (δD:δ18O slope) and

water deficit values (AreaPET-PPT). The

results of regression analysis are:

Water Deficit (AreapET-ppi) = 12.19e0.022slope(δD:δ18O )

 -18.66e 0.565slope(δD:δ18O)

The correlation coefficient (R2) is 0.75 and P

<0.05.

Our technique of stable isotope analysis is

an efficient method to indicate the drought

severity pattern cross Great Basin. The

results suggest that the ratio of the juniper

leaves δD:δ18O is a reasonable index of

drought severity. For 1995, both N-S

transacts follow a climate gradient that

primarily reflects increased drought severity

from the northern to southern, but the E-W

transect appears to be contrary to the

historical drought gradient.

The results will be submitted for publication

in the fall of 1997.

For more information:

Robin J. Tausch

920 Valley Road

Reno, NV. 89512

Phone: (702) 784-5329

37
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

GROWTH OF UTAH

AND WESTERN

JUNIPER ALONG

THREE CROSS-BASIN

TRANSECTS

Presented by Robin J. Tausch, USFS

Intermountain Research Lab, Reno, Nevada

The rapid change in climate and atmospheric

CO2 that is predicted for the near future will

likely affect vegetation, including the

pinyon-juniper woodlands and associated

plant communities of the Great Basin.

To survive the projected future changes in

climate, aridland vegetation must either

migrate to follow favorable climate or adapt

to the new conditions. Adaptation and

hybridization appear to be important

mechanisms for many Great Basin tree and

shrub species. Western and Utah juniper

(Juniperus occidentalis and Juniperus

osteosperma) and their hybrids grow in

different, but overlapping ranges of

environmental conditions. Western juniper

is found in the wetter, cooler end of the

spectrum and Utah juniper on the dryer,

warmer end. Hybrids appear to occupy a

climatically intermediate position. Thus,

juniper represent an ideal model system to

study the various processes by which plants

adapt or acclimate to climate change.

The primary goal of this portion of the

research project is to determine the

relationships between the modern

environment and growth of juniper. To

accomplish this goal, we measured the

growth of junipers along three transects that

cross the Great Basin. Field study plots were

established on 18 mountain ranges located

along three transects that cross the Great

Basin. The first transect represents an eastwest transect of Utah juniper and includes

plots located in seven mountain ranges. The

other two transects run north to south and

parallel the west side of the Great Basin.

The westernmost of these transects focuses

on western juniper, and the other focuses on

Utah juniper.

Six ranges were selected on each range and

at even 200-meter elevation intervals over

the elevational extent of juniper's

distribution. Plots consisted of 12 trees that

were greater than or equal to 0.5 m tall,

regardless of maturity class. To measure

plant growth, a circular area of

approximately 10 cm in diameter was

painted with a light-colored latex spray paint

on the north-, east-, south-, and west-facing

sides of the tree. Cumulative twig growth

was measured periodically by randomly

selecting two twigs on each side of the tree

and measuring the amount of twig growth

that protruded beyond the painted foliage.

To date, preliminary data analysis has been

completed on only a subset of the mountain

ranges. In general, leaf and twig growth of

juniper occurred during a two-month period

that begins in early summer. For example, in

both 1994 (a dry year) and 1995 (a wet

year), twig growth began in late- May or

38
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

early-July and was completed by early

August.

By the end of the second season of growth

measurements, cumulative growth at lower

elevations were greater than that for higher

elevations for two mountain ranges that had

western juniper, that is, Juniper Mountain

and Sonora Pass. For Utah juniper,

differences between elevations were small,

except for the Virginia Mountains. Although

cumulative growth of Utah juniper at 1600m

and 2200m in the Virginia Mountains was

similar through mid-July 1995, growth at the

higher elevation occurred to a greater extent

during late-summer 1995. The absence of

growth during the winter is consistent

among all plots analyzed to date. Growth

rates of western juniper as well as Utah

juniper were at or near zero for the 1994-95

winter growth period.

The effects of a very dry year (1994) versus

a wet year (1995) are especially evident

from the growth rates of Utah juniper. With

few exceptions, growth rates during the

summer 1995 were larger than those during

summer 1994. Often, growth rates during

the summer 1995 were at least two times

greater than those of summer 1994, and the

differences between these two years were up

to almost an order of magnitude at midelevation plots in the Virginia Mountains.

Differences between summer growth rates

were not as large for western juniper as they

were for Utah juniper. For example, growth

rates in summer 1994 were equal to or

greater than those in summer 1995 for the

highest elevation plots in Sonora Pass and

for all elevations in Juniper Mountain.

However, growth rates during spring 1995

were generally greater than those during

summer 1994 for western juniper trees at

both Sonora Pass and Juniper Mountain.

Thus, the effects of drought may largely be

on the spring growth period for western

juniper, whereas drought affects growth

during both spring and summer for Utah

juniper.

Two publications are anticipated from this

research. The first publication will focus on

a six year data set from the Virginia

Mountains and will be submitted towards

the end of 1997. A second publication will

contrast these results with the three year data

set from the remaining mountain ranges and

will be submitted in summer of 1998.

For more information:

Robin J. Tausch

920 Valley Road

Reno, NV. 89512

Phone: (702) 784-5329

39
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

INFLUENCE OF

WESTERN JUNIPER

INVASION AND

DEVELOPMENT ON

NUTRIENT

ACCUMULATION

PATTERNS IN

SAGEBRUSH/GRASS

ECOSYSTEMS

Presented by Arthur R. Tiedemann, Forestry

Sciences Laboratory, Wenatchee,

Washington

Research Purpose

The primary hypothesis to be tested in these

studies is that invasion of western juniper

into sagebrush/grass ecosystems is

accompanied by a significant increase in

total aboveground biomass, primarily in

trees, and a significant increase in

concentrations and amounts of organic C

and nutrients in soil-plant systems occupied

by juniper compared to systems without

juniper.

Hypothesis la—Nutrient redistribution and

accumulation in juniper soil-plant systems

and their major components (biomass, forest

floor, and soil) are a linear function of

elapsed time since tree establishment.

Hypothesis 1b—Nutrients are accumulated

in the juniper soil-plant system at the

expense of nutrient capital of intercanopy

areas by virtue of absorption by the lateral

root system of juniper and a more favorable

microclimate for accumulation of organic

matter. Depletion of the nutrient capital of

intercanopy areas is a linear function of age

since invasion.

Hypothesis 1c—Nutrient accumulation by

litterfall and a microenvironment more

favorable for accumulation and maintenance

of organic matter and nutrients in the area

beneath juniper canopies results in changes

in availability of nutrients in that location

and these changes are a function of time

since juniper establishment.

Progress to Date

We have already published results of

research related to hypothesis lc.

(Reference: Tiedemann, A.R. and J.O.

Klemmedson. 1995. The influence of

western juniper development on soil nutrient

availability. Northwest Science 69: 1-8.)

In this study, we assessed availabilities of

nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K)

and sulfur (S) in the upper 15 cm of soil

from beneath western juniper canopies and

adjacent open areas. Nitrogen availability

was the same in areas under juniper

canopies as in open areas and there was no

change in availability with age. Availability

of phosphorus in open areas was reduced

with advancing tree age. In canopy soils, P

increased with increasing tree age to 81 -

years-old and then declined with the oldest

tree class at 160-years-old.

40
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

The most striking effect of juniper was an

increase in availability of S in canopy soils

with advancing juniper maturity. From a

management perspective, the low inherent

availabilities of soil N and S observed in this

study suggests that any efforts at

productivity enhancement should include

fertilization with these two elements.

Manuscripts in Progress

Klemmedson, J.O. and A.R. Tiedemann.

Influence of western juniper development on

distribution of forest floor and soil nutrients.

Tiedemann, A.R. and J.O. Klemmedson.

The Influence of Western Juniper

Development on Biomass and Nutrient

Distribution in Trees and Understory

Vegetation.

Klemmedson, J.O. and A.R. Tiedemann. A

nutrient budget for soil, forest floor, and

vegetation in a developing chronosequence

of western juniper.

For more information:

Arthur R. Tiedemann

Forestry Sciences Laboratory

1133 N. Western Ave.

Wenatchee,WA 98801

Phone:(509)662-4315

James O. Klemmedson

School of Renewable Natural Resources

University of Arizona

Tucson, AZ 85721

Phone:(520)621-1268

Informal Notes

By Jerry Haugen, U.S. Forest Service

What are the implications of management

schemes on productivity? Given that we are

dealing with nutrient limited sites, careful

management is required. The hypothesis was

that the invasion of juniper into sage and

grass ecosystems brings an increase in

biomass (trees), and an increase in carbon

and mineral nutrients. Five classes of trees,

from age 36 to 160, at each of five sites (25

trees) were used in the study. Understory

vegetation was measured, as was the soil

down to 30 cm. The soil, mazama ash, was

only about 40 to 50 cm deep. The trees were

then harvested and broken into their

components.

It was found that nitrogen and sulphur are

very limited. The oldest trees reduced

available phosphorus, but generally

phosphorus increased with the age of trees.

As trees age they improve sulphur

availability. The kilogram per square meter

of litter rises with tree age, under the

canopy.

The recommendation is to add nitrogen and

sulphur if management is desired. Nitrogen

in the forest floor is up to 1000kg per

hectare under old trees. In age class one,

(36 years) 60 percent of the tree's biomass is

in the bole and 40 percent in the foliage. In

age class five (160 years), 80 percent of the

biomass is in the bole and 20 percent in the

foliage. Most of the nitrogen can be found in

the leaves.

41
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

CAMP CREEK

PAIRED WATERSHED

STUDY

Presented by Michael Fisher, Big Summit

Ranger District on the Ochoco National

Forest

The research area is located in the Camp

Creek drainage approximately 20 miles

northeast of Brothers, Oregon, and 40 miles

southeast of Prineville (see fig. 4). The two

watersheds drain into the west branch of

Camp Creek, which drains into the South

Fork of the Crooked River.

This study is designed to provide a physical

and ecological analysis of paired watersheds

in the semi-arid western juniper (Juniperus

occidentalis) woodlands of Central Oregon.

Instrumentation and monitoring was

accomplished in each watershed as the

preliminary portion of a longer term project

designed to address the question of "what

impact does landscape-level treatment of

western juniper have on erosional processes,

hydrology, and vegetation."

Instrumentation was setup to assist in the

comparison and calibration of water flow

out of the watersheds. Ground-water is also

being monitored in order to attempt to

quantify any effect that western juniper may

have on the this element of the watershed.

The project will entail a five-to-seven year

calibration period of the watersheds. This

will be followed by removal of the juniper

overstory in one of the watersheds. The

calibration began in 1995, and expected

removal treatment should take place in the

next two to three years (1999-2000).

To date, analysis shows the watersheds to be

similar in size, percent juniper cover, grass

and bare soil cover, topography, and

precipitation frequency and intensity.

Differences were obtained relative to

erosional processes, area of different soil

types and channel discharge. Further

monitoring and calibration should provide

greater insight into the comparison of these

components of the study.

This study is intended to address the

concerns of public and private land

managers with regards to western juniper

treatment and its impact on hydrology, both

surface and subsurface on a watershed scale.

For more information:

Michael Fisher

Phone: (541) 416-6645 Or

John Buckhouse

Phone:(541)737-1629

42
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Figure 4—Study Location

43
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

CYRUS BUTTE SITE:

IMPROVING

UNDERSTORY

VEGETATION IN

WESTERN JUNIPER

WOODLANDS

Presented by Clint Jacks, Oregon State

University Extension Service, Madras,

Oregon

Research Purpose

The purpose of the project is to evaluate

means and materials needed to improve the

understory vegetation on high western

juniper densities on bitterbrush and other

understory plants, and to follow the effects

of tree cutting and burning. The location of

the project is Cyrus Butte, on the Crooked

River Grasslands 12 miles south of Madras,

Jefferson County, Oregon.

Methods

The project was initiated in 1991, with the

collection of vegetation and soil surface

baseline data on seven plots each 40x50

meters in size.

Seven permanent sample plots were located

in each of the seven plots. At each sample

plot stems of eight bitterbrush plants were

tagged and leader growth for the year

measured. An additional 69 older bitterbrush

plants were tagged in the uncut woodland. In

late winter of 1992, trees were cut on six

plots. On three plots trees were left whole

and on three plots trees were slashed and

limbs scattered. One plot was left uncut.

Vegetation density and cover on the

permanent sample plots and tagged

bitterbrush stems were remeasured in posttreatment years. One whole-tree plot and

one slash-scattered plot were burned in the

early spring of 1994.

This area is considered an important browse

winter area for mule deer. However, larger

bitterbrush plants within the woodland show

a high percentage of dead crown, low vigor

as expressed by little if any leader

elongation, and there appears to be a low

recruitment of new plants.

The decadence of these plants may be due to

a variety of causes including several dry

years in a row, severe browsing, insects and

disease, old age, and competition with

western juniper. Whether or not bitterbrush

will survive in thick juniper woodlands and

whether or not it will respond to the removal

of a dense overstory appear to be significant

questions.

44
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Results (Not Published)

Bitterbrush—

1991- Essentially no bitterbrush leader

growth took place. Average growth per

tagged stem was less than 1 inch, and each

stem had 10 or more spur-shoots that

potentially could elongate.

1992- Moisture conditions were better and

leader growth averaged 4 inches per stem in

the woodland and approximately 10 inches

on the treated plots.

1993- Very wet year with leader growth

averaging 35 inches per stem on woodlands

and 36 inches in the cut plots.

1994- Precipitation near normal, woodland

leader growth averaged less than 1 inch and

the cut plots averaged 8 inches per stem.

Young bitterbrush plants, basal stem of 0.2

to 1.0 inches in the woodlands produced

nearly 60 inches of leader growth per tagged

stem in 1993, while plants with a high

percentage of dead canopy averaged 24

inches of growth. This same young age class

had fallen to about 1 inch in 1994 in the

woodland, but was still at about 13 inches in

the cut plots. From 1991 to 1994, 20 percent

of the woodland plants died and an

additional 31 percent of the tagged stems

died. In cut plots about 10 percent of the

plants have died and an additional 18

percent of the tagged stems have died. In the

burned plots approximately 54 percent of the

bitterbrush plants appeared dead in 1994

following the early spring burn.

Understory plants—From 1991 to 1994,

perennial grasses increased from 4.3 to 7.3

percent in uncut, 8.2 to 24 percent in cut and

scatter, and 6.5 to 13 percent in cut-scatter

and burn. Annual grasses showed no

increase in uncut plots, 0.7 percent increase

in cut and scatter, and 0.1 to 1.2 percent

increase in cut-scatter and burn. Perennial

forbs went from 0.6 percent to 0.3 percent in

uncut, 0.2 percent to 1.3 percent in cut and

scatter and 0.3 percent to 0.6 percent in cutscatter and burn. Annual forbs showed very

little increase.

For more information:

Lee Eddleman

OSU Rangeland Resources

Corvallis, OR. 97331-

Phone:(541)737-1621

Clint Jacks

Jefferson County Extension Service

2218 34 S.E. DSt.

Madras, OR 97741

Phone:(541)475-3808

Informal Notes

By Jerry Haugen, U.S. Forest Service

Clint's work is a take-off on the previous

studies at Combs Flat. He is looking at

worst-case scenarios and less productive

lands with much less understory. The 15

demonstration plots are 15 miles north of

Madras. Canopy ranges from 18 to 30

percent, 2 percent understory and 1 percent

45
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

native bluegrass. The plots were established

from 1992 to 1994. The base year, 1992,

was dry with 4 inches of precipitation and

1993 had 14 inches of precipitation.

The tests involved two management

techniques:

- cut the trees and scatter the slash

- cut the trees, but leave them whole

It was found that the best grass growth came

with about 50 percent of the area covered in

slash in areas with the greatest amount of

soil disturbance. Seeding was done after

punching holes in the soil. Seeds established

in the loose soil that sloughed into those

holes. The whole tree approach got less

grass growth because there was not enough

slash to spread around.

On even worse sites in Warm Springs,

transplanted seedlings were compared to

seeding. This test got 90 percent survival

under slash when transplanted and 55

percent when seeded. The transplants are

probably not worth the cost because similar

results can be achieved with seeding.

A third series of tests was performed at

Cyrus Butte on north slopes in high density

juniper with dying bitterbrush. Again the

two approaches were:

- cut the trees and scatter the slash

- cut the trees, but leave them whole

None of the plots were seeded, but some

were burned.

In 1991, the base year, no leader growth was

seen on the bitterbrush with 5-to-6 inches of

rain. With more rain in 1992, 4 inch leader

growth was seen in woodlands, but 10

inches in cut over areas. During the course

of the study, 20 percent of the bitterbrush

died in the woodlands, 10 percent in cut

areas, and 54 percent in burned areas.

46
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

ASHWOOD

DEMONSTRATION

AND RESEARCH

PLOTS

Presented by Clint Jacks, Oregon State

University Extension Service, Madras,

Oregon

Research Purpose

The purpose of this project was to evaluate

the means and materials needed to improve

understory vegetation in western juniper

woodlands that no longer have a productive

and protective cover of perennial herbaceous

plants. The project's second objective was to

follow vegetation changes over an extended

time period to determine long-term effects

of cutting western juniper on degraded sites

18 miles north of Madras on private land,

Jefferson County, OR.

Methods

Demonstration plots were established in

1991 with a collection of baseline

information for each plot. Treatment was

then applied in 1992, 1993 and 1994. Plots

received a combination of: surface

treatment, consisting of using a cut juniper

roller or tree drag or no surface treatment;

broadcast seeded or no seed treatment; and

junipers cut without being delimbed, trees

cut and limbs scattered, or no treatment.

In 1994, two additional plots were added

that included thinning the juniper stand. The

seed mix included Sherman Big bluegrass at

0.5 lb. per acre, Goldar Bluebunch

wheatgrass at 7.2 lb per acre, Critana

Thickspike wheatgrass at 2.4 lb. per acre

and Rosana Western wheatgrass at 2.6 lb.

per acre.

Research plots were established in 1991.

They consisted of a series of 3 × 10 meter

plots. After baseline data was collected,

treatments were applied in 1992 and 1993

with: 1) seed or no seed treatment; 2) no

punch or punch; and 3) slash cover at 0

percent, 25 percent, 50 percent, or 75

percent. Seed mix was the same as in

demonstration plots.

Results

1992 was a dry year, and 1993 was a wet

year. Baseline data in 1991 indicates tree

cover of 18-30 percent, total understory

cover 2 percent and native bluegrass cover

at just over 1 percent. Results are not

published; data are still being collected.

Demonstration Plots

Good seedling establishment occurred in

1992 (dry year) where juniper trees were cut

and limbs scattered, or cut and left whole,

soil surface disturbed with a tree drag and

seeded; establishment occurring under slash

or under the fallen whole-tree. Total percent

cover, where treatment consisted of seeding,

dragging and falling, leaving whole trees

was 6 percent perennial, 4.3 percent native

47
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

blue grass and 1.4 percent annual grass with

23 percent bare ground.

For drag, seeded and slash treatment, cover

was 4.4 percent perennial grass, 2.6 percent

native bluegrass and 0.6 percent annual

grass with 12 percent bare ground. In wet

years, establishment occurred both under

slash and in interspaces, but was favored

with site disturbance by roller punch or tree

drag. Roller punch sites did not have enough

disturbance for seedling establishment in the

dry year.

Research plots showed significantly greater

(2X) establishment at 50 percent and 75

percent slash cover for the drought year

1992 planting. In the wet year, there was an

equally high establishment for 0 percent, 25

percent, and 50 percent, but slash cover had

less establishment with 75 percent. Punch

hole density in the research plots was about

50 percent higher than in the demonstration

plots, and showed greater establishment in

dry year.

For more information:

Lee Eddleman

OSU Rangeland Resources

Corvallis, OR. 97331-2218

Phone:(541)737-1621

Clint Jacks

Jefferson County Extension Service

34 S.E. D St.

Madras, OR 97741

Phone:(541)475-3808

48
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

UNDERSTANDING

THE BIOLOGY AND

ECOLOGY OF

WESTERN JUNIPER

Presented by Tim DeBoodt, Oregon State

University Extension Service, Prineville,

Oregon

Research Purpose

The purpose of this study is to better

understand the ecology and biology of

western juniper and how it interacts within

its environment at two sites: Combs Flat,

Prineville, Oregon, and South Maury

Mountain, Crook County, Oregon. Reestablishment of herbaceous understory is

also a part of this project.

Results

Sites just outside of Prineville were first

treated in 1982. Sites were monitored pretreatment, trees cut and removed from

treatment sites, and monitoring conducted

post-treatment in both treated and control

areas. Additional sites were added through

the years since looking at treatment

technique (cut and scatter tree limbs) and

reintroduction of herbaceous material,

primarily grasses.

Soil depth and restricting layers play a

crucial role in determining tree competition

with herbaceous and shrub understory. In

sites where soil depth is limited or a

restricting layer occurs, greater vegetative

differences occur between treated and

untreated plots. Summary of results from

one trial is as follows:

A) Idaho fescue declined in cover with

cutting and clearing but not in the cut and

slash treatment;

B) native bluegrass plant cover was always

less on cut plots than on uncut plots;

C) perennial forb cover was approximately

two times greater on cut plots than uncut

plots;

D) perennial forbs responded strongly to the

very wet year of 1993 reaching 7 percent

cover in several plots including both cut and

uncut (note: Forb component was probably

measured after the spring peak in most years

and is likely an underestimate);

E) there was in general a higher percentage

(average about 50 percent more, excluding

moss and lichen cover) of bare soil in uncut

versus cut plots; and

F) shrub cover shows a steady increase over

time in cut plots and a general decline in

uncut plots.

Estimated carrying capacity for cattle, over

the years and between blocks, was 2 to more

than 10 times greater on cut plots versus

uncut plots. The 2X figure was for the very

wet 1993 year in one block, otherwise, the

value was 5-to- more than 10X. The

Prineville site estimated carrying capacities

51
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

(AUM, animal unit month) in normal

precipitation years are:

Uncut 15 - >20 Acres per AUM

Cut 3- 4 Acres per AUM

Grass species planted for revegetative effort

were: GOLDAR Bluebunch wheatgrass,

SECAR Bluebunch wheatgrass, NORDAN

Crested wheatgrass, EPHRAIM Crested

wheatgrass, RUSH wheatgrass, CRITANA

Thickspike wheatgrass, ROSANA Western

wheatgrass, SHERMAN Big bluegrass,

MAMMOTH Wildrye, TEGMAR

Intermediate wheatgrass, CANBAR Canby

bluegrass, and PAIUTE Orchardgrass.

Seeding rates varied depending on seed size;

from five seeds per sq. foot (Mammoth

wildrye) to 210 seeds per sq. foot (Sherman

Big bluegrass). Each species was broadcast

seeded and trees were then cut and limbs

scattered in mid-winter 1988 and 1989.

Results were measured in 1995. Plant cover

and density were highest in the 1989

planting for all species over 1988. In the

1988 planting, Goldar bluebunch wheatgrass

had the highest percent cover (4.1) while the

seed mix of Tegmar, Canbar and Paiute had

the greatest plant density (11.9 plants per sq.

meter). In the 1989 planting, Rush

wheatgrass had the highest plant cover (7.7

percent) and the grass mix had the greatest

plant density of 34.1 plants per sq. meter.

Publications

Bedell, T.E., L.E. Eddleman, T. Deboodt,

and C. Jacks. 1993. Western Juniper - Its

Impact and Management in Oregon

Range lands. EC 1417. Oregon State

University Extension Service. 15 pgs.

For more information:

Lee Eddleman,

OSU Rangeland Resources,

Corvallis, OR 97331-2218

Phone:(541)737-1621

52
Science and Management

Abstracts

Session III

Three Real-Life Scenarios:

What Went Right, What Went Wrong, and

What Would I Do Differently?

Organizer: Larry Swan, USDA Forest Service,

Winema National Forest, Klamath Falls, Oregon

Each presenter was asked to answer the following questions:

1. What was there before treatment?

2. Why did you choose this particular parcel to treat?

3. What did you want to accomplish and why?

4. How did you go about implementing your project?

5. What were the results?

6. What worked well and not so well, and why?

7. What would you do differently?

53
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

STEENS MOUNTAIN

COOPERATIVE

PRESCRIBED BURNS

AND JUNIPER CUTS

(A BEGINNING)

Presented by Fred Otley, Otley Brothers,

Inc., Diamond, Oregon, and

Jim Buchanan, Bureau of Land

Management, Andrews Resource Area,

Burns, Oregon

The areas treated are approximately 5 to 10

miles southeast of Diamond, Oregon, in the

Steens Mountain. The elevation varies from

approximately 4,800 feet to 7,100 feet

within the project areas. Fire was introduced

on approximately 2,500 acres. In excess of

200 acres were cut. Most of the area treated

has north and east aspect, with some west

aspect.

In the burn areas, juniper trees were from

100 to 300 trees per acre with most trees

under 10 feet in height. The sites were

mostly mountain big sagebrush-Idaho fescue

plant communities with some low

sagebrush-Idaho fescue communities

included. These were at an early-to midstage of woodland development as defined

by Miller (1996.) Shrubs were beginning to

die, and in some areas, were all decadent

and/or dying. The forb component was

limited but there were 10-12 percent grasses.

Groundcover averaged 75-85 percent with

15-25 percent bare ground.

Areas that were cut were in a mid-to-late

stage of woodland development with little

shrub understory, few forbs, and usually 8-

10 percent Idaho fescue and other grasses.

Tree density was up to 500 trees per acre

and average height was 15-20 feet.

Treatment areas were selected because of

the potential to produce a diverse native

plant community and where diversity had

already diminished. The purpose of

reintroducing fire was to create a mosaic of

habitats; increase structural diversity, which

would improve habitat for many wildlife

species; increase the forage base for

livestock and wildlife; and improve

watershed conditions. The resulting mosaic

of plant communities in various seral stages

would increase the efficiency of the

ecosystem to cycle available water and

nutrients. These sites were progressing to a

later stage in woodland development when

prescribed fire would no longer be effective

in changing the community.

NEPA documentation and public input were

accomplished one to two years previous to

completing on-the-ground work. A

cooperative agreement was developed with

Otley Brothers, Inc., and partnerships

established with Oregon Department of Fish

and Wildlife (ODFW), Eastern Oregon

Agricultural Research Center (referred to in

this section as "Research Center), and

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. The

Research Center continues intensive

monitoring of treatment areas as well as

providing scientific data for the BLM and

landowner to base decisions.

54
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

All juniper cutting was done by volunteers

or contract, with contract costs running

between $50-$60 per acre. The burns were

done in the fall, usually during October,

with a crew consisting of a fire boss, seven

or eight people from the fire crew, Fred

Otley, and approximately five people from

our Resource Area (BLM). Prescribed burns

were designed to use roads, topography, and

differences in vegetation cover to provide

for control. This allowed minimum blacklining and equipment, which in turn has held

down average costs to $4.00-$5.00 per acre.

Much of the ignition was done with drip

torches and travel by All Terrain Vehicle

(ATV). Weather conditions are variable on

the Steens with the mountain influencing

wind patterns. This required on-site

information and test fires to see if objectives

could be accomplished.

Results have been favorable. A mosaic of

plant communities has been established,

structural diversity increased, forage base

for livestock and wildlife increased, and

watershed conditions improved. Monitoring

studies indicate an increase in herbaceous

cover and number of native species

(especially forbs) on treated sites. Most of

the burned area attained between

50-70 percent reduction in juniper density.

Grasses have increased cover within three

years. In the second and third year, the shrub

component began to increase.

Aspen stands have recovered more slowly

than other communities because of limited

size and high palatability to elk and deer.

We have rested areas from livestock use, but

elk and deer prefer aspen saplings. BLM has

a short season for prescribed burning on the

Steens; we cannot begin until there are no

suppression needs throughout the state. We

are often "weathered-out" with few days

possible to burn.

The BLM will not burn certain shallow soils

or slopes in excess of 30 percent, depending

on soil depth and texture. The agency also

has concerns with cutting or burning juniper

within riparian zones.

Partnerships have been invaluable. The

Research Center provides annual reports and

data as needed, Fred and his family

constructed fire lines, provided cost sharing,

and are a constant source of information. In

the future, a helitorch will be used for

ignition in a mountain sagebrush-Idaho

fescue community that is now a mature

woodland due to lack of fire. It will also be

used to ignite aspen stands to attempt to

create the heat needed to regenerate aspen

suckers. Plans are being developed to

protect the stands from deer and elk grazing

to accelerate recovery.

Spring burns will be tried on areas

previously cut to lessen fuel loads, reduce

possibility of soil sterilization, and compare

vegetation response with areas that have cut

trees left in place. Decision-making

authority to ignite prescribed burns is being

examined for delegation to the local Fire

Management Officer. More precutting will

be conducted to allow fire to carry into sites

which are in a later stage of woodland

development.

55
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

The reintroduction of fire into areas in the

Steens Mtns. has increased since beginning

work with the Otleys in 1991. Last year, a

1500 acre burn began a 10-to-15 year

project to burn 60,000 acres on the west

slope. Next year another 30,000-acre area

will have treatment begun.

At this rate, it would take over 100 years to

reintroduce fire to the Steens, however,

much of the mountain has only 15-30 years

until woodland communities develop to a

stage of maturity where fire will no longer

be a viable alternative. At least it is a

beginning!

For more information:

Fred Otley

HC72, Box 30

Diamond, OR 97722

Phone:(541)493-2702

Jim Buchanan

HC74, 12533 Highway 20 West

Hires, OR 97738

Phone: (541) 573-4400

56
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

JUNIPER

MANAGEMENT -

CROOKED RIVER

NATIONAL

GRASSLAND (CRNG)

Presented by Byron L. Cheney, Crooked

River National Grassland, Madras, Oregon

Presentation Outline

1. CRNG encompasses 110,000 acres in

Jefferson County, Oregon.

2. CRNG burns up to 3000 acres per year

and cuts or thins up to 100 acres per year of

juniper.

3. Juniper Woodland Management

Objectives:

a. Improve forage for livestock and

wildlife

b. Maintain grass-forb-shrub

successional stage

c. Maintain openness and low

vegetation in antelope winter range

d. Maintain or improve understory

vegetation for groundcover

4. Prescribed fire is a cost-effective way to

control smaller junipers. However, older

juniper stands reach a threshold where

they become difficult to burn; too much

bare ground and not enough understory

vegetation to carry the fire. In these areas

we have clearcut junipers to improve

forage, and maintain or improve

understory vegetation. It should be noted

that clearcut treatments are not normally

applied - most of these occurred when

juniper was still considered a "weed."

5. Began later to leave the larger, older trees

for wildlife. Older trees tend to be the

ones with hollow centers that provide

cavities for wildlife.

6. At one point we were leaving all trees

greater than 15 inches dbh, and just

thinning out the smaller trees - trying to

mimic what natural fire may have done.

More recently, we began a demonstration

project where we are thinning juniper

using a "stand improvement" approach

(select best trees to leave; prune lower

limbs; vary spacing; and use spacing

which allows understory response).

7. Benefits of Current Thinning Prescription

a. Faster growth on the leave

trees.

b. Improved forage conditions.

c. More groundcover and healthier

understory vegetation.

d. Some wood products harvested

from thinned trees (mainly posts

or firewood).

e. Improved nutrient recycling by

scattering limbs of thinned trees.

f. Leave trees have greater

potential to be used for wood

products in the future.

8. Sales and Uses of Juniper to Date

a. Personal use firewood

b. Commercial firewood

57
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

c. Decorative limbs

d. Juniper boughs

e. Posts and poles

f. Small trees for landscaping

Informal Notes

By Jerry Haugen, U.S. Forest Service

The Crooked River National Grassland

Management Plan calls for burning up to

3,000 acres per year, usually in August.

There are a few problems with this. First,

burn crews are often elsewhere fighting

fires. Second, it is not politically expedient

to be starting fires when fire fighting is in

the news. The dilemma is that humidity of

less than 20 percent is needed for best

results.

Usually the area to be burned is rested from

cattle grazing and use for a year to build up

enough fuel to carry the fire. As mentioned

by others, western juniper woodland

development eventually causes loss of

ground vegetation and the opportunity to

thin by using fire. One option is to cut the

juniper and leave the slash for two to three

years and then burn it.

Byron noted that stumps are found high on

the hills above old homesteads. Apparently

the homesteaders had to go that far to find

trees for their use.

The Grasslands offer firewood in designated

places. One commercial sale of 600 cords

of juniper was attempted, but got no bidders.

Generally bidders are looking for 25 cord

lots and could not deal with 600 cords at

once. Decorative limbs are sold with

permits. Live trees are removed for

landscaping by being pulled with a chain

and a pick-up. There is some interest in

material for log homes, but the logs are not

typically long enough.

58
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

RESULTS

FOLLOWING

JUNIPER CUTTING IN

A KEY CIRCLE 5

RANCH SUB-BASIN

Presented by Louis Randall, Circle 5 Ranch,

Bonanza, OR

Treatment Area Description

The treatment area is located within a 80-

100 acre sub-basin on the Circle 5 Ranch.

The sub-basin is situated on a southeast

aspect at about 4200 ft. elevation. It is

bordered to the north and northeast by

rimrock. There were about 50 to 100 juniper

trees per acre on the lower slopes of the

basin, which were treated first, and about 25

to 75 juniper trees per acre on the upper

slopes. Western juniper woodlands,

averaging 25 to 75 trees per acre surround it.

Slopes average 15 to 20 percent on the lower

end of the sub-basin, with a few benches

midslope, and in excess of 35 percent

starting about two-thirds of the way up the

sub-basin slopes. A few remnant ponderosa

pines are located near the toe of the rimrock,

and a perennial spring is located at the outlet

of the basin which eventually drains into the

Lost River.

years, with a few older ones higher up on the

slope (around 300 years and some may be

older). The groundcover consisted of

scattered sagebrush and cheatgrass and was

about 20 percent bare ground before

treatment.

Why Was This Particular Parcel

Chosen For Treatment?

The reason this particular parcel was chosen

was because the spring is located at the

outlet to the sub-basin. It was the best spring

on the Circle 5 Ranch, and it went dry in

1992. The landowner, Louis Randall, said it

had never gone dry in his memory, and he

has been on the same ranch since 1932.

According to Randall, the original

homestead for this ranch was located right

next to the spring, and people who had lived

there prior to him coming into the area could

not remember the spring going dry.

Significant use of the spring was made in the

late 1800s and early 1900s, based on

evidence of ditching for flood irrigation of

nearby fields. He could not recall seeing any

juniper, besides a few scattered ones higher

on the slopes, when he first arrived.

Juniper trees average 30 to 40 feet in height,

and are about 12 to 18 inches in diameter at

breast height (DBH). The age of juniper

trees at the stump averages between 70 to 80

59
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

What Did You Want to

Accomplish?

Wanted the spring to produce water again,

and based on the evidence Randall saw on

Doc Hatfield's ranch around 1988, he was

fairly sure he would get some response.

How Was the Project

Implemented?

The project began in the fall of 1993 by

pushing over about 10 acres of juniper with

a dozer. The trees were cut up for firewood

and most of the limbs were left. Have been

cutting 5 to 10 acres per year since then,

sometimes using ranch employees and by

letting people come in and cut firewood.

Just letting people come in and cut firewood

did not work as well because they simply

took the best trees. Randall found the

average cost for using his own employees is

about $200 per acre. He suspects that cost

would rise to about $400 to $500 per acre if

he had to pay someone to clear the juniper in

the manner he wants. So far a total of about

40 acres has been cleared. Some of the slash

has been piled, but the majority of it has

been simply left scattered.

Treatment Results

The spring came back following treatment

and has been getting better each year.

Currently seeing about 250 gallons per

minute (April 1997) and groundcover has

increased. Bunchgrass is coming back

where the limbs were scattered and less than

five percent of the bare ground is visible.

The area was never fenced, but was not

grazed during the first year after the

treatment. Currently have between 40 and

50 head of cattle on a 5,000-acre parcel that

includes the sub-basin, which even now is

not grazed very heavily.

One of the indirect benefits from this project

is that the deer, which had been plundering

the ranch's alfalfa sheds in December and

January, are now found up in the cut area

browsing on the freshly cut juniper foliage.

What Worked in Your Particular

Situation and Why?

Concentrating on a small, but critical, subbasin with a usually excellent spring.

What Are You Planning to Do

Differently?

"I will control the woodcutters better, if they

are ever let on the property again," said

Randall. Also, "I wouldn't wait so long!" In

fact, Randall is looking at a couple of other

sub-basins where he thinks he could obtain

similar results. The other two basins each

have a history of a perennial spring and

would appear to require clearing 30 to 40

acres of juniper.

For more information:

Louis Randall

45850 Gerber Road

Bonanza, OR 97623

Phone: (541) 545-7636

60
Industry Topics

Abstracts and Informal Notes

Session I

Primary and Secondary Processing Updates and Other

"Non-Commodity" Wood Products Industries

Moderator: Dennis Brock,

Northwest Wood Products Association, Bend, Oregon

61
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

WESTERN JUNIPER

HARVEST SYSTEMS

COMPARISONS

PROJECT

Presented by Larry Swan, USDA Forest

Service, Winema National Forest,

Klamath Falls, Oregon

Project Need and Purpose

Western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis) is

the most under-utilized wood fiber resource

in Oregon. A number of factors contribute to

this situation, but probably the biggest

barrier to the commercial use of juniper is

harvest costs.

Juniper trees have numerous and large

limbs, and average volume per acre is much

less than current commercial species (such

as ponderosa pine or fir). The terrain is often

rocky and road systems are primitive. Other

major barriers to large-scale use and

commercialization of juniper include

distance from potential markets, lack of

industry infrastructure specific to juniper,

and market acceptance.

The purpose of this project was to identify

and assess harvest systems that already have

been tried in western juniper woodlands,

what might work that has not been tried, and

conduct harvest trials with the best available

systems identified. Harvest trial results were

evaluated in terms of direct site impacts,

production, and production costs. Loggers

and landowners with juniper harvest

experience were consulted, as well as a

harvest systems researcher.

The harvest trials project site was located on

property owned by the Lost River Ranch,

about six air miles southwest of Bonanza,

Oregon. Total project area was about 14.7

acres. Most of the site was considered

"above average" for juniper stands with

commercial potential.

Average tree height was 33.4 feet, average

age at stump height was 89-years-old, and

the average diameter at breast height was

12.6 inches. Tree density ranged from 25 to

160 per acre, and the volume per acre

ranged from 220 ft3 to 1,175 ft3. Tree

canopy prior to harvest ranged from less

than 10 percent in the least dense area to

over 60 percent in the densest area. For the

most part, groundcover consisted of a thick

carpet of cheat grass (Bromus tectorum). A

shrub layer was virtually absent and there

was very little juniper in the seedling/sapling

size class.

Western Juniper Harvest Systems

At least seven individuals with commercial

western juniper harvest experience, as well

as a harvest systems researcher, were

interviewed to determine what has been

tried, what worked, what did not work, and

what has not been tried that might work. Ten

different options involving all phases of a

juniper harvest operation were considered

for field trials based on their input.

62
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

The two options, which appeared most

promising for reducing harvest costs, were

pull-through delimbers and forwarders. A

forwarder could not be tested due to

insufficient volume and equipment

availability.

Harvest Trials Methodology

Baseline data was not available about

average cycle times and production for the

operational phases involved with juniper

harvest. This prevented comparisons

between potential harvest system options

and made it imperative to obtain baseline

data using the most commonly used western

juniper harvest system chainsaws and a

grapple-equipped rubber-tired skidder.

Harvest operation phases studied included

delimbing prior to falling (a technique used

in juniper to reduce cost and risk to falters),

falling with chainsaws, delimbing with

chainsaws, mechanical delimbing, and

skidding. Three different pull-through

delimbers were examined in the mechanical

delimbing phase.

Two variables were used to evaluate direct

site impacts of the harvest systems

investigated: 1) Soil bulk density changes;

and 2) ability to distribute slash (limbs and

other logging debris) evenly about the site.

A third variable, success of grass seeding,

could not be evaluated because of project

and report time lines. A total of nine

exclosures were erected after harvest to

provide control plots for monitoring site

response.

Harvest Trials Results

There was no significant production

difference between a harvest system which

used chainsaws to delimb juniper and a

system which used a pull-through delimber.

Both systems averaged about 1.7 tons of

juniper per hour at an estimated cost of $27-

$29 per green ton. The production results

were considered on the "low end" by both

the logging systems researcher and the

logging contractor. The logging contractor

reports that a production increase of 10 to 20

percent can be expected as a shovel operator

becomes more familiar with the pull-through

delimber. (Special Note: The logging

contractor recently revised this estimate to

around 40 percent, based on additional

production experience with the delimber.)

Performance of the three pull-through

delimbers used in these trials differed

substantially. The skidder pull-through

delimber was least effective with juniper.

Limb size and length hindered proper

loading and actuation of a set of hydraulic

knives.

There were various reasons why one shovel

pull-through delimber performed better with

juniper than the other. They included:

Larger, heavier, and taller platform; longer

knives; and self-centering head. All three

pull-through delimbers appeared suitable

and capable of delimbing trees with smaller

limb diameters and lengths.

A total of 398 trees were removed from the

project site, which represented roughly twothirds of the total standing before harvest

63
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

(average 82 trees per acre pre-harvest and 27

trees per acre post-harvest).

There was very little difference in bulk

densities before and after harvest operations,

even though post-harvest sampling was

biased towards high impact areas, such as

landings and skid trails. Surface organic

matter actually increased due to needle cast

from whole tree skidding, and redistribution

of mechanically delimbed slash from a

central landing. Slash was better distributed

in the area that was delimbed with

chainsaws (average cover 65 percent) than

those areas where trees were whole-tree

skidded to a central landing, mechanicallydelimbed, and slash redistributed back out

into the unit (average cover less than 15

percent).

Implications

Inventory—Research conducted for this

project highlighted the sparse and often

incompatible nature of western juniper

inventory data. It will be difficult to

convince companies to invest significant

amounts of capital without better inventory

data. The key questions are: 1) How much is

there?; 2) What is the quality?; 3) Where is

it located?; and 4) How accessible is it

(considering physical, geographic, legal, and

social factors)?

Existing Juniper Harvest Systems—Western

juniper harvest is expensive (averaging $25-

$30 per green ton). There was not one piece

of equipment identified that will solve all or

most of the cost and production issues

associated with western juniper. It appears

that incremental production increases and

cost reductions may be possible through use

of different arrangements of conventional

systems. Economies of scale and consistent

production will also significantly affect

costs.

A paper exercise was conducted to

determine potential economies of scale

through use of a forwarder. Actual field

trials were not conducted with a forwarder

because of the volume and acreage required.

It is estimated that a harvest operation using

a forwarder would require at least 1,500-

2,000 acres per year of medium- to highdensity juniper woodlands (50-150 trees per

acre, averaging 12-14 inches diameter at

breast height). The high volume needs of

such an operation probably preclude the use

of a forwarder in the majority of juniper

woodlands.

Slash Dispersal—The ability to evenly

disperse juniper slash is critical in meeting

the goal of improving rangeland habitat

through commercial harvest. This is difficult

to accomplish effectively and economically

using a harvest system that relies on a

rubber-tired skidder and grapple. Several

methods were tried to improve slash

dispersion, but none worked very well.

Options to improve slash dispersal were

discussed with various government

personnel and private industry. Analysis

suggests that more limbs can be left on-site

without major modification of systems

64
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

already in use, or a significant negative

impact on costs and production.

Mechanical Harvest Impacts on Juniper

Woodlands—Concern has been expressed

about the impact of mechanical harvest on

soil types found in western juniper

woodlands. Based on the results of this

project, minimal impacts are expected on

dry clay loam and clay soils. These soil

conditions are encountered most frequently

in late summer and early fall, when soil

moisture is historically at a minimum.

Harvest Equipment Specifically Designed

for Juniper—Several loggers with extensive

commercial juniper harvest experience

believe what is needed is a piece of harvest

equipment which will delimb juniper "on the

stump" and cut it. Advantages of such a

system include reduced labor costs, and

improved personal safety and slash

dispersal. Costs would have to be

comparable to a shovel/pull-through

delimber combination ($75-$80,000). There

is currently no way to estimate production

because there is no equipment like this on

the market.

Summary

This project established a number of "firsts":

First Summary of Potentially Utilizable

Western Juniper Volume and Acreage

Inventory Data—Published and unpublished

data about potentially utilizable juniper

volume and acre estimates from Oregon,

California, and Idaho were summarized in

one table.

First Pre- and Post-Harvest Soil

Investigations—Bulk density was evaluated

before and after commercial harvest

operations in western juniper woodlands.

First Systematic Collection and Analysis of

Conventional Harvest System Data—

Baseline data was gathered about average

production of a conventional harvest system

in western juniper.

First Evaluation of Post-Harvest Slash

Dispersal—The effectiveness of a grappleequipped skidder was evaluated in terms of

its ability to redistribute juniper slash from a

central landing where juniper was

mechanically delimbed.

First Written Evaluation of Use of PullThrough Delimbers in Juniper Harvest—

Two shovel pull-through delimbers and a

skidder pull-through delimber were used in a

western juniper woodland harvest operation,

and data recorded for baseline

time/economics calculations.

First Juniper Harvest Systems Production

and Costs Comparison Table—Based on the

information gathered for this project, a table

was prepared showing cost and production

estimates for various combinations of

conventional harvest system operational

phases in western juniper woodlands. Also

included in the table are cost and production

estimates for mechanical delimbers and a

forwarder.

65
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Publication

Swan, Larry 1997. Final report - western

juniper harvest systems comparisons

project. Unpublished report. On file

USDA Forest Service, Winema National

Forest, and Oregon State University

Extension Service, Klamath Falls,

Oregon, (available at the western juniper

web page—

http://www.orst.edu/dept/kcoext/juniper/h

arvest.htm).

Questions and Answers

Q: Could you use a rotosaw that is

backed into the tree?

A: There is a tractor attachment that you

back into a tree....sort of like a

rotosaw, but more heavy duty, like

for stump grinding. According to the

one person I know who has one, it

works fine on trees up to about 14

inches at the base.

Q: Could you use hydraulic trimmer

saws to delimb juniper?

A: We have not tried hydraulic trimmer

saws, and I'm not sure I would know

one if I saw one. If you can, send me

a photo and any literature you have

on them, or tell me where to go to

find out more.

on a small-scale basis, but not

economical on a larger-scale and

may not be the best way to

rehabilitate rangeland habitat. Let's

talk at break to make sure I

understand where you're headed with

that question.

Q: Could you use mechanical

processors in a mixed juniper/conifer

stand?

A: I would assume since the juniper in

mixed conifer stands has better shape

and usually fewer limbs, it can be

done. I've heard through the

grapevine that mechanical processors

have harvested juniper, usually in

conjunction with pine and fir harvest.

For more information:

Larry Swan, U.S. Forest Service, Winema

National Forest

2819 Dahlia St.

Klamath Falls, OR 97601

Phone:(541)883-6714

Q: Can you selectively harvest a site?

A: There's a couple of ways to answer

this question. I'm assuming you

mean cutting only the trees that will

make the best sawlogs. It's possible

66
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

WESTERN JUNIPER

LOG STORAGE

PROJECT

Presented by Scott Leavengood,

Oregon State University Extension Service,

Klamath Falls, Oregon, and

Larry Swan, USDA Forest Service, Winema

National Forest, Klamath Falls, Oregon

Western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis)

product trials in 1992 and 1993 revealed a

potential problem with excessive endsplitting during drying and remanufacturing.

Splitting reduces raw material recovery and

may cause reductions in quality and value of

finished products. It was theorized by

academicians and manufacturers that the

problem might in part be caused by "raw

material handling," e.g., excessive log

storage time and improper log storage

methods.

The Western Juniper Commercialization

Steering Committee Oregon obtained lottery

funding to study the effects of differing log

storage methods (end-coated vs. non endcoated) and storage duration on product

recovery and value. The sample set

consisted of 25 logs: eight were left as a

control, eight were end-coated on both ends

as well as all knots over 3 inches, and nine

were simply coated on both ends. All logs

were harvested in early October 1995 from

the same site and classified as "sawlogs" by

a local mill with experience sawing juniper.

A representative sample of the "green" logs

was then sawn into lumber, dried, and

remanufactured into finger-joint blanks. The

remaining logs were sawn, dried, and

remanufactured into finger-joint blocks after

250 days of storage.

Recovery figures for the lumber and fingerjoint blanks were calculated for both storage

periods. Lumber recovery1 values were

approximately 1.66 (that is, the lumber

recovered was 1.66 times the volume

predicted by the gross log scale) for logs

stored 30 days. Lumber recovery for logs

stored 250 days was approximately 1.43.

Therefore, lumber recovery was

approximately 20 percent greater for logs

stored for 30 days than for logs stored for

250 days. The finished product recovery in

the form of finger-joint blanks was 53

percent for lumber sawn from logs stored 30

days, and 44.7 percent for lumber sawn from

logs stored for 250 days. The slight decrease

in finished product recovery is likely

insignificant.

Specific data comparing the effects of log

storage on end-coated versus uncoated

material was unattainable; it was impossible

to distinguish end-coated versus uncoated

logs after 250 days due to weathering. Endcoating probably contributed to a better than

expected lumber recovery; however, to what

extent could not be determined.

1

 Where BF=board foot:

Lumber recovery = BF lumber

BF log scale

Finished product recovery = BF finger-joint blocks

BF lumber

67
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

References

Leavengood, Scott and Larry Swan 1997.

Final report - western juniper log storage

and debarking project. Unpublished report.

On file Oregon State University Extension

or USDA Forest Service, Winema National

Forest, Klamath Falls, OR (also, available at

the western juniper web site—

http://www.orst.edu/dept/kcoext/juniper/logs

tor. htm).

For more information:

Scott Leavengood, OSU Extension

3328 Vandenberg Road

Klamath Falls, OR 97603

Phone:(541)883-7131

68
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

WESTERN JUNIPER

DEBARKING

PROJECT

Presented by Scott Leavengood, Oregon

State University Extension Service,

Klamath Falls, Oregon, and Larry Swan,

USDA Forest Service, Winema National

Forest, Klamath Falls, Oregon

The vast majority (approximately 80-90

percent) of western juniper (Juniperus

occidentalis) trees is unsuitable for saw logs.

Markets for fiber and other products must be

pursued to economically harvest and process

juniper on a large-scale. One potential

market for juniper is as chips for hardboard

and medium-density fiberboard, which

generally require a bark content of less than

three percent.

The stringy and fibrous nature of western

juniper bark, as well as log form, concern

many in industry who have considered

chipping juniper. A common belief is that

juniper cannot be debarked effectively or

efficiently with existing sawmill or "in-thewoods" debarkers.

Three different types of debarkers were used

in these trials: Ring, chain flail, and

rosserhead. A total of about 90 logs were

run through three ring debarkers at two

different mills, about 10 logs were run

through a chain flail, and about 19 logs were

run through two different rosserheads at two

different mills.

Contrary to common industry belief, all

three types of debarkers performed

effectively on juniper logs. Bark content of

chips averaged below two percent, well

within industry standards for such fiber

products as hardboard and medium-density

fiber board.

Economic efficiency is another issue. If a

mill does not already have a ring or

rosserhead debarker installed, end-product

market price range (such as chips) and costs

of getting the product to market, must be

closely examined. Portable mills probably

will not be able to justify the capital

investment for debarkers. For "in-thewoods" operations, chain flail debarkers also

operate effectively and economically on

western juniper.

The purpose of this project was to gather

information about the effectiveness and

economic efficiency of commonly available

debarking equipment on western juniper.

This information will assist chip producers

and sawmills in analyzing and selecting the

most economical and efficient method for

their particular operation and markets.

69
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

References

Leavengood, Scott and Larry Swan 1997a.

Final report - western juniper log storage

and debarking project. Unpublished report.

On file Oregon State University Extension,

Klamath Falls, and USDA Forest Service,

Winema National Forest, Klamath Falls,

OR. Also on the website

www.orst.edu/dept/kcoext/juniper/debarh. ht

m.

For more information:

Scott Leavengood, OSU Extension

3328 Vandenberg Road

Klamath Falls, OR 97603

Phone:(541)883-7131

70
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

WESTERN JUNIPER

OIL DISTILLATION

AND MARKETING

PROJECT

The Confederated Tribes of the

Warm Springs Reservation of

Oregon Business and Economic

Development Branch

Presented by Joe Yesenofski, Management

Consultant, Portland, OR, and Robert

Seidel, The Essential Oil Company, Lake

Oswego, OR

Abstract Editor Larry Swan, U.S. Forest

Service

Project Purpose and Organization

The purpose of this project was to distill

essential oils from western juniper

(Juniperus occidentalis) leaf, bole wood,

and dried berries, and to determine if viable

business opportunities exist for western

juniper distillation operations.1

The project was organized into four phases:

1. Collection, Distillation, and Essential Oil

Analysis

1

 In the essential oil business, "leaf refers to

needles or foliage. "Bole wood," as used in this

report, refers to the mixture of sapwood and

heartwood which results when the whole log is

chipped.

2. Essential Oil Production Cost Analysis

3. Market Research

4. Business Opportunity Identification

A set of related, but separate, distillations

were conducted in the fall of 1996 for a

project still underway. Distillations were

conducted with the same operator and

equipment, and were focused on obtaining

leaf and heartwood oil for further market

research (Swan personal communication).

Collection, Distillation, and

Essential Oil Analysis

Collection—Leaf and bole wood samples

were obtained from a low-density juniper

woodland on a flat near the town of Warm

Springs, OR (average 10-20 trees per acre).

Based on the stand characteristics recorded

for the first six samples, age range was 65-

160 years (average 110 years), height range

was 25-40 feet (average 31 feet), and base

diameter range was 20-30 inches (average

24 inches). The sample was purposefully

biased towards trees with extensive crowns

and darker green foliage. Trees were

sampled with and without a green berry

crop.

Trees utilized for bole wood were fallen and

bucked into short lengths (approximately 15

inches) at the harvest site. Bucked log

rounds were covered and stored for varying

lengths of time before further processing.

The rounds were split, chipped, placed in

burlap bags, and covered and stored from

one to four days before distillation.

71
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Trees utilized for leaf samples were fallen,

clipped, and the resulting material bagged at

the harvest site. Juniper leaf samples were

stored from one to five days before

distillation.

Juniper berries were dropped from the

sampling program due to predicted low

recovery potential for green berries and lack

of sufficient dried berries on the ground to

sample.

Distillation—Raw material was steamdistilled at zero pressure in a 23 cubic feet,

top-loading retort. A total of 13 batches

were run through the system, nine batches

were leaf and four were bole wood.

Distillation residue was returned to the

harvest site and scattered as mulch.

Leaf oil yield by weight averaged 0.206

percent for samples harvested and distilled

in June, July, and August, and 0.405 percent

for samples harvested and distilled in

October and November (almost a 100

percent increase). Bole wood yield by

weight for this project averaged 0.138

percent for the earlier period and 0.420

percent (one sample) for the later period

(approximately 300 percent increase).

Seasonal variation in both oil content and

improved processing techniques is one of a

number of possible reasons for these

differences.

Other key distillation phase observations

include:

- Trees laden with immature berries

appeared to yield significantly less oil

from leaf material than trees that had

sparse berries.

- A properly "tuned" steam/retort

/condenser system should yield 80

percent oil recovery in three hours.

Minimum oil yield from leaf material

with such a system is expected to be 0.40

percent. A leaf oil yield of 0.50 percent to

0.75 percent can be expected with more

experience and properly prepared raw

material. Oil yields of 1.0 percent to 1.5

percent are projected in a 20 to 40 psi

pressure system, based on previous work

by Kurth and Ross (1954).

- There are 300 to 350 gallons of run-off

distillate waters for each gallon of oil

produced.

Essential Oils Analysis—Three samples of

juniper leaf oil and one sample of leaf oil

distillate water were analyzed using a gas

chromatograph.2 The crude leaf oil is

colorless or pale greenish-yellowish with a

characteristic balsamic odor. The leaf oil is

somewhat unique in that its aroma is very

similar to the aroma of the living tree.

2

 Interpretation of gas chromatograph

readings have been questioned by Joe Karchesy,

Oregon State University, based on previously

published western juniper gas chromatograph results

and his personal experience and research (Swan

personal communication).

72
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Essential Oil Cost Production

Analysis

Assumptions were made concerning raw

material costs, equipment (zero-pressure

system), yield, operation and maintenance

costs, and capital investment. The estimated

production cost of leaf oil is $360 per gallon

for a high-volume operation (one-ton retort

capacity) and $925 per gallon for a lowvolume operation (250 lbs. retort capacity).

The key determinant appears to be the

relatively low yield estimate used (0.40

percent to 0.45 percent) because of a zeropressure system. The economic profile of

bole wood was not projected due to low

yields and the current market price of a

competing product: Eastern redcedar

(Juniperus virginiana) at $60 per gallon.

Production costs could change significantly

if markets are found for the distillate waters.

Market Research

A list of potential applications were

developed for juniper leaf oil based on

distillation results and production cost

analysis. These applications included

aromatherapy, mood scents, room

fresheners, scent masks, insect repellents,

soaps and candles, cosmetics and fragrances,

lotions and cremes, and naturopathic

remedies (using the antibacterial properties

of juniper for example). Small samples of

juniper oil and, in some cases, distillate

waters were sent to prospective buyers,

along with gas chromatography results.

Prospective buyers were identified and

contacted in the following markets

segments:

- Industrial: Companies that supply

essential oils to product manufacturers in

bulk form; typically 400 lb. (45-gallon)

drums.

- Large Commercial: Companies that

principally broker and distribute oil in

drum lots to oil blenders and large thirdparty manufacturers.

- Specialty Commercial: Companies that

distribute and often blend a wide variety

of essential oils, often on a regional basis.

They generally purchase relatively small

lots of oil (one to five pounds) and

produce specialty products for

aromatherapy, naturopathic medicine,

and scent products for niche markets.

- Single Entrepreneur/Retail: This

segment consists of local entrepreneurs

who distill small quantities, which they

use to create retail products for local and

regional distribution.

Manufacturers and distributors of

competitive or similar oils were also

contacted, such as western redcedar, eastern

redcedar, Alaska yellow-cedar, cypress, and

balsam fir.

The market research performed for this

project indicates no potential for western

juniper leaf or bole wood oil in the

Industrial Sector. The bottomline is that

73
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

the market price of eastern redcedar, with

which juniper would have to compete, is

$7.50/lb. at the industrial distribution level

($60 per gallon). This market segment is

simply not feasible to pursue at this point

given what is known about juniper oil yield

and production costs.

Feedback from the Large Commercial

sector was similar, although at least the

potential price that might be obtained for

leaf oil was higher ($25/lb.). Leaf oil yields

would have to be in excess of 0.90 percent

to be competitive in this market segment.

There appears to be good market potential in

the Specialty Commercial segment.

Feedback from potential customers indicate

willingness to pay an estimated $60/lb. for

juniper leaf oil in relatively small quantities

(average one to five pounds). A business

break-even point is predicted for this market

at 0.5 percent yield; at 1.0 percent yield

business viability is assured down to prices

as low as $25/lb. Single entrepreneurs or

small businesses who produce specialty

aromatherapy and scent products principally

for the local and regional market, would also

be prospective customers.

Business Opportunity Identification

A profitable commercial business based on

distillation and sale of juniper bole wood oil

is highly unlikely. In contrast, the numbers

for a business dedicated to distillation of

juniper leaf oil do look promising,

particularly if yields can be increased from

an estimated business break-even point of

0.5 percent. Calculations do not include

potential revenue from distillate waters (if a

market is created or found).

There also appears to be good potential for

single entrepreneurs with a small distillation

operation (250 lbs. capacity) to distill and

sell specialty juniper retail products,

especially if based on a large volume of

small, pre-packaged products. A high degree

of marketing and distribution expertise and

knowledge would be necessary, as well as

an adequate supply of working capital

during business start-up.

References

Kurth, E.F. and J.D. Ross 1954. Volatile oil

from western juniper. Report No. C-3, April,

1954. Oregon Forest Products Laboratory,

Corvallis.

Swan, Larry 1997. Personal communication

with coordinator for Western Juniper

Alternative Fiber Markets Project, funded

by the Oregon Multi-Regional Strategy

Program. Mr. Swan states that a report

should be available late 1998 or early 1999.

Yesenofski, Joe 1996. Final report - A

Juniper distillation and marketing project.

Unpublished report. On file Oregon State

University Extension Office, Klamath Falls,

and The Confederated Tribes of the Warm

Springs Reservation, Warm Springs, OR.

74
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

For more information:

Joe Yesenofski

4180 N.W. Carton Court

Portland, OR 97229

Phone: (503) 645-8349

Robert Seidel

P.O. Box 206

Lake Oswego, OR 97304

Phone: (503) 697-5992

Larry Swan

2819 Dahlia St.

Klamath Falls, OR 97601

Phone:(541)883-6714

75
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

WESTERN JUNIPER

DRYING PROJECT

SUMMARY: 1993-

1996

Scott Leavengood, Oregon State University

Extension Service, Klamath Falls, Oregon

Larry Swan, USDA Forest Service, Winema

National Forest, Klamath Falls, Oregon

The purpose of this project was to address

the common industry perception that

western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis) is

difficult to dry. During the course of the

Western Juniper Commercialization Project

trials in 1993 and 1994, it became obvious

that years of anecdotes about how difficult it

was to dry juniper were hindering

manufacturer willingness to conduct

manufacturing trials and test market valueadded juniper products. Further impetus to

explore the drying issue was provided by a

potential problem identified during juniper

manufacturing trials in 1993: low product

recovery due to excessive checking, splitting

and warping1 during remanufacturing.

Drying tests and trials were conducted

between 1993 and 1996 to:

1

 The terms "splitting" and "checking" are

often used interchangeably. A check is defined as "a

lengthwise separation of the wood that usually

extends across the rings of annual growth and parallel

to the wood rays" (Dry Kiln Operator's Manual,

1991), whereas splitting often results from the

extension of a check and extends across the full

thickness of the piece. Warp is a broad term that

encompasses any distortion in the "shape" of a board

and includes bow, crook, twist, cup, and diamonding.

A) Test and refine existing dry kiln

schedules;

B) develop moisture meter correction

factors;

C) test dry western juniper in different types

of kilns, both by itself and with

ponderosa pine;

D) explore alternative drying techniques to

minimize splitting and warping due to

inherent growth stresses; and

E) test a "saw-dry-rip" program currently

utilized in the hardwood industry to

reduce splitting and cracking.

Dried material from the different phases of

the project was remanufactured and put into

service by a variety of secondary

manufacturers. Impressions and

observations were then monitored.

The following is a brief summary of dryingrelated results:

A) Dry Kiln Schedules: Published juniper

drying schedules appear to work well.

The final trial was a full kiln charge

(about 40,000 board feet) in a standard

commercial kiln. Although the kiln

operator indicated some anxiety about

what would happen, no problems were

encountered.

B) Moisture Meter Correction Factors:

Moisture meter correction factors for

western juniper are small, but significant.

At 10 to 12 percent, true moisture content

averages almost 2 percent above what

resistance- and capacitance-type meters

would read if calibrated or set for pine.

76
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Kiln operators need to be aware of these

correction factors to dry juniper to

customer specifications.

C) Different Kilns/Single Species and

Mixed: Juniper was successfully dried in

three different steam kilns, a

dehumidification kiln, and a vacuum kiln.

No problems were encountered when kiln

drying juniper by itself. Juniper can also

be successfully dried with pine, however,

minor modifications of pine drying

schedules are needed to prevent overdrying. It should be noted that moisture

content targets were consistently

exceeded by about 2 percent when

juniper was dried with ponderosa pine

(for example, if target moisture content

was 8 to 10 percent, juniper would

average 10 to 12 percent). Project trials

also indicate that juniper air-dried well.

Air-dried material needs to be carefully

prepared (e.g. trim all bark) to reduce the

possibility of woodborers. Treatment

with an insecticide, such as Bora Care®

or Tim-bor® may be needed.

D) Alternative Drying Techniques: Two

alternative drying techniques were tested

to evaluate their potential to relieve

growth stress in juniper: High

temperatures and steaming, and presteaming. Based on results from early

project tests and trials, growth stress is

considered the primary cause of the

splitting and warping observed in dried

material. Neither technique tested showed

potential for reducing the splitting or

warping sometimes observed in dried

juniper. Full-scale trials were not

conducted.

E) Saw-Dry-Rip Program: Tests were

conducted to determine if juniper would

warp less if ripped after drying rather

than before drying. Results support

previous research and experience with

hardwoods: Less warpage will occur if

kiln dried lumber is properly conditioned

and ripped after drying, rather than before

drying. Unfortunately, other tests have

shown that drying narrower boards will

result in less checking. Therefore,

manufacturers may have to choose the

lesser of two evils: dry wide boards to

minimize warp or dry narrow boards to

minimize checking.

Reactions of secondary manufacturers who

tried the material were mixed, especially if

they were accustomed to dealing with only

one species. Those who had experience and

markets for other niche species were open to

further trials with juniper if there was

assistance in finding and exploring new

markets.

Based on the results of tests performed

during the three-year period covered by this

project, it appears that checking and splitting

in juniper can be reduced by: 1) Careful

choice of logs to minimize large knots,

spiral grain, and taper; 2) careful treatment

of logs after harvest, such as end-coating

and sawing logs as soon as possible after

felling; 3) minimizing material with large

knots (over 1⁄2-inch) and pith; 4) drying

thinner, narrower, and shorter boards; 5) use

77
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

of moderate kiln schedules (lower initial

temperatures, higher initial relative

humidities, and longer times); and 6) fingerjointing and emphasis on products, which

require shorter, narrower, and thinner

lumber than commonly produced in the

Pacific Northwest.

References

Leavengood, Scott and Larry Swan 1997b.

Western juniper drying project summary:

1993-1996. Unpublished report. On file

Oregon State University Extension, Klamath

Falls, and USDA Forest Service, Winema

National Forest, Klamath Falls, OR. Also on

the website www.orst.eduf

dept/kcoext/juniper/drying.htm.

For more information:

Scott Leavengood

3328 Vandenberg Road

Klamath Falls, OR 97603

Phone:(541)883-7131

78
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

OTHER "NONCOMMODITY" WOOD

PRODUCT

INDUSTRIES:

EASTERN REDCEDAR

INDUSTRY

Panel Discussion

Moderator

Scott Leavengood, Oregon State University

Extension Service, Klamath Falls, Oregon

Panelists

Bill Breedlove, Western Juniper Industry

Facilitator, Klamath Falls, Oregon

Brent McGregor, Rocky Mountain Timber

Products, Sisters, Oregon

Don Prielipp, Consultant, Redding,

California

Glenn Burleigh, Burls by Burleigh, Powell

Butte, Oregon

Mike Kilpatrick, Juniper Plus, Mt. Vernon,

Oregon

Moderator (Leavengood): This group

visited Missouri eastern redcedar producers.

Eastern redcedar is actually a juniper

(Juniperus virginiana). Visits to a mature

industry using juniper trees should reduce

the tendency to "reinvent the wheel."

The characteristics of redcedar that were

investigated included log length, knot size,

taper, rot, and harvest procedures.

Moderator: Other comparisons between

redcedar and western juniper? Will the type

of system used for redcedar work here for

western juniper?

Speaker (Kilpatrick): Redcedar provides

"bread and butter" money to the local people

and the harvesting is done by hand. Trees

are small and most are milled. The society

and economy of Eastern Oregon are very

different from the Southeast.

Redcedar is almost a weed, most are cut

before maturity. The large mature trees have

been gone since the 1920s, and most of

those were made into pencils.

With western juniper, there are many large

mature trees and even the short logs can be

large and heavy.

Moderator: The short logs of redcedar are

made into short boards. Is there a market for

short boards in this area?

Speaker (Kilpatrick): People in this area

need education on what is a good western

juniper log. The redcedar industry includes

products like specialty products, paneling,

and cants for birdhouses. Western wood

industry is based on lumber. It is a largescale industry and requires more volume

than just pickup loads. Mills are not set up to

process eight-foot logs.

Speaker (Prielipp): The length of the log is

determined by market needs. Short-length

logs are better for high taper trees. The 42-

inch length of redcedar is common for closet

79
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

lining. The best guess as to why 42 inches

was chosen was based on many people

having 1953 International pickups with a

bed width of 42 inches. The average

diameter of redcedar logs is between 6 and 8

inches.

Moderator: (displayed an overhead

showing Whittaker Farms Sawmill,

Bradleyville MO log prices) - Would this

type of pricing be reasonable here?

Speaker (Breedlove): Here, 5 tons of logs

are needed to recover 1000 board feet of

lumber and the landowner may get $5 per

ton in a good market and for juniper with

good form.

Moderator: Redcedar mills are small-scale

circular saw mills. Would small mills work

here?

Speaker (Kilpatrick): Small mills won't

happen here. OSHA would shut down mills

like the redcedar mills.

Moderator: Would western juniper have a

similar market as redcedar? Does western

juniper have other niche uses?

Speaker (Breedlove): We need to discover

more markets for western juniper. People

need to accept juniper as a possible

substitute. We need to find a market for byproducts. A niche market perhaps? Having a

market for leftovers makes

commercialization more viable.

Speaker (Kilpatrick): Oregon can't expect

to compete with the redcedar industry. They

are established and have old machines to

produce their products at low cost. Laserengraving is an option for western juniper.

Eastern redcedar has established markets

across the country. Even in Oregon,

redcedar products are stamped with Oregon

names and sold here.

Speaker (Prielipp): Why were they

(redcedar) able to make the market? In the

1920s there were many producers making

chests, caskets, paneling, flooring, and more.

These producers formed the Eastern

Redcedar Association based in Chicago.

There was much promotion on the virtues of

"Redcedar." The texture, color, odor and

insect repellent qualities were promoted.

This image has carried over until now.

Redcedar is considered a "special" or nearly

sacred species.

In the 1960s, larger business consumed

many of the small ones. These large

industries didn't support the Eastern

Redcedar Association and it was disbanded.

Speaker (McGregor): I was impressed by

the industry, the creativity of the people and

their successful marketing. Here, there is too

much expense tied up in processing to

develop a similar industry. An older

woodworker told me that redcedar was

"mellower" and easier to work.

Moderator: Full utilization of residuals is

important. Redcedar has markets for

80
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

residuals. Shavings are used mainly for

poultry bedding.

Speaker (Prielipp): There is no single

product in the redcedar industry that will

carry the load. The same applies to western

juniper.

Products in the Redcedar Industry include:

- Bark: Sold as mulch for soil condition

and topping, and by the pickup load.

- Lumber Products: Established market

exists.

- Shavings: Big flaky shavings are used

100 percent in the poultry bedding

market.

- Sawdust and Small Shavings: Used for

oil extraction. The very small, fine

materials are used to run the boiler that

ran the distillation. The recovered

shavings from distillation are packaged

in small bags and sold as small animal

bedding. There is more demand than

supply for shavings.

How can we develop a market for these

products here? Currently, western juniper is

a small-scale, artisan industry. Missouri and

Arkansas have a cottage industry for

redcedar.

The scale of industry in the southeast is

"Can I survive this week?" The scale here in

the west is "How many truckloads per day?"

The desire in Oregon and Northern

California is to be a commercial industry.

Commodity or specialty products? Specialty

products have the best chance for western

juniper.

To have a commercial industry for western

juniper, we have to make sure the

infrastructure lives. We need to treat

everyone fairly. We need a reliable supply

of sufficient quantity in a timely manner,

and we need markets for the by-products.

Speaker (Kilpatrick): To have an industry

in western juniper, we have to attain full

utilization. We don't have an established

infrastructure.

Speaker (Prielipp): I would like a selfreliant, self-disciplined small industry.

Reference

Leavengood, S. and L. Swan. 1994.

Summary of Missouri eastern redcedar

industry study (September 26-29, 1994).

Unpublished document. On file, Oregon

State University Extension Service, Klamath

Falls, OR. 45pp.

For more information:

Scott Leavengood

3328 Vandenberg Road

Klamath Falls, OR 97603

Phone:(541)883-7131

81
Industry Topics

Informal Notes

Session II

Product Introductions and Marketing Workshop

Moderator: Dennis Brock,

Northwest Wood Products Association, Bend, Oregon

82
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

OTHER "NONCOMMODITY" WOOD

PRODUCT

INDUSTRIES:

OREGON

MYRTLEWOOD

Presented by John Shreck, The Oregon

Connection (formerly House of

Myrtle-wood), Coos Bay and Brookings,

Oregon

The Oregon Connection produces 150 items

made of myrtlewood. The wood ranges from

light blonde to dark. The items include golf

putters, turned items, decorative items,

grandfather clocks, and flooring. Shreck's

focus is the niche cottage industry. He

requires logs to be a minimum of 60 inches

in length. His mill has a 42-inch circular

saw. The spotted owl and fish restoration

issues have affected pricing for logs. A

nature-based area, such as Oregon, needs

prudent resource management. Shreck

processes 4,000 to 6,000 board feet at a

time. The cost is about $.85 per board foot

to mill the logs inhouse. Shreck pays

between $.42 to $.43 per board foot for the

wood. A cottage industry might be able to

get better yield using short pieces.

Q: Is it practical to haul logs to existing

small-scale mills?

A: One possibility is small portable

sawmills for small operators. The

cost of these portable sawmills

ranges from $6,000 to $20,000.

Other cost considerations:

- Don't debark if it is not necessary. Shreck

doesn't debark myrtlewood.

- Use small pieces of wood. Shreck uses

wood down to a 2 inch cube for a

candleholder.

- A market is needed for falldown and byproducts.

Other miscellaneous comments:

- The name change to "The Oregon

Connection" was to generate interest in

all of Oregon, not just the Southern

Coast. Trying to get more tourist dollars

is best for the entire state.

- Shreck plans to expand into western

juniper products.

- A good specialty market for his products

is the corporate gift and incentive market

because they buy in quantity.

- He strives for the most quality in the

product: color and grain are important,

not maximum utilization of the wood.

There can be a market for even very

small pieces of quality wood for jewelry.

For more information:

John Shreck, P.O. Box 457, Coos Bay, OR

97420, Phone: (541) 267-7804

83
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

PRODUCT

INTRODUCTIONS:

INFORMAL PRODUCT

REVIEW BY

WESTERN JUNIPER

MANUFACTURERS

AND EXHIBITORS

Presented by Bill Breedlove, Western Juniper

Industry Facilitator, Klamath Falls, Oregon

1. Mike Connolly, Connolly Wood Products

(Bend): Produces custom millwork,

doors, flooring, cabinet doors.

2. Brent McGregor, Rocky Mountain

Timber (Sisters): Produces high-end,

rustic furniture and has a table and chair

on display.

3. Glenn Burleigh, Burls by Burleigh

(Powell Butte): Makes high-end, rustic

furniture. Has a bed and nightstand on

display.

4. Ron Horvat, R.H. Forest Products

(Vancouver, B.C.): Runs a flooring mill

in British Columbia and is hopeful for

the juniper industry. Western juniper

will compete with Australian cypress,

but western juniper is homegrown,

aromatic, and they get an attractive

translucent effect with an oil-base finish.

This effect makes the wood look

different from different positions on the

floor. By this time next year, expect to

process 24,000 board feet per year.

5. Mike Bryant, Clearwater Drilling (Bend):

Produces lamps. Has two on display. He

doesn't experience many problems

working with western juniper. Needs

wood with some white sapwood. Dead

wood presents some problems.

6. Matt Madson, Burl Arts (Orick, CA): Has

15 years experience. His "calling card"

is rustic phones. He has phones and

furniture in 30 countries. He used to

work with redwood burls and roots. Was

introduced to western juniper by Brent

McGregor. He prefers to work in lighter

woods because of the fashion trend

drifting to lighter woods.

7. Steve Walter, Walters Personalization

Services (Bend): Does custom laser

engraving on a variety of surfaces

including wood, metal, glass and leather,

and he can do custom artwork. He has

products in the Capitol Building Gift

Shop in Salem and in Sunriver. He

produced the western juniper wood

business cards.

8. Tim Coe, The Wood Shed (Mitchell):

Had no products to display because he

sold them all. His business has

increased 280 percent since 1994 and

was involved with Howard McGee in

shipping western juniper logs to Taiwan.

9. Cynthia King, The Herb Shed (Mill

City): Brought several products. People

need to "experience" her products to

84
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

appreciate them. She specializes in

Native Forest Remedies using juniper

and cedar. She is located in Mill City,

Oregon and attends the Saturday Market

in Eugene. Her juniper products include:

Juniper Spray

Juniper and Sage Antiseptic Spray

Juniper and Sage House Cleaner

(good for killing mold)

Juniper Salve (good for arthritis,

rheumatism, sports injuries)

Juniper and Sage Foot Powder (antifungal)

Juniper Vinegar (Juniper berries

have meat tenderizing properties)

10. Al Bailie, Artistry in Wood (Paisley):

Was unable to attend, but had pen and

pencil sets and card holders on display.

11. Elden Meeder, Juniper Creations

(Burns): He is a freeform wood artist but

was unable to attend.

12. Milo Medlock, Anchor "M" Lumber

(Spray): Mainly in the lumber business.

His great granddaughter made some

fancy items from western juniper. He

will be sawing some juniper in the next

few weeks.

13. Rod Andrews, Rainier Wood Products

(Sweethome): Was involved in drying

projects.

14. Gary Berglund, Burnich Frame and

Moulding (Missoula, MT): Was given

some western juniper for product

development. Produced a picture frame

molding, which has been well received

by people who have seen it.

15. John Brandis III, Superior Hardwoods

(Philomath): Produces hardwood

plywood and has experimented with

western juniper. His goal is to market

Pacific Northwest woods including

juniper, alder and walnut. Has

experienced problems with low recovery

(15 percent). He needs better selection

and grading and better communication

with log suppliers. He is sure the process

will improve. He sent his logs back East

to be sliced because he works with a mill

in that area that was already set up for

him.

16. Robert Seidel, Essential Oil Co. (Lake

Oswego): Has sample products on

display including, incense (made from

wood and leaf oil), hunters mask spray

(made from leaf oil), and Juniper Soap.

He could have customers in Europe for

western juniper oil, but has no supply

available.

17. Mike Kilpatrick, Juniper Plus (Mt.

Vernon): Produces solid wood paneling

and has worked with western juniper for

20 years. He has his own land, sawmill,

and logger, and they do the processing

themselves. He also produces custom

boards for cabinets. He does not have a

problem making things out of western

juniper. It is a problem to sell it because

he does not have a market.

85
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

18. Bend Spirits (Bend): Makes a superior

Cascade Mountain Gin and uses western

juniper berries for flavoring.

19. John Shreck, The Oregon Connection

(Coos Bay and Brookings): Displayed

several items including turned pieces

that had been painted. Juniper is a good

medium for painting and he sees it

becoming part of his product line.

86
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

MARKETING

WORKSHOP

Facilitated by Dick Handley, Business

Consultant, Medford, Oregon

Panel Members:

Mike Connolly, Connolly Wood Products,

Bend, OR

Ted Napier, Oregon Log Homes,

Sisters, OR

Cynthia King, The Herb Shed,

Mill City, OR

Lance Romine, Lineshack Log Cabins,

Prineville, OR

Brent McGregor, Rocky Mountain Timber

Products, Sisters, OR

Don Prielipp, Wood Products Industry

Consultant, Redding, CA

Dennis Brock, Northwest Wood Products

Association, Bend, OR

MerrieSue Carlson, OR. Econ. Develop.

Dept, Brand Oregon Program, Salem OR

Panel Questions:

What have I tried in marketing my western

juniper products?

What has worked?

What did not and why do I think it did not?

What kind of marketing assistance do I

need?

What would help my business grow?

Mike Connolly, Connolly Wood Products

Mike attended the '93 Western Juniper

Forum where he met Larry Swan and Bill

Breedlove. They gave him 20- 6 in. by 6 in.

cants to make something from.

He began by thinking of using it the same as

Tennessee Cedar (eastern redcedar). When

he started to process the cants though, the

City of Bend fined him $50,000 for air

pollution and Mike had to buy a $183 billion

bond for potential allergy problems...which

he went on to add, was only a billion less

than the proposed tobacco industry

settlement.

When he began to see the beauty in the

wood, he realized he shouldn't be limited in

his thinking. Mike has tried about a "100

different products," but seems to be

centering in on architectural doors, cabinet

doors, and paneling. The types of products

he makes with juniper appear especially

well-suited for the log and timber frame

home market. He wants to make what

people want to buy.

Mike thinks we need to build the image of

western juniper as a "wood of choice." We

need to look for and be able to bring out the

beauty in the wood.

Products made by the linear foot have not

turned out well for him. Mike thinks we

need to look for applications that use lengths

less than eight feet, and maybe less than six

feet.

87
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Mike's daughter, Colleen, has produced a

series of attractive and informative

brochures about Connolly Wood Products'

western juniper product line.

Q: What would help you increase

your juniper business?

A: Networking with people such as

architects, designers, and artists.

Q: What is your yearly consumption

of western juniper?

A: We are planning to use juniper for

25 percent of our total raw

material needs - we expect to use

12,000 - 15,000 board feet this

year, mostly for doors and

flooring.

Q: What problems have you

encountered?

A: We have problems getting boards

with good grain and length. We

make a lot of waste and need to

find homes for it.

growing market, and has samples in their

showroom.

Lance Romine, Lineshack Log Cabins

Lance and his partners have experimented

with western juniper and are developing a

product. They took a log home kit to the Log

Home Show in Seattle where it was well

received. They came home with "Best in

Show." The markets are there, and juniper's

number one feature is its uniqueness. They

plan to use juniper for the majority of their

business due to the good reception at the

home show. They have a 3,500 square foot

juniper home nearly complete.

Q: Whom do you buy from?

A: The Western Juniper Industry

Facilitator (Bill Breedlove) helps

us out.

Ted Napier, Oregon Log Homes

Ted works with a facility in Maupin, which

turns logs and can manufacture 8-inch cants.

He has the ability to make juniper log homes

and has already sold two. One of the houses

will be on the Oregon Coast. He expects a

88
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Brent McGregor, Rocky Mountain

Timber Products

[Brent read a prepared statement. The

following is a summary of that statement,

which was published in a past issue of the

Western Juniper Newsletter.]

I'm a rustic woodworker and want to start

out by saying that I haven't met anyone who

has gotten rich working with juniper!

There's a lot of work involved with juniper,

but I think that the attraction many feel for

the wood is because it has character:

Wrinkles, bark seams and twists, and

beautiful color bands and grain patterns.

These are all positive and workable elements

for a furniture builder such as myself. I

came to Central Oregon back in 1984,

wanting in the worst way to work with

juniper, but I didn't know how to go about it.

I had spent time in Alaska, and logged and

built log homes in Wyoming. I always

seemed attracted to the crooked trees

though, instead of the straight ones.

I started out in Oregon by taking on a

contract with BLM. I had the rights for one

year to all the juniper I could use from a

500-acre project. I only managed to find 200

trees solid enough to mill with my mobile

dimension saw, and then I couldn't figure

out what to do with the stuff. I still have

piles of the lumber lying around. It was at

that time that I started looking at ways I

could make a living out of the forked limbs

and crosscut sections.

When I started out, I not only didn't know

anyone else in Central Oregon working with

twisted and burled limbs and logs, I didn't

know anyone anywhere doing this type of

work. I had to learn almost everything

myself, like places to harvest the wood, how

to debark and dry it, what tools and joinery

worked best, how to sandblast and sand it,

and what type of finish to use. I made some

disasters, which I still have hanging in my

shop, but I learned from those mistakes.

There is no one right way to market a

product. Marketing tactics are going to be as

different as the personalities of the people

who make the product. I know one furniture

builder who doesn't want to meet his

clientele, so he sells everything through

galleries. I know others who put thousands

of miles on the road for the show circuit.

When I was first getting started, I called Log

Home Guide Magazine about placing an ad.

After hearing what I did, they asked me to

write a story about my new business and

send in a few photos. I happened to tell this

to the editor of our local paper, who I was

talking to about an ad. He knocked-out an

article for me in less than an hour, along

with photos. The story was published and

what do you know, a check came in the mail

from a doctor in Wisconsin who wanted a

log bed like the photo in the magazine. This

blew me away...I sold something to

someone I never spoke with before and that

lived far away!

I love what I do. There are days I walk into

the shop and never want to come out. As

89
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

time went on, I got up my nerve and took in

a glasstop juniper table to a local gallery.

That was a good move, because several local

residents saw it and ordered one. But I knew

I probably couldn't sell enough of this

unique furniture locally to make a living. So

I put together a brochure with the help of my

brother, who is a talented graphic artist.

It seemed to me people treated me

differently once I had a brochure. People felt

more confident that my business was for

real. I mailed my brochures to everyone I

could think of, throughout the country. Dan

Mack, a noted furniture builder in New York

City, saw one and included me in a book he

was writing. That book, and mention in

others, led to more exposure.

I took out a small advertisement in Log

Home Magazine, which landed me my first

really big job - several pieces of furniture for

a modern day camp near the Adirondacks in

New York. And from an article on rustic

furniture in Town and Country Magazine,

where I didn't even rate a photo, I sold two

20-foot Ryder Van loads for an amazing log

home in Park City, Utah.

I like to deliver my own furniture and have

traveled cross-country to do it. Luckily, I

have a partner like Kara who will go with

me. I like to meet the people who buy my

furniture and see where it is going. I have

stayed in touch with some of my clients and

have formed long-lasting friendships with

some of them.

About 80 percent of my sales are done in my

shop and showroom I constructed for my

furniture. I find for me that my own "two

cents worth" goes a long ways to making a

sale. I'm not afraid to offer ideas, and I'm

fortunate that most people now search me

out instead of me going out and finding

them. It's a thrill to have someone fly

thousands of miles in their Lear jet, so we

can meet and talk about what kind of

furniture they want.

Last year, Kara and I put a lot of time in on

a booth for a log home show. We won "best

of show" for our booth and attracted a lot of

attention. This year I'm trying the Internet.

I'm in the second month of my home page

and just got my first inquiry last week from

a motel being constructed in Barrow,

Alaska. Only time will tell if this will work,

but I'm willing to try it out for awhile.

I'm now working on an incredible home in

Washington. It has over 11,000 square feet,

400 tons of river rock, and beautiful log

work. The more juniper I put into the house,

the more they want. Thirteen years ago I

could never have imagined that I would be

working on a project like this. Now I can't

wait to see what the next 10 years will bring.

Panel Question: What kind of industry

do you want?

Don Prielipp, Wood Products Industry

Consultant

Sharing of information is critical, but we

need to identify what categories need to be

90
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

communicated. The Western Juniper Group

does well sharing and communicating

technology issues. Resource availability and

how to extract the resource at a reasonable

cost need more work. Marketing is also an

issue. Can a group label be developed to

represent both entrepreneurs and

commercial producers?

Don has a long-term association with the

pencil industry and gave some background.

California Cedar Products makes pencil

slats mainly from incense-cedar. Juniper

was tested for pencil slats and worked

OK. Pencils are made from the shop

grade component of the log and may

present an opportunity for the western

juniper industry. The pencil industry

looks at 8-inch cuttings and grades

accordingly.

The pencil industry is experiencing a

shortage of incense-cedar and is looking

in Wisconsin, Russia, Africa, Mexico,

South America, and China for alternative

species. They are not looking in Oregon

because most of what they need is on

public lands. The pencil industry cannot

make credible business plans based on

assumptions about raw material coming

from public lands - there are too many

unknowns.

Dennis Brock, Northwest Wood Products

Association

Dennis's image of juniper has changed

dramatically - from being a "water sucking

weed" to a useful product. He feels there is

room for both cottage industry and

commercial producers.

The juniper industry needs to develop total

fiber utilization through networking. This is

a different approach than with fir and pine.

Artisans may not need the same

infrastructure - waste is not a big problem

for them.

Cynthia King-Atiyeh, The Herb Shed

Cynthia wants to see an industry based on

diverse markets and uses for all of the tree.

Maybe form a co-op for secondary products.

Diversification takes effort.

MerrieSue Carlson, Oregon Economic

Development Dept., Brand Oregon

Program

MerrieSue is Project Manager for Brand

Oregon, which provides marketing resources

for companies wanting to use Oregon

imaging in their products.

Brand Oregon was an idea that started when

Goldschmidt was Governor. He said that

Oregon is a special place and needs to be

noticed.

Using "Oregon" in a name, logo, or label

gives small, emerging companies a jumpstart in the marketplace, especially those

dealing in natural resource, value-added

products such as rustic furniture. Large

companies, like Mentor Graphics, don't

depend on "Oregon" to sell their products.

91
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Examples of industries developing logos and

names using Oregon's positive image

include Seafood Oregon and Oregon

Brewers Guild.

MerrieSue's objective is to enhance

programs that are already developing. This

summer, Brand Oregon will complete a tool

kit identifying different resources having to

do with Oregon. For example, they will list

an inventory of photobanks of Oregon

photos. Many people can use these photos,

paying a fee to the owner, rather than having

to hire their own photographer at a greater

cost. The tool kit will also list awardwinning businesses that successfully

integrate the Brand Oregon concept, as well

as explain how and why they were

recognized.

Admittedly, it is hard for new businesses to

come up with a plan and cash to pay for the

design and manufacture of a logo or label.

What you are trying to do is reach out to

people and teach them about Oregon and

your product...build awareness that builds on

the existing brand strength of Oregon.

You have to think of ways to cooperate and

collaborate in marketing juniper and

associating juniper with Oregon. Brand

Oregon can perhaps help with an "Origin

Campaign" for the Western Juniper

Industry.

92
Western Juniper Forum '97

Closing Session

93
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

CLOSE-OUT NOTES

COMBINED SESSION

Closing Remarks

Session Moderators were asked if they had

any closing or summary remarks, based on

what they heard at the sessions they

moderated.

Steve Fitzgerald (OSU Extension Forester,

Redmond) Science and Management,

Session I (General Topics) and Session II

(Field Research Updates)

Steve noted that there remains a lot that is

unknown about the science and management

of juniper. Results of studies presented

appear to lead to useful recommendations,

but overall there remain a lot of unanswered

questions. Steve warned that all studies

have limitations and must be interpreted. He

indicated special concern about

extrapolating research results about nutrient

balances in juniper woodlands to the extent

that you may not want to burn at all.

Dennis Brock (Northwest Wood Products

Association [formerly WPCC, Inc], Bend)

Industry Topics, Session I (Primary &

Secondary Processing Updates; Other NonCommodity Wood Product Industries) and

Session II (Product Introductions)

Dennis summarized by listing five main

points:

1. Steady supply is needed.

2. What does the industry want to be

when it grows up? Specialty,

cottage, large? Maybe continue

to be all-inclusive?

3. Networking is critical.

4. One of marketing messages is that

juniper is "wood of choice."

5. In terms of marketing, there is no

one "right way."

There is solid growth and potential for more.

Key to development has been the Steering

Committee's emphasis on networking and

communication.

Dick Handley (Marketing Consultant,

Medford) Marketing Workshop

Dick remarked that from a marketing

standpoint, a plan is needed so that everyone

can keep moving forward.

Scott Leavengood (OSU Wood Products

Extension, Klamath Falls) Program CoChair

Scott noted that the emerging juniper

industry needs to fully utilize its raw

material in order to become broad and

diverse like the eastern redcedar industry.

He emphasized like Dennis that

communication is critical. There were 150

people on the Western Juniper mailing list

three years ago and there are over 800 now.

The newsletter is a good means of

communication, but needs funding and

contributions of articles and ideas.

94
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Larry Swan (U.S. Forest Service, Klamath

Falls) Program Co-Chair and

Management/Science Session III (Real-Life

Scenarios)

Larry highlighted several issues facing the

continued growth and sustainability of a

western juniper industry based on sound

science:

- Biological and physical western juniper

woodlands research must continue and

stay focused on peer-reviewed issues

and needs; funding should not be

provided without commitments and

timelines to publish in peer-reviewed

publications;

- Scientists who oversee large-scale

inventory must hear from the people

who need the data; data categories

relevant to issues and questions already

raised should be included; data should be

comparable across jurisdictional and

ownership boundaries; remote sensing or

sampling techniques to characterize the

millions of acres of juniper not pickedup by normal remote sensing methods

must be implemented;

- Rural small business needs for working

capital and marketing expertise need to

be addressed;

- Fiber markets must be established in

order to make a dent in the one million

plus acres which have 20 percent canopy

cover or more, and where fire is no

longer an option;

Harvest costs remain a critical factor;

new and cost-effective equipment

configurations are needed to address

terrain limitations, juniper limb sizes and

quantity, and slash dispersal;

Watershed treatments and public/private

cooperative management plans appear to

make more sense and are more

economical than everyone doing their

own thing;

Processing issues will continue to arise

because juniper is "the new kid on the

block"; grading rules will be an issue

over the next year or two as the industry

matures;

Technology transfer and communication

tools, such as the Internet and the

Western Juniper Newsletter, require

funding support and a broader base of

contributors; there is a lot more going on

than anyone of us can know about, much

of which may be directly relevant to our

business or land management goals;

more demonstration sites are needed

closer to population centers;

A plan and liaison is needed to assist in

heightening public and government

agency awareness, soliciting input and

ensuring involvement - informal efforts

need to be supplemented by a more

formal approach.

95
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Subgroups

Sign-ups were solicited for subgroups

suggested during the Forum. Subgroups

suggested including the following:

Science and Management Web Site

Expansion—Preliminary Purpose:

Formulate proposal to expand existing web

sites to facilitate information exchange,

research, public dialogue, and NEPA

compliance. Contact: Larry Swan, U.S.

Forest Service (541/883-6714; FAX

541/883-6709; e-mail

/s=L.Swan/oul=R06F20A@mhsfswa.attmail.com).

Harvest Methods and Equipment—

Preliminary Purpose: Continue seeking ways

to reduce harvest costs, increase production,

and scatter slash on-site. Also may seek

funding to development equipment specific

to challenges of delimbing and scattering

western juniper slash. Contact: Larry Swan,

U.S. Forest Service (see contact information

above).

Trade Show Training—Purpose: Asking for

expression of interest in receiving training

about how to choose the appropriate trade

show, prepare for it, and display, as well as

follow-up contacts and leads. Will probably

attend one to two shows, depending on

personal finances and market grant award.

Contact: Bill Breedlove, Western Juniper

Industry Facilitator (Voice Mail and Fax

541/850-4317).

Myrtlewood Industry Review—Purpose:

Learn from experiences of Oregon

myrtlewood industry by visiting with

myrtlewood industry representatives, and

touring plant and retail locations. Potential

commercial ventures are expected to be

explored. Will take place on Oregon Coast

in vicinity of Coos Bay. Contact: Bill

Breedlove, Western Juniper Industry

Facilitator (see contact information above).

Oregon State Legislator Briefings—

Purpose: Provide constituent briefings to

state legislators who have requested more

information or a briefing about the status of

the Western Juniper Commercialization

Project. The Project has received significant

support and funding from Regional Strategy

Boards and Oregon Lottery dollars.

Contact: Bill Breedlove, Western Juniper

Industry Facilitator (see contact information

above.)

Lumber Grading Rules—Purpose: Refine

existing draft grading rules for western

juniper lumber. Contact: Bill Breedlove,

Western Juniper Industry Facilitator (see

contact information above).

Newsletter Article Contributors and

Writers—Purpose: Seeking contributors of

photos and short articles relating to western

juniper science and management, harvest,

manufacturing, and marketing. Personal

experiences are welcome. Articles can vary

in length from less than a paragraph to a

page (with graphics). Some editing is

normally necessary to fit the space available

and ensure consistent grammar. Contact:

96
Western Juniper Forum '97 Proceedings

Scott Leavengood, OSU Extension

(541/883-7131; FAX 541/883-4582; e-mail

Scott.Leavengood@orst.edu).

Management Demonstration Projects—

Purpose: Highlight design, execution, and

monitoring of on-the-ground juniper

management projects which exemplify

implementation of field science results.

Public access, at least on a call-ahead basis,

is needed. Proximity to population centers

and a good transportation system are

helpful. Contact: Larry Swan, U.S. Forest

Service (see contact information above).

Open Microphone

- Experiment with a buyer/seller conference

or forum where buyers present their needs

to producers.

- Use the World Forestry Center (Portland) to

display the wide range of juniper items -

from research to products.

- Ranchers are in the healthy vegetation

business. They need to communicate the

need for riparian and upland areas to be

treated and they need to know the kind of

trees industry needs.

- The industry has a lot going for it including

quality products, this forum, juniper and

state promotion.

- This forum brings mostly industry and

technical groups together, but want to see

more landowners. Suggest meetings for

landowners in other parts of the state.

- BLM folks need better access to the

information presented here today.

- Demand will increase as we get product

samples out. We need to have more products

and raw materials available in the future.

97
Leavengood, Scott; and Swan, Larry; 1998. Proceedings, western juniper forum '97:

Proceedings of a meeting; 1997 April 21; Bend, OR. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-432. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Research Station. 97 p.

This proceedings is a compilation of 30 articles on various aspects of the

management and commercialization of western juniper. The topics are split

between commercial and industrial topics, and science and management topics.

Presenters were asked to provide abstracts, not full papers, and to include who to

contact for more information or a copy of the complete paper, or when and where

the information or study was expected to be published.

Keywords: Western juniper, western juniper proceedings, western juniper

marketing and utilization, western juniper biology and management.

The Forest Service of the US 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 service to a growing Nation.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in its programs on the basis of race, color,

national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political affiliation,

and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to

all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative

means of communication of program information (Braille, large

print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA's TARGET

Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint, write the Secretary of Agriculture, US

Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250, or call

(800) 245-6340 (voice) or (202) 720-1127 (TDD). USDA is

an equal employment opportunity employer.
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Pacific Northwest Research Station

333 S.W. First Avenue

P.O. Box

Portland, Oregon 97208-3890

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300

do NOT detach Label