Ozark-Ouachita

Highlands Assessment

Summary Report

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Southern

Research Station

General Technical

Report SRS-31

REPORT

1

OF 5
Cover photo: Sunrise in the Ouachita Mountains.

Photo by A.C. Haralson, Arkansas Department of Parks and Recreation, Little Rock, AR.

Natural resource specialists and research scientists worked together to produce the five General

Technical Reports that comprise the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment:

· Summary Report

· Air Quality

· Aquatic Conditions

· Social and Economic Conditions

· Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife

For information regarding how to obtain these Assessment documents, please contact: USDA Forest

Service, P.O. Box 1270, Hot Springs, AR 71902 or telephone 501-321-5202.

To limit publication costs, few color maps and figures were used in the Assessment reports. For color

versions of some of the Assessment figures and supplemental material, please see the Assessment’s home

page on the Internet at <http://www.fs.fed.us/oonf/ooha/welcome.htm>. The Assessment reports will be

online for about 2 years after the date on this publication; then they will be archived.

Please note: When “authors” are agency or business names, most are abbreviated to save space in the

citations of the body of the report. The “References” at the end of the report contain both the full name

and abbreviations. Because abbreviations sometimes are not in the same alphabetical order as the references, for clarifications of abbreviations, consult the “Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms.”

The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of

the readers. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement of any product or service by the USDA

Forest Service.

December 1999

Southern Research Station

P.O. Box 2680

Asheville, North Carolina 28802
Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment:

Summary Report

Eastern Region

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Milwaukee, WI

North Central Research Station

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

St. Paul, MN

Southern Region

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Atlanta, GA

Southern Research Station

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Asheville, NC

Contents

Page

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

Contributors to This Report and

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

The Highlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Social and Economic Conditions and Trends . . . 4

Population Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Race and Hispanic Origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Educational Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Socioeconomic Well-Being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Economic Output, Employment, and

Employee Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Minerals Industry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Forest Products Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Travel and Tourism Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Heritage Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Range Resources, Special Uses, and

Special Forest Products. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Impacts of National Forest Programs on

the Highlands’ Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Wilderness, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and Other

Congressionally Designated Areas . . . . . . . . 13

Draw Area and Demand for Recreation . . . . . 13

Timber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Minerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Public Attitudes, Values, and Opinions

About Land and Resource Management . . . . . 20

Aquatic Conditions and Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Surface Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Ground Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Point Sources of Water Pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Superfund Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

System Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Municipal Water Supplies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Toxic Releases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Page

Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution . . . . . . . . . . 26

Roads and Highways. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Agriculture and Silviculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Urbanization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Mineral Extraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Introduced Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Water Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Aquatic Animals and Their Habitats . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Fishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Mussels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Crayfishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Aquatic Insects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Endangered, Threatened, and Other

Aquatic Species of Special Concern . . . . . . 35

Recreationally and Commercially Important

Aquatic Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Aquatic and Riparian Habitats . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife

Conditions and Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Status and Trends of Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Silvicultural Practices and Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Plant and Animal Populations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Species of Special Concern. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Cave Animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Game Animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Extirpated or Extinct Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Biological Threats to Forest Resources . . . . . . . . 46

Air Quality Conditions and Trends . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Particulate Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Visibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Ground-Level Ozone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Acid Deposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Glossary of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms . . . . 53

List of Tables and Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

iii
Preface

The Summary Report is one of five reports that document the results of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands

Assessment. Federal and State natural resource agencies and university cooperators worked together to

produce the four technical reports that examine air quality, aquatic conditions, social and economic

conditions, and terrestrial vegetation and wildlife. Dozens of experts in various fields provided technical

reviews. Other citizens were involved in working meetings and supplied valuable ideas and information.

The Summary Report provides an overview of the key findings presented in the four technical reports.

The latter offer much more detailed data, findings, and discussion of implications as well as links to many

additional sources of information. References to other publications and data bases are kept to a minimum

in the Summary Report, whereas the more detailed reports include hundreds of such references.

The USDA Forest Service initiated the Assessment and worked with other agencies to develop a

synthesis of the best information available on conditions and trends in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands.

Assessment reports emphasize those conditions and trends most likely to have some bearing on the future

management of the region’s three national forests—the Mark Twain, Ouachita, and Ozark-St. Francis.

People who are interested in the future of the region’s other public lands and waters, or of this remarkable

region as a whole, should also find the reports valuable.

No specific statutory requirement led to or guided the Assessment. However, data and findings

assembled in the reports should provide a helpful context for any evaluation of possible changes needed in

the land and resource management plans of the Highlands’ three national forests. The National Forest

Management Act directs the Forest Service to revise such management plans every 10 to 15 years, which

means that the national forests of Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma are due to have revised plans in the

year 2001. Due to restrictions in the annual appropriations bills for the Forest Service, it is uncertain when

these revisions can begin, let alone be completed; revision efforts could be underway, however, as early as

the latter part of 2000.

The charter for the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment established a team structure and listed

tentative questions that the teams would address. Assembled in mid-1996, the Terrestrial, Aquatic and

Atmospheric, and Human Dimensions (Social-Economic) Teams soon refined and condensed these

questions and then gathered and evaluated vast quantities of information. They drafted their key findings in

late 1997 and refined them through mid-1999. In addition to offering relevant data and key findings in the

reports, the authors discuss some of the possible implications of their findings for future public land management in the Highlands and for related research. The Assessment reports, however, stop well short of

making decisions concerning management of any lands in the Highlands or about future research. In no

way do the reports represent management “plans”. Instead, the findings and conclusions offered in the

Assessment reports are intended to stimulate discussion and further study.

iv
Contributors to This Report and Acknowledgments

Assessment Team Leaders

William F. Pell, Assessment Team Leader and compiler of this report, USDA Forest Service, Ouachita

National Forest, Hot Springs, AR.

George A. Bukenhofer, Terrestrial Team Leader, USDA Forest Service, Ouachita National Forest,

Heavener, OK

J. Alan Clingenpeel, Aquatic and Atmospheric Team Leader, USDA Forest Service, Ouachita National

Forest, Hot Springs, AR.

Daniel J. Nolan, Jr., Social and Economic Team Leader, USDA Forest Service, Ouachita National Forest,

Hot Springs, AR.

Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment Steering Team

G. Samuel Foster, Assistant Station Director of Research Programs–West, USDA Forest Service,

Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC.

Randy Moore, Forest Supervisor, USDA Forest Service, Mark Twain National Forest, Rolla, MO.

Lynn C. Neff, Forest Supervisor, USDA Forest Service, Ozark-St. Francis National Forests, Russellville,

AR.

Alan G. Newman, Forest Supervisor, USDA Forest Service, Ouachita National Forest, Hot Springs, AR.

Editorial Team

Donna M. Paananen, Technical Publications Writer-Editor, USDA Forest Service, North Central Research

Station, East Lansing, MI.

Louise A. Wilde, Production Editor, USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC.

Acknowledgments

The Steering Team for the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment would like to express its sincere

appreciation for the long hours of dedicated work contributed by the four Assessment Team Leaders

(named above), the production staff, and the many individuals from a variety of Federal and State agencies

and institutions who contributed in any way to the final publication of this and the four other Assessment

reports. (Contributors’, reviewers’, and production staff names are listed in the companion reports.)

In addition, the Steering Team would like to thank members of the public who attended meetings and/or

provided written or oral input during the Assessment process. All played a role in the development of the

final five Assessment reports.

v
Figure 1—The Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment area includes 107 counties and 6.5 million acres of public lands

managed by the Federal and State agencies listed in the legend.

vi
The Highlands

The Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment focuses

on a geographic area that includes portions of Arkansas,

Missouri, and Oklahoma (fig. 1). The Assessment area

is home to nearly 4 million people and includes about

6.5 million acres (ac) of public lands and waters.

Change is evident across the Highlands. Whether

following State or regional news, studying statistical

patterns and trends, or driving through the area, one

cannot avoid the signs that many of its communities

and at least some of its natural environments are

undergoing rapid change. Urban and suburban development, planned communities, transportation networks,

water distribution systems, and a variety of economic

sectors are expanding, all driven by a growing and

increasingly prosperous population. Naturally, how

people regard the changes that are occurring varies

widely, as does access to reliable information that

might help individuals assess the significance of what

is happening. The Assessment reports provide windows

to a wealth of such information.

Growth and change do not occur without conflicts.

Proposals for new or expanded reservoirs, landfills, and

new or improved highways or airports are often controversial. Commercial and residential developments in

some parts of the Highlands are placing new strains on

community infrastructure. In some areas, there are

disagreements over the proper balance between private

property rights and “the public good.” Concerns about

the environmental effects of agricultural wastes and

some kinds of resource extraction are also growing.

Many people nonetheless rate overall conditions and

trends in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands very favorably.

The region’s reputation for unspoiled beauty is still

intact and largely deserved. A low-altitude flight over

the Ozarks or Ouachitas still reveals vast expanses of

natural-appearing forests (fig. 2), appealing pastoral

landscapes, hundreds of miles of sparkling streams and

lakes, and dozens of attractive, small communities. The

populations of many species of wildlife are stable or

increasing. Among the area’s many amenities are

several of the Nation’s cleanest lakes, more than 6

million ac of public land, and more than 500 miles (mi)

of federally protected rivers. Human population density

remains relatively low in the Highlands. And although

high poverty rates persist in many counties, economic

growth has been steady, and poverty is declining in

some areas.

Are the Highlands, then, basically in good shape—

capable of accommodating more growth and sustaining

a higher quality of life for more people—or does the

region face serious challenges or even crises? Can the

Highlands, and particularly its public lands, be described as “healthy?” What roles do public lands play

in the social and economic life and the environmental

quality of the area? Some answers, or at least a basis

for informed discussions, have emerged from the key

findings discussed in this report. Similarly, needs for

additional information and research became apparent

during the data collection and analysis of information.

The Assessment reports offer a wealth of information

about the Highlands as a whole and about the many

roles and relationships of public lands within that region.

The status of the Highlands as a whole and of its public

lands and waters are intimately connected; their futures

are intertwined (fig. 3). Assessment teams sought to

explore and better understand these connections.

For example, net migration of people moving to the

Highlands was strongly positive in the 1990’s. Studies

suggest that migration within the United States during

that decade was correlated with the “natural amenities”

Figure 2—Extensive, natural-appearing forests cover large portions

of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands; prairies, pastures, and human

communities cover smaller areas.
Figure 3—Large reservoirs, many built and maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, cover about 673,000 acres in the Highlands

and provide strong draws for retirees and recreation visitors.

offered by certain nonurban parts of the country,

including many counties in the Highlands. An analysis

of results from a recent nationwide study by the USDA

Economic Research Service reveals that the “Natural

Amenities Index” for 43 percent of the counties in the

Assessment area fell within the top 25 percent of

counties in the United States, and fully 87 percent of

the Highlands counties were in the top half (fig. 4).

Although public lands have not been factored

specifically into the Natural Amenities Index used in

these studies (the index is based on such factors as

surface water area, topography, and climate), these

lands clearly play important roles in sustaining the

values associated with clean lakes and streams, forest

cover, and bountiful recreation opportunities. How

agencies manage the public lands and waters of the

Highlands, then, surely contributes in important ways

to regional economic and social conditions (as well as

environmental ones), even though actual revenues or

the number of jobs directly attributable to public land

management may seem low.

Another example of the importance of the interconnections between public lands and surrounding lands

and communities are the ways the recreation offerings

of Federal and State lands complement or “compete”

with those of private or corporate lands. What one

sector provides in the way of campgrounds, hunting

opportunities, or trails potentially affects all other

sectors. Given that the demand for nearly all categories

of recreation activity is expected to increase in the next

decade, it would probably behoove recreation providers

to know as much as possible about recreation supply

and demand in the Highlands before proposing to

expand or limit a particular recreation opportunity.

2
Similarly, most lumber mills in the Highlands process

logs from private or corporate lands and from one or

more of the national forests; to consider national forest

timber sales in isolation from the regional supply and

demand for timber would be shortsighted at best.

Public lands in the Highlands include over 164,000

ac of lands managed by the National Park Service, over

66,000 ac of national wildlife refuges managed by the

Fish and Wildlife Services, about 673,000 ac of lakes

managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, two

Figure 4—The “Natural Amenities Index” for 43 percent of the counties in the Assessment area

was within the top 25 percent of counties in the United States.

military bases, and 4.4 million ac of national forests

managed by the Forest Service (fig. 1). National forests

occupy about 10 percent of the area. Thirty-nine

Assessment area counties contain at least 38,000 ac of

national forest lands; 12 counties have at least 100,000

ac, and 4 contain at least 200,000 ac of national forest

lands. State lands include 65 State parks, 32 wildlife

management areas, historic sites, 2 National Guard

areas, and many State natural, historic, and conservation areas.

3

Assessment area

Top quartile (U.S.)

Second quartile (U.S.)

Third quartile (U.S.)

Fourth quartile (U.S.)

Oklahoma

Missouri

Arkansas
Social and Economic Conditions and Trends

Population Growth

The human population of the Assessment area has

grown rapidly in recent decades and continues to do so,

at least in metropolitan counties (fig. 5). Between 1970

and 1996, the population increased about 48 percent,

while in Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and the Nation

as a whole, the increases were only 15, 29, 31, and 30

percent, respectively. Recent (1990 to 1996) population

growth in the Highlands is most strongly associated

with metropolitan areas, high rates of in-migration, and

the presence of national forest lands. In-migration of

new residents contributed nearly 80 percent of the

estimated population growth in the Assessment area as

a whole and 83 to 98 percent of the growth in

nonmetropolitan counties containing lands of one of

the Highlands’ national forests. (Two counties have

lands of two national forests.)

Although the association of population growth with

the presence of national forest lands may be coincidental, it is noteworthy that metropolitan counties containing parts of the Mark Twain or Ozark National Forest

grew by more than 20 percent during this 6-year period.

Similarly, the populations of metropolitan counties

with Ouachita National Forest lands grew 10 percent,

whereas metropolitan counties without national forest

lands grew 7 percent. On the other hand, nonmetropolitan counties with 100,000 ac or more of

national forest or other federally managed lands show

the slowest population growth, on average, of Assessment area counties.

A few counties in the Highlands lost population over

the last three decades. In Pulaski County, MO, cutbacks

at Fort Leonard Wood resulted in the loss of nearly 30

percent of the county’s population during that time.

Seven counties saw net out-migration, and only one of

these, Pulaski County, AR, had a sufficient natural

population increase to produce net growth.

Communities

The geographic communities of the Assessment area

include 695 municipalities and many unincorporated

places. Nearly 97 percent of the municipalities in the

region have populations of 10,000 or fewer, and more

than half of the area’s population lives in the open

country. Only 24 cities had more than 10,000 people at

the time of the 1990 census. Current estimates are that

the Highlands now have 30 cities of that size.

As of 1990, 16 Assessment area counties were

“retirement destinations,” according to the Economic

Research Service. Most of these counties are in the heart

of the Assessment area, with a string of 15 of them

extending in a north-south band from Benton and

Morgan Counties in the Missouri Ozarks to Garland

County in the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas (fig. 6).

Nine of the 16 retirement destination counties have

national forest lands; at least 8 contain portions of large

lakes.

Retirement-aged adults make up a significant

segment of the population of the Assessment area.

Seventeen percent of nonmetropolitan and 12 to 13

percent of metropolitan Assessment area residents in

1990 were over age 65.

Thirty percent or more of the land base in nine

nonmetropolitan counties consists of Federal lands,

making these counties particularly sensitive to Federal

land policies. Four of these counties—and 32 others in

the Assessment area—have persistent high levels of

poverty.

Arkansas communities in the Highlands that depend

upon the timber industry show no clear pattern of

disadvantage in terms of poverty or annual per pupil

expenditures on K–12 public education. When compared with other rural communities, timber- and

national forest-dependent rural communities in Arkansas appear no less willing to invest in education than

other communities. Annual Federal payments (including “25 percent returns”) to the counties and school

districts that have national forest lands apparently

compensate for most effects of the reduced tax base

4
Figure 5—Metropolitan counties (dark gray) in the Assessment area tended to have the highest rates of population growth.

Springfield

 

Joplin

Tulsa

Jonesboro

Pine

Bluff

Dallas-Ft. Worth

(partial)

 Little RockNorth Little Rock

Kansas City

St. Louis

Memphis

FayettevilleSpringdaleRogers

Fort Smith

Texarkana

Columbia

Arkansas

Missouri

Oklahoma

Nonmetropolitan counties

Metropolitan areas

ShermanDenton

ShreveportBossier City

(partial)

5
Retirement-destination 

counties

Counties that contain national 

forest lands

Missouri

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Figure 6—A string of 15 “retirement destination counties” (shaded) extends in a north-south

band from Benton and Morgan Counties in the Missouri Ozarks to Garland County in the

Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas.

attributable to the presence of these Federal lands. The

same patterns may or may not hold true in the Oklahoma and Missouri communities of the Highlands.

Race and Hispanic Origin

The Assessment Team used the same categories as

those used by the U.S. Bureau of the Census during the

1990 census (the race categories of White, Black,

American Indian and Alaska Native, and Asian and

Pacific Islander and the ethnicity categories of Hispanic

and non-Hispanic). In 1990, 91 percent of the people

living in the Assessment area were White, representing

a much higher proportion of residents than in Arkansas

(82 percent), Missouri (87 percent), Oklahoma (81

percent), or the Nation as a whole (76 percent). Generally, racial composition tends to be more homogeneous

in counties containing national forest lands than in the

other Assessment area counties.

Among those counties that do contain national forest

lands, those with Ouachita National Forest lands appear

to have the greatest degree of racial diversity: together,

American Indians and Black Americans make up 5

percent of the metropolitan population and 10 percent

of the nonmetropolitan population in “Ouachita counties.” However, some of the nonmetropolitan “Ouachita

counties” have very little diversity. The higher numbers

of American Indians and Black Americans in the

Ouachitas as a whole largely reflect the racial diversity

of two southeastern Oklahoma counties (Le Flore and

McCurtain) and three Arkansas counties (Hot Spring,

6
Howard, and Garland—the first two of which lie

partially in the West Gulf Coastal Plain and contain less

than 1,900 national forest acres).

Although the population of the Assessment area

grew rapidly between 1970 and 1990, its racial and

ethnic composition changed very little. The White total

declined slightly as a percentage of the population,

from 93 percent in 1970 to 91 percent in 1990. Black

American totals also declined slightly (5.3 percent in

1970 to 5.2 percent in 1990). Other groups grew from

1.4 percent of the Assessment area population in 1970

to 3.6 percent in 1990.

There is evidence, however, that the ethnic diversity

of the Assessment area increased in the 1990’s. For

example, the Bureau of the Census estimated in 1998

that the Assessment area Hispanic population grew 52

percent between 1990 and 1996. A special census of

Washington County, AR, in 1996 showed a 435 percent

growth in the Hispanic-American population between

1990 and 1996 (from 1,526 to 8,164 individuals).

Educational Levels

Overall, educational levels are relatively low in the

Assessment area. In 1990, 37 percent of adults 25 years

and older had not completed high school (or its equivalent), and 13 percent of teenagers (ages 16 to 19) were

high school dropouts. Residents with low levels of

education are more common in nonmetropolitan

counties. In 14 nonmetropolitan Assessment area

counties, clustered mainly on the eastern side of the

Highlands, at least 45 percent of the adult population

had less than a high school diploma.

Socioeconomic Well-Being

The overall level of socioeconomic well-being in the

Assessment area is relatively low. In 1989, median

household incomes in the area were almost $11,000 less

than the national median of $30,056. Individual poverty

rates in the Assessment area (17 percent) were greater

than poverty rates in Missouri (13 percent) and the

Nation (14 percent), equal to the poverty rate in Oklahoma, and lower than the rate in Arkansas (19 percent).

Assessment area workers, especially those living in

nonmetropolitan counties with national forest lands,

faced higher unemployment rates than the Nation as a

whole (7.8 percent compared to 6.3 percent in 1990).

The Economic Research Service classifies 37

nonmetropolitan counties in the Assessment area as

having “persistent poverty” (high rates of poverty in

each of 4 years: 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990). Nearly

half of the 49 nonmetropolitan “national forest counties” and one-third of the 42 nonmetropolitan counties

with no national forest lands are persistent poverty

counties (fig. 7). In nonmetropolitan counties, persistent

poverty appears most often in southeastern Missouri

(15 counties), north-central Arkansas (9 counties), and

southeastern Oklahoma (6 counties). The 24 persistent

poverty counties in southeastern Missouri and northcentral Arkansas include 12 of the 14 counties in which

45 percent or more of the adult population have less

than a high school education; 19 of these 24 persistent

poverty counties include national forest lands.

Retirement pensions and Social Security income

provide a slightly larger portion of aggregate income in

the Assessment area than in the three States (13 percent

versus 11 to 12 percent). These two sources of income

are most important (at 15 to 18 percent of total income)

in nonmetropolitan counties with national forest lands.

Economic Output, Employment, and

Employee Compensation

Of the 10 major economic sectors in the Assessment

area, manufacturing has the largest share of output and

employee compensation. This sector produces 33

percent of total output, employs 16 percent of all

workers, and pays 22 percent of all employee compensation in the area. The trade and services sectors each

employ more people but provide less employee compensation than manufacturing (table 1). Average annual

wages are highest in the transportation and mining

sectors, followed by manufacturing and a category that

combines government and special industries.

Between 1977 and 1993, total industrial output in the

Assessment area grew 53 percent above inflation, and

employee compensation grew 40 percent above inflation. The construction sector had the greatest increase

in total output—291 percent—followed by the services

sector (at nearly 192 percent). Concomitant with these

7
Persistent poverty counties

Counties that contain national 

forest lands

Missouri

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Figure 7— The Economic Research Service classifies 37 nonmetropolitan counties in the

Assessment area as having “persistent poverty” (high rates of poverty in 1960, 1970, 1980,

and 1990). Nearly half of the 49 nonmetropolitan “national forest counties” have persistent

poverty.

Table 1—Industrial output, employment, and employee compensation across selected industrial sectors of the Assessment

area, 1977 and 1993, and percent change in these measures from 1977 to 1993

Industrial output Employment (jobs) Employee compensation

Industrial sector 1977 1993 Change 1977 1993 Change 1977 1993 Change

 - - - - Million dollars - - - Percent Percent - - - Million dollars - - - Percent

Agriculture and

fisheries 2,553.3 5,813.0 127.7 30,307 127,527 320.8 167.8 422.4 151.7

Mining 606.2 912.4 50.5 6,917 4,886 -29.4 192.0 144.0 -25.0

Construction 3,607.0 14,114.6 291.3 80,621 139,972 73.6 1,307.2 2,259.9 72.9

Manufacturing 18,941.8 39,836.9 110.3 314,490 304,441 -3.2 4,421.2 8,025.6 81.5

Transportation 3,830.9 9,349.6 144.1 65,939 89,604 35.9 1,154.2 2,789.8 141.7

Trade 5,452.1 12,725.7 133.4 236,291 397,244 68.1 2,347.1 6,065.0 158.4

Finance 5,436.6 13,388.7 146.3 49,744 85,422 71.7 657.7 1,728.4 162.8

Services 6,013.8 17,532.1 191.5 286,688 437,157 52.5 2,483.2 7,019.9 182.7

Government and

special industriesa 3,035.4 8,107.5 167.1 236,242 299,831 26.9 2,758.0 7,652.8 177.5

Total 49,477.1 121,780.5 146.1 1,307,239 1,886,084 44.3 15,488.4 36,107.8 133.1

a Government and special industries sectors are combined due to differences in sector definitions between 1977 and 1993; only the combined totals of the two

sectors are comparable.

8
increases and with regional population growth, the

number of jobs in the Assessment area rose 44 percent.

Jobs increased at least 35 percent in every major sector

except manufacturing (3.2 percent decline) and mining

(29.4 percent decline).

The mining, forest products, and recreation-tourism

industries generate most of the tangible economic

output from public lands. Of these, only mining is

considered a major economic sector, and the contributions of the other two have to be estimated based on

activities in several major sectors. Because these three

industries have special importance for public land

management (and especially national forest management), each will be discussed in more detail.

Minerals Industry

The minerals industry accounts for 5 percent of the

total output, 2.2 percent of all employment, and 3.4

percent of the employee compensation in the Assessment area. Approximately 10,500 people within the

Assessment area work directly in the minerals industry.

Twenty-one counties had double the average share of

output, employment, and/or employee compensation

from the minerals industry (fig. 8); in other words, the

proportion that the minerals industry contributed to these

counties’ output, employment, and/or compensation was

at least twice the average for the Assessment area.

Forest Products Industry

In the Assessment area, 5 percent of the industrial

output, 3 percent of the employment, and 3.4 percent of

the employee compensation are directly attributable to

the forest products industry. Thirty-five of the 107

counties in the Assessment area have at least double the

area average output, employment, and/or employee

compensation from the forest products industry (fig. 9).

On average, 15.7 percent of the output, 8 percent of the

employment, and 11 percent of the employee compensation in these counties were from the forest products

industry. The Assessment area accounts for about 2.3

percent of the Nation’s output of forest products.

Travel and Tourism Industry

The travel industry supports 5.7 percent of the

output, 7 percent of the employment, and 4.6 percent of

the employee compensation in the Arkansas and Missouri portions of the Assessment area (comparable data

for Oklahoma are not available). In 1996, travel expenditures in the Assessment area counties of Arkansas and

Missouri totaled $9 billion and accounted for nearly

167,000 jobs. A 1995 study for Oklahoma indicated that

expenditures related to travel totaled over $3 billion.

Although all of this activity obviously is not recreationor tourism-related, significant portions of it are.

Examining only the counties that have at least twice

the Assessment area’s average percent of total output,

employment, and/or employee compensation yields 23

counties that have high concentrations of travel-related

employment, output, or income (fig. 10). The travel

industry’s share of the economy in these counties

averages 25.5 percent of industrial output, 28.9 percent

of employment, and 24.7 percent of employee compensation. Combined, these counties—4 in Arkansas and

19 in Missouri—account for almost half the total

travel-related output, employment, and employee

compensation in the Arkansas-Missouri portion of the

Assessment area. Taney County, MO, where Branson is

located, has an incredible 83.7 percent of its jobs

related to travel. In Camden, Hickory, and Stone

Counties in Missouri, more than 40 percent of the jobs

Missouri

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Figure 8—The proportion of the total output, employment,

and/or compensation that the minerals industry contributed

in 21 counties (shaded) was at least twice the average for

the Assessment area.

9
Missouri

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Figure 9—In 35 counties (shaded), an average of 15.7 percent of total

output, 8 percent of employment, and 11 percent of total employee

compensation was from the forest products industry.

Travel significant areas

No information

Missouri

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Figure 10—In 23 counties (shaded dark), the travel industry’s share of

the economy averages 25.5 percent of industrial output, 28.9 percent of

employment, and 24.7 percent of employee compensation.

10
are associated with the travel industry. Carroll County,

AR, has the highest percentage (20 percent) of travelrelated employment in that State.

Heritage Resources

Archeologists have documented approximately

14,040 archeological sites within the Highlands’ three

national forests. These sites are estimated to represent

less than one-third of the total number of sites on these

Federal lands. Prehistoric sites range from small isolated finds of single artifacts to extensive quarries; some

sites are 12,000 years old. Historic sites are also highly

varied and numerous, ranging from cemeteries, fire

towers, and home sites to entire towns that were settled

and then abandoned during the 20th century (fig. 11).

Range Resources, Special Uses, and

Special Forest Products

Of the more than 14 million ac of grazing land in the

Assessment area, only about 4.5 percent (743,000 ac)

consist of Federal lands. More than 90 percent of the

national forest range consists of grazed woodlands

(principally on the Ouachita National Forest) that have

low forage value; the remaining 10 percent of range

(principally on the Mark Twain National Forest)

consists of natural openings and improved pasture. The

number of individuals that hold permits to use national

forest range declined 67 percent from 1987 through

1996, and range use itself dropped 63 percent.

Various “special uses” are permitted on the Highlands’ national forests to accommodate individual and

community needs, including economic development. In

1996, there were more than 2,000 special uses under

permit on the Highlands’ national forests, generating

fee revenues of nearly $330,000.

Firewood remains in demand on all three national

forests in the Highlands. Firewood availability on the

Ouachita National Forest, however, has declined by

about 62 percent since 1992.

There is a large and increasing demand for wild

plants used in herbal dietary supplements and medicines. Arkansas accounts for 2 percent and Missouri for

3 percent of total U.S. production of wild ginseng. The

Ozark National Forest permits limited harvesting of

ginseng; otherwise, the three national forests have not

been a significant source for herbal products. Small

amounts of grapevine, pine knots, sassafras, lichens,

and acorns are harvested under permit. The total

revenue generated by the sale of permits to gather

special forest products on the three national forests in

1996 was about $32,000.

Impacts of National Forest Programs on

the Highlands’ Economy

In 1996, the gross regional product (sum of all

incomes, less indirect business taxes) for the Highlands

was $61,600 million. National forest programs, payments

to counties, and expenditures accounted for almost 1

percent ($557.4 million) of this total. National forests

directly influence nearly 17,000 jobs, which is also

slightly less than 1 percent of Assessment area employment (approximately 1.9 million jobs). Naturally, the

economic impacts of national forests are felt most closely

in those counties that either have significant amounts of

national forest lands or are close to ones that do.

Of the three principal national forest programs

affecting the Highlands’ economy (minerals, recreation, timber), timber has the greatest overall influence

on employment, employee compensation, and total

income when the three forests are considered together

(fig. 12). However, the relative economic importance of

Figure 11—Public lands harbor many historic sites, including

cemeteries, fire towers, home sites, and Civilian Conservation

Corps (CCC) structures such as cabins and lodges.

11
Timber

52%

Recreation

38%

Minerals

10%

Recreation

32%

Timber

48%

Minerals

20%

Employment

Recreation

26%

Timber

54%

Minerals

20%

Total income

Employee compensation

Figure 12—Although the economic importance of minerals, recreation, and timber (the three

principal national forest programs that generate revenue) varies significantly among the three

Highlands forests, timber has the greatest overall influence on employment, employee compensation, and total income when the forests are considered together.

these resource programs varies significantly among the

forests.

Using 1996 as a typical year, national forest timber

harvesting directly affected 8,052 private sector jobs

and generated $261.3 million in total industry income

and $118.8 million in employee (non-Forest Service)

compensation. Recreation directly affected 5,848 jobs

in the Assessment area and generated about $188

million in total income and $74.4 million in employee

compensation. Minerals programs affected 1,514 jobs

and generated $91.6 million in total income and $47.7

million in employee compensation. In addition, national forest revenues in fiscal year 1996 yielded $6.6

million in payments to States and counties in the

Assessment area.

Recreation

Settings

State and national parks, national forests, national

wildlife refuges, and Army Corps of Engineer lands

and waters occupy about 13 percent of the Highlands

and provide the principal settings for many kinds of

outdoor recreation. The three national forests, covering

4.4 million ac (85 percent of the public lands in the

Assessment area), are the main providers of dispersed

recreation opportunities such as primitive camping,

hunting, and trails—offering, for example, about 63

percent of the trail miles in the Assessment area (fig.

13). Recreation opportunities on these national forests

are principally in settings the Forest Service classifies

as “roaded natural” (75 percent) or “semiprimitive” (20

percent); very few “primitive” settings are available on

national forests or elsewhere in the Highlands.

12
Figure 13—National forests provide about 63 percent of the

trail miles in the Assessment area.

Developed recreation sites are more common on

other public lands and on private lands. For example,

the Army Corps of Engineers provides one-half and

State park agencies provide nearly one-third of the

developed campsites in the Assessment area, while

national forests supply about one-sixteenth. Private

operations account for the remainder (about one-eighth)

of the campsites.

The condition of many recreation facilities on public

lands is declining due to their age and heavy use. Lack

of adequate funds to maintain and repair existing

facilities is a widespread concern among land managers

in the region. Recreation overuse, particularly in the

categories of off-road vehicle driving, dispersed

camping, and river use, is occurring in some areas,

resulting in resource damage and conflicts among

users.

Because they provide many of the settings for

outdoor recreation, public lands are important to

maintaining and enhancing a strong tourism industry.

Private lands are also important to the Highlands’

tourism industry, if for no other reason than that they

influence the scenic quality of large parts of the area.

The nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) lands account

for between 65 and 85 percent of all timberlands in

three of the Highlands’ four ecological sections—the

Ozark Highlands, Boston Mountains, and Arkansas

Valley. In the Ouachita Mountains, forest ownership is

almost evenly split among industrial forest lands,

national forests, and NIPF lands. Some tourism opportunities span all three types of ownership, notably the

nine national forest and State scenic byways in the

Assessment area. More than 7 million people travel

over these byways each year.

Wilderness, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and

Other Congressionally Designated Areas

Congress has established nearly 240,000 ac of wilderness in the Highlands’ national forests and along the

Buffalo National River. Federally designated wilderness

in the Highlands represents 4.4 percent of all national

forest lands and about 5 percent of the total Highlands

land area managed by the Forest Service and the National Park Service combined. Wilderness areas are

found in all four ecological sections of the Highlands.

Congress has recognized about 523 mi of rivers in

the Highlands for their exceptional values by designating them national rivers or components of the National

Wild and Scenic Rivers System (fig. 14). More than

2,000 additional miles of rivers may merit special

designation for their recreational or other outstanding

values but have not yet been the subjects of complete

evaluations to determine their suitability for inclusion

in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

Finally, Congress has designated the Winding Stair

Mountain National Recreation Area and several adjacent scenic and botanical areas (altogether about 83,422

ac) on the Ouachita National Forest in Oklahoma.

Draw Area and Demand for Recreation

Approximately 57 million people—21 percent of the

U.S. population—live within a 1-day drive of some of

the Highlands’ outdoor recreation opportunities. These

57 million people, then, live in the Highlands’ “draw

area” (fig. 15). Residents of the draw area exceed the

national average in percent of population participating

in every major category of outdoor recreation available

in the Highlands. More than 90 percent of the draw area

population participates in activities associated with

viewing and learning about nature and human history

such as sightseeing, birdwatching, and wildlife viewing. Approximately 40 percent participate in fishing

and outdoor adventure activities such as hiking or offroad driving. About 30 percent participate in camping,

and 14 percent participate in hunting.

Demand for nearly all categories of recreation activity

is expected to increase in the next decade (fig. 16).

Other

4%

National parks 

5%

National forests

63%

State parks

28%

13
Figure 14—Richland Creek in the Arkansas Ozarks is one of 11 National Wild and Scenic Rivers in the Highlands.

14
#

#

Tulsa

Chicago

St. Paul

 Oklahoma

City

ia

Jonesboro

ayetteville

Springfield

Joplin

Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment Area

Draw area

Fort Worth Dallas

Austin

San Antonio

Corpus Christi

New Orleans

Houston

Atlanta

Memphis

Nashville

Hot

Springs

Little

Rock

Kansas City

Wichita

St. Louis

Milwaukee

Fort Smith

F

Omaha

Ind napolis

Birmingham

Louisville

Shreveport

Figure 15—About 57 million people live within a 1-day drive of the Assessment area; residents of this

“draw area” exceed the national average in percent of population participating in every major category of

outdoor recreation.

15
Nationally, the largest projected increases are for

activities involving visits to historic sites and beaches

(and other water sites), biking, and sightseeing.

Timber

In terms of timber volume, the forests of the Highlands are predominantly hardwoods (over 14 billion

cubic feet of growing stock and over 38 billion board

feet of sawtimber). Softwood—especially pine—

volumes are also substantial (about 7 billion board feet

of growing stock and over 24 billion board feet of

sawtimber). More than two-thirds of the hardwood

Figure 16—Horseback riding is one of many recreation activities expected to increase in the

Highlands between 2000 and 2010.

volume occurs on NIPF lands, while softwood volume is

fairly evenly distributed among timber industry, national

forest, and NIPF lands. Both growing-stock and sawtimber inventories have increased in the Arkansas and

Oklahoma portions of the Highlands over the last

decade. (Comparable data for Missouri were not

available.)

NIPF owners hold 69 percent of the timberland in

the Highlands; national forests account for 15 percent,

other public lands for 5 percent, and forest industry for

12 percent of the timberland acres. Across all subregions of the Assessment area except Oklahoma, NIPF

lands have the largest proportion of higher grade

hardwoods relative to the other ownership categories

16
Figure 17—Although national forests account for 41 percent of the total softwood-sawtimber volume in the Assessment area,

they account for only 20 percent of softwood-sawtimber removals.

while the national forests have the greatest share of the

higher grade softwood sawtimber volume.

National forests account for 41 percent of the total

softwood-sawtimber inventory but only 20 percent of

sawtimber removals in the Assessment area (fig. 17).

In contrast, forest industry accounts for 20 percent of

softwood-sawtimber inventory but 40 percent of

removals (while NIPF lands account for 35 percent of

inventory and 39 percent of removals). Sawtimber-size

stands occur on 58 percent of the national forest timberland acreage in the Assessment area and from 28 to 48

percent of timberlands in other ownership categories.

The majority (64 percent) of large diameter (greater

than 20 inches in diameter at breast height) hardwood

volume occurs on NIPF lands.

Up to 15 percent of the potentially harvestable

volume of timber on private land may be unavailable

due to physical constraints such as wet sites, steep

slopes, and low volumes. On the three national forests,

from 59 to 79 percent of the land is classified as

suitable for timber production based on suitability

definitions that exclude acres for wilderness, administrative sites, areas of low productivity, and areas

allocated to other resource management categories.

In general, inflation-adjusted prices for Highlands’

timber rose between 1988 and 1994, implying an

increasing scarcity of timber resources. Between 1992

and 1995, the three Highlands States increased their

share of the total U.S. lumber production from 5.5

percent to 6.8 percent. Since 1988, these three States

also claimed an increasing proportion of the Nation’s

investments in the furniture and lumber industries.

Largely due to the decline in timber harvests from

western forests, national forest timber sold in the

17
Highlands represents an increasing percentage of total

U.S. national forest timber sales. Between 1991 and

1995, the Highlands’ share of total national forest

“green” (not salvage) timber sales increased from 3

percent to 10 percent.

New hardwood chip mills have recently led to

increased hardwood-pulpwood removals—a 135 percent

increase between 1994 and 1995—particularly in

Arkansas. Due to fluctuating demand over the preceding

decade, the overall percentage increase in average

annual removals since 1988 was 65 percent. These

increases should lead to higher prices, providing income

to local landowners and possibly forcing other competing industries to pay more or seek alternate sources.

The Assessment area contains 12 percent of the

South’s timberland but only 5 percent of southern

softwood volume and 9 percent of southern hardwood

volume. However, relatively low removals rates (3

percent of southern softwood and 6 percent of southern

hardwood removals) will continue to attract new and

expanded wood-using industries to the area.

Favorable growth-to-removals ratios indicate that

the softwood inventory in the Highlands is increasing.

Projections to 2020 show increasing softwood harvests

on private lands in the Highlands—more than double

the rate experienced in 1990. Total softwood harvests

in the Highlands are projected to increase at rates

greater than the South as a whole (fig. 18).

The currently favorable growth-to-removals ratio for

hardwoods in the Highlands is projected to narrow and

be about equal by 2020 as growth remains stable and

removals increase, especially in the Ozarks (fig. 19).

Figure 18—Projections to 2020 show increasing softwood harvests on private lands in the Highlands—more than double the rate

experienced in 1990.

Softwood harvest increase

Increase 

below

average 

rate

Regional

average

increase

Increase

above

average

rate

18
Hardwood harvest increase

Increase 

below

average 

rate

Regional

average

increase

Increase

above

average

rate

Figure 19—Despite projected increased harvesting of hardwood trees in parts of the Highlands, hardwood inventory in 2020 is

projected to be greater than current levels.

Nonetheless, by 2020 hardwood inventory is still projected to be greater than current levels.

Minerals

Of 76 known minerals and mineral materials within

the Assessment area, 33 are currently being mined. The

Assessment area contains the top 10 production sites in

the United States for 14 mineral commodities. The

portion of Missouri within the Assessment area contains

the largest concentration of lead deposits in the world.

Mines located there are the number one producers of

lead in the United States and until recently were also the

world’s major lead producers. Between 75 and 80

percent of U.S. lead production comes from the Mark

Twain National Forest (fig. 20).

The Ouachita Mountains are the only source for

electronic grade, high quality quartz in North America.

All of the Nation’s production is from the Ouachita

National Forest in Arkansas. The Ouachita Mountains

and the Ouachita National Forest are major world

19
Figure 20—Between 75 and 80 percent of the Nation’s lead

production comes from the Mark Twain National Forest. (Photo

courtesy of Doe Run Mining Company, Viburnum, MO.)

producers and the leading U.S. producers of quartz

crystal for aesthetic and jewelry uses. Missouri is the

leading U.S. producer of fire clay, much of which is

mined from within the Assessment area.

Sixty percent of the mineral resource extraction

operations (mining and processing plants) within

Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma occur within the

Assessment area, accounting for approximately $1.2

billion in mineral value in 1996. Coal from the Oklahoma portion of the Assessment area is used to generate power for 150,000 homes in eastern Oklahoma.

In 1996 alone, extraction of mineral resources from

the three national forests within the Assessment area

generated almost $6 million in Federal revenue. The

national forests within the Assessment area have a high

potential for discovery of additional reserves of the

minerals currently being mined on them and, in some

cases, those mined in the past as well. For example, the

Ozark National Forest has 66 producing gas wells in

areas that have a high potential for additional development. The demand to access the national forests for

mineral exploration is expected to continue and increase.

Finally, the Assessment area and its three national

forests have unique geologic features that attract people

from across the United States and throughout the world

for research, education, rockhounding, and mineral

collecting.

Public Attitudes, Values, and Opinions

About Land and Resource Management

Opinion surveys indicate that the American public

strongly supports the need to maintain healthy forests

and environmental quality, although the concept of

“healthy forest” is subject to a variety of interpretations. One version suggests that undisturbed old-growth

forests are the best models of ecological health; another

envisions vigorous, disease-free young trees growing in

orderly plantations; and still another looks not to any

particular stage of forest development but to how well

key ecosystem functions are sustained.

Generally, the public accepts the idea that forests

fulfill a variety of roles—from pristine wilderness to

intensive tree farms—and that forest management

objectives will differ among and within landowner

categories (e.g., public, industrial, NIPF). Most respondents in public opinion surveys support the following

ideas: (1) forests should be managed for multiple uses;

(2) forests should provide a range of goods, services,

experiences, and values; and (3) public forests should

not provide goods and services at the expense of longterm forest health and environmental quality (fig. 21).

Although some segments of the public have a strong

interest in environmental issues and public land management, few people have a good grasp of land management principles and practices or even know which

agencies are responsible for managing public land.

Most people responding to public opinion surveys,

however, seem to support the concept of multiple-use

management of the national forests—managing for

recreation, timber, watershed, range, and fish and

wildlife values in ways that are as harmonious and

coordinated as possible and do not impair the productivity of the land. (Wilderness, historic-cultural, and

mineral resources are also important on many national

forests.) However, there is no consensus about what the

proper balance or mix of uses and values should be.

In various surveys, 40 to 50 percent of the respondents disapproved of timber cutting for wood products

on public lands. However, if environmental protection

20
measures were listed as conditions or the management

objective included benefits to wildlife and/or scenery,

as many as 70 percent of the respondents tended to be

in favor of such timber harvests. A study in Missouri

suggests that 40 to 50 percent of the population may be

opposed to logging regardless of how or where it takes

place.

The public expects the Forest Service to take a

scientific approach to managing the national forests,

but they also want the agency to encourage public

participation in decisionmaking and monitoring. One

study on the Ouachita National Forest suggests that

many people believe the Forest Service gives too much

attention to environmental and timber industry interest

groups and too little to the “ordinary citizen.”

Results of an Arkansas survey indicated that NIPF

landowners have strong interests in a variety of environmental issues. Their stated reasons for owning forest

lands seem heavily weighted in favor of aesthetic and

environmental values. A large percentage of such

landowners expressed no intention of selling timber

from their lands.

A majority of respondents to a survey conducted in

Arkansas in the mid-1990’s felt that water pollution,

littering, clearcutting, agricultural waste, and disposal

of hazardous materials were environmental problems in

their State. Few identified mining of public land,

damming of rivers, or destruction of wetlands as

environmental problems. In Missouri, where 67 percent

of the survey respondents in 1966 said they were

“environmentalists,” environmental issues paled in

importance to concerns about crime, education, employment, and the economy.

Although it is difficult to estimate how many people

in the Highlands believe private property owners face

imminent threats of “takeovers” by United Nationssponsored groups and/or government entities, those that

hold such beliefs do so with great conviction. The

public opinions voiced most often during OzarkOuachita Highlands Assessment Team working meetings in 1996 and 1997 were those having to do with

perceived threats to private property and U.S. sovereignty.

Figure 21—Most citizens apparently approve of managing public forests for multiple uses as long as forest

health and environmental quality are not compromised.

21
Aquatic Conditions and Trends

Surface Water Quality

The streams and lakes of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands are among its most precious assets. This section

describes the quality of surface water in streams and

lakes of the Assessment area. The discussion focuses on

nutrients (various forms of nitrogen and phosphorus);

suspended sediment and suspended solids are discussed

beginning on page 26.

Natural sources of nutrients in streams include: (1)

fixation of atmospheric nitrogen by plants and bacteria,

(2) deposition of atmospheric nitrogen from lightning,

(3) dissolution of rocks or minerals, and (4) dissolution

of soil organic matter and decaying plants and animals.

Sources of nitrogen and phosphorus originating from

human activities include sewage and septic tank discharges, fertilizer applications, and animal waste.

Background concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus in streams are generally low because dissolved

forms of the two elements are assimilated rapidly by

plants and bacteria. Aquatic vegetation, particularly

algae, requires nitrogen and phosphorus to grow. When

concentrations of these nutrients in streams or lakes

increase beyond normal levels, they can contribute to a

dense growth of algae (algal blooms). Bacterial decomposition of dead algal cells after an algal bloom can

deplete dissolved oxygen in the water body and negatively affect aquatic life (e.g., kill fish).

Data analyzed by the Aquatic Team for the period

1970 through 1990 show that concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus forms and suspended solids did not

change substantially during the study period at most

stream sites in the Ozark Plateau. The same was also

true of streams in the Arkansas Valley and Ouachita

Mountains for measurements taken from 1975 through

1995 (fig. 22). In most parts of the Highlands, water

samples from stream sites near sewage treatment plants

had higher median concentrations of nitrite plus nitrate,

ammonia, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus than any

other type of site.

Within the Arkansas Valley, Boston Mountains, and

Ozark Plateaus, nitrite plus nitrate concentrations at

stream sites increased significantly with more intensive

uses of land (e.g., acres of “forest-pasture mix” had

higher concentrations than did “forest” acres). Where

more intensive uses of land occurred in the Springfield

and Salem Plateaus, Arkansas Valley, and Ouachita

Mountains, ammonia concentrations in streams generally increased significantly. Within basins that have

significant “agriculture” land use, total phosphorus

concentrations were highest at stream sites in the

Arkansas Valley where land was used for a mix of

agriculture and forest activities. Concentrations of

suspended solids were highest at stream sites in the

Osage Plains (just outside the Highlands).

State monitoring reports from the mid-1990’s

identified more than 5,500 miles (mi) of Highlands’

streams that exhibit varying degrees of impairment of

their beneficial uses. The predominant sources of

impairment of water quality within the Assessment area

are agriculture (36.1 percent), “unknown” (10.9 percent), and mining (10.2 percent). About 133 mi, or 2.3

percent of the total impaired stream miles, occur within

national forest boundaries. The sources of impairment

for stream segments within national forest lands

include agriculture, road construction, and silviculture.

At the opposite end of the scale, there are 4,113

stream miles of extraordinary, ecologically sensitive, and

legislatively designated waters within the Assessment

Figure 22—In stream sample sites within the Highlands, concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspended solids did not change

substantially over 20-year study periods.

22
area. Seventeen percent of these miles occur on or

immediately adjacent to national forests.

In addition to examining information concerning

individual streams and lakes, the Aquatic Team reviewed available assessments of water quality at the

scales of watersheds and river basins. The Assessment

area is drained by 10 major river basins, each of which

is subdivided into watersheds (fig. 23).

In an assessment of the Continental United States,

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rated 24

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Missouri

Spring

(11070207)

Current

(11010008)

Sac (10290106)

Meramec

(07140102)

Bull Shoals Lake

(11010003)

Beaver Reservoir

(11010001)

Illinois

(11110103)

South Grand

(10290108)

Lower Neosho

(11070209)

Little Red

(11010014)

James

(11010002)

Upper Black

(11010007)

Buffalo

(11010005)

Big

(07140104)

Elk

(11070208)

Spring

(11010010)

North Fork White

(11010006)

Upper Gasconade

(10290201)

Middle White

(11010004)

Dardanelle Reservoir

(11110202)

Niangua

(10290110)

Petit Jean

(11110204)

Eleven Point

(11010011)

Upper

St. Francis

(08020202)

Ozarks

(10290109)

Lower Osage

(10290111)

Cadron

(11110205)

Bourbeuse

(07140103)

Lower

Gasconade

(10290203)

Big

Piney

(10290202)

Strawberry

(11010012)

 

Harry S. Truman

Reservoir

(10290105)

Pomme

de Terre

(10290107)

Lake ConwayPoint Remove

(11110203)

Lake O' the

Cherokees

(11070206)

Osage River Basin

Neosho-Illinois

River Basin

Arkansas

Kiamichi-Little

Ouachita-Saline

River Basin

Upper White

Upper St. Francis

River Basin

Meramec

River Basin

Upper Black

 

Gasconade

River basin boundary

Watershed boundary

Black

(11010009)

Lower

Dirty-Greenleaf

(11110102)

Poteau

(11110105)

Frog-Mulberry

(11110201) Robert S. Kerr

Reservoir

(11110104)

Fourche La Fave

(11110206)

Lower ArkansasMaumelle

(11110207)

Little Missouri

(08040103)

Upper Saline Upper Ouachita (08040203)

(08040102)

Ouachita Headwaters

(08040101)

River Basin

Kiamichi

(11140105)

Lower Little

(11140109)

Upper Little

(11140107)

Mountain Fork

(11140108)

River Basin

Lake of the

River Basin

River Basin

River Basin

Figure 23—The Assessment area is drained by 10 major river basins, each of which is subdivided into watersheds.

23
of the 50 watersheds in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands

as having “better water quality and low vulnerability to

impairment.” Nationwide, only 9 percent of all watersheds scored this highly. The Spring watershed at the

intersection of Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma had

“serious water quality problems and high vulnerability

to stressors.” Two others—the South Grand and

Fourche La Fave watersheds—had “serious water

quality problems and low vulnerability to stressors.”

Overall, however, watersheds within the Assessment

area generally seem to have better water quality and

less vulnerability than is typical for the Continental

United States. National forest lands are present in 9 of

the 10 basins and 34 of the 50 watersheds.

Lakes play many important social, economic, and

environmental roles in dozens of communities and even

whole counties in the Highlands (fig. 24). Each State

submits a biennial assessment of the water quality of its

lakes, including their trophic status. Trophic status

refers to the degree of eutrophication of a lake (defined

in the following paragraph) and provides insight into

the lake’s productivity and its future. In natural lakes, a

correlation exists between the age of a lake and its

Figure 24—Lakes and ponds cover less than 1 million acres within the Assessment area, but they have

tremendous importance to the economies, lifestyles, and environments of the Highlands.

trophic status. Reservoirs, because of their generally

higher inflow and outflow rates, do not function in the

same manner as natural lakes, but determining their

trophic status does assist in understanding water quality

problems affecting them.

Eutrophication is a cumulative process brought

about by (1) agricultural runoff, (2) sewage and industrial effluents, and (3) natural nutrients (such as leaves

and fallen trees). These inputs support increased algal

and other aquatic plant growth and gradually fill lakes

with sediment and decaying organic matter. Trophic

status describes how far a particular lake has advanced

in the eutrophication process, as described by the

following classes:

· Oligotrophic: lakes that receive low levels of nitrogen, phosphorus, and other nutrients and thus have

little algae or other aquatic plant growth;

· Mesotrophic: lakes that have received somewhat

more nutrients and have greater aquatic plant

growth.

· Eutrophic: lakes that have accumulated high levels

of nitrogen, phosphorus, and other nutrients and thus

are often very green due to large algal blooms.

24
· Hypereutrophic (the most advanced stage of

eutrophication): lakes that have received exceptionally large amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus, and

other nutrients and consequently have very heavy

growths of algae and other aquatic plants.

Trophic status is not necessarily a measure of lake

use. People who use lakes for sightseeing, picnicking,

swimming, or water skiing prefer oligotrophic lakes

with good water clarity. Anglers prefer slightly more

eutrophic lakes because they tend to have more

species and larger fish due to enhanced aquatic plant

communities.

Of the 28 Oklahoma lakes within the aquatic study

area, 3 percent were classified as oligotrophic, 30

percent mesotrophic, 43 percent eutrophic, 17 percent

hypereutrophic, and 7 percent (2 lakes) as silt dominated. Fort Gibson Reservoir was hypereutrophic-silt

dominated, and Wister Reservoir was eutrophichypereutrophic. Oklahoma lakes were unusual with

respect to their colloidal clay content. Resuspension of

colloidal clays can produce very high levels of turbidity, a condition found in many Oklahoma lakes. In

addition, most of Oklahoma’s larger lakes were characterized by a large degree of horizontal mixing.

When the Aquatic Team assigned a trophic status to

the 48 Arkansas lakes in the data base, 35 percent were

classified as mesotrophic, 63 percent eutrophic, and 2

percent (1 lake) as hypereutrophic. Most of the mesotrophic lakes were borderline eutrophic, and at least

half of the eutrophic lakes were borderline mesotrophic.

Most of the large Federal reservoirs fell into these

borderline situations while the smaller lakes fell into

the higher value range of the eutrophic category (due to

low flow-through). Lakes managed by the Arkansas

Game and Fish Commission fall within the eutrophic

category due in part to ongoing fertilization programs

to improve fish production and shade out rooted aquatic

weeds by increasing plankton production.

Within the Assessment area in Missouri, 13 percent

of the lakes were classified as oligotrophic; these

mostly occurred in the mountainous area of St. Francois

County. Thirty-two percent of the selected Missouri

lakes and reservoirs were classified as mesotrophic and

55 percent as eutrophic.

Ground Water Quality

Ground water is a vital resource in many parts of the

Highlands, providing water for human consumption,

irrigation, and cave life. The Springfield Plateau

aquifer, the Ozark aquifer, and aquifers of the Ouachita

Province generally provide water of excellent quality.

Wide-ranging inorganic concentrations observed in

aquifers in the Ouachita Province are indicative of both

the province’s diverse geochemical environments and,

for some water quality measures, the influential land

uses that are present. Background concentrations of

nutrients in ground water of the Ouachita Province are

low: nutrient concentrations were below detection

limits in many ground water samples. Nitrite plus

nitrate was detected in samples of ground water from

sites in the Ouachita Province at concentrations ranging

as high as 4.7 milligrams per liter (mg/L) as nitrogen,

with a median of 0.16 mg/L.

Background concentrations of nutrients in the

Springfield Plateau and Ozark aquifers are also low.

Nutrient concentrations were below detection limits in

many samples collected from sites in heavily forested

areas. Nitrite plus nitrate was detected more often and

in greater concentrations than any of the other nutrients.

Values ranged from less than 0.05 to 25 mg/L as

nitrogen, with a median of 1.6 mg/L. Concentrations

were greater than background concentrations in many

samples from these two aquifers and were positively

correlated with the percent of agricultural land use

around each site. Median nitrite plus nitrate concentrations generally were greater in samples from springs

than in samples from wells. Springs are more susceptible to contamination from surface sources.

Point Sources of Water Pollution

Point sources include wastewater discharge pipes,

stormwater drains, mine pits, smokestacks, and ditches.

These are sources that deliver pollution via a single

conveyance, in contrast with the more diffuse delivery

of pollutants that characterizes nonpoint sources

(discussed later).

25
Superfund Sites

The Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) was

enacted in 1980 and amended by the Superfund

Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986. These

acts establish broad authority for the Federal Government to respond to problems posed by the release, or

threat of release, of hazardous substances, pollutants, or

contaminants. The CERCLA also imposes liability on

those responsible for releases and provides the authority for the Government to undertake enforcement and

abatement action against responsible parties. Within the

aquatic study area, there are 15 Superfund sites—9 in

Missouri, 4 in Arkansas, and 1 each in Kansas and

Oklahoma. These sites are eligible for extensive, longterm cleanup funds under the Superfund program.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

System Sites

About 136 point sources currently discharge treated

wastewater into surface waters of the Assessment area.

Many of these sources with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are

considered major facilities based on their volume of

discharge and pollutant loadings (concentrations of

pollutants in discharged effluent). Four types of operations account for most of the point source discharges:

sewage treatment plants, pulp mills, lead and zinc ore

operations, and electrical services.

Of the four types of NPDES facilities that are ranked

as “major,” the greatest number are found in the Lower

Neosho, Upper Black, and James River watersheds.

Bull Shoals Lake watershed in the Upper White River

Basin has the most NPDES sites in the Assessment

area.

The majority of the permit sources with discharges

greater than 1 million gallons per day (gal/d) are

municipal treatment facilities. Approximately 200

sewage treatment plants discharge treated water into

surface waters of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands.

Average daily flows from these facilities range from

1,000 to 2 million gal. Larger municipal sewage

treatment plants include those of Springfield, MO, and

Little Rock, AR.

Municipal Water Supplies

Municipal water supplies are essential to the wellbeing and growth of communities. They also affect

aquatic resources. Water-supply reservoirs change

hydrologic regimes and water quality, stop downstream

movement of sediments, initiate downstream channel

erosion, and influence downstream water temperatures.

Therefore, municipal water supplies are regarded as

point sources for some purposes. (Water withdrawals

by municipal facilities in the Assessment area are

discussed subsequently in the section entitled “Water

Use.”)

Toxic Releases

As in many other parts of the world, hundreds of

toxic chemicals are stored, transported, used, and

disposed in the Assessment area. Toxic chemicals

include any chemical listed in EPA rules as “Toxic

Chemicals Subject to Section 313 of the Emergency

Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of

1986.” A toxic substance is a chemical or mixture that

may present unreasonable risk of injury to health or the

environment.

Densities of toxic release sites are highest in and

near urban areas such as Little Rock, AR; Fort Smith,

AR; Springfield, MO; St. Louis, MO; and areas that

have large industries or concentrations of industries.

The Spring (Neosho-Illinois River Basin), Lower

Arkansas-Maumelle, James, and Illinois watersheds

have the highest number and density of toxic release

sites in the region. Discharge media for toxic releases

include land, underground, air, water, and off-site

transfer. Of these media, air releases account for 53

percent of all discharges.

Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution

Nonpoint sources of water pollution include activities associated with construction, transportation,

agriculture, and silviculture. For example, during and

after storms, water often washes directly into streams

from city streets, parking lots, yards, and construction

sites, all of which function as nonpoint sources.

26
Roads and Highways

Roads, highways, and bridges contribute measurable

amounts of pollutants to the Nation’s waters. The

impervious surface of roads and highways prevents the

infiltration of rainfall and causes runoff to increase.

Runoff may carry sediments, nutrients, oil, grease,

gasoline, metals, salts, and other pollutants generated

by vehicular traffic and road maintenance. When the

polluted runoff enters a stream, water quality can be

degraded. Obviously, roads and highways near streams,

lakes, and rivers have the greatest potential to deposit

pollutants in water bodies.

Sediment is one of the primary pollutants from

gravel and dirt roads. Periodic maintenance of the

roadbeds and ditches of these roads exposes soil to

erosion (as does neglecting road maintenance). The

increase in runoff sediment caused by road construction

and maintenance can cause physical changes in the

aquatic habitat. Sediment loads can affect channel

shape, sinuosity, the ratio of stream length to valley

length, and the relative balance between pools and

riffles. Increased sediment can also alter the quantity

and quality of habitats for fish and invertebrate animals.

Road construction that creates a greater impervious

surface area and/or interrupts the subsurface lateral

flow of water can increase peak runoff flows. Careful

layout and construction of roads can minimize changes

in the volume and route of peak flows. When roads

occupy a significant proportion of a watershed, total

water yield and flow timing will be observably affected.

Places where roads cross streams can be barriers to

fish movement and gravel distribution in streams. Low

water bridges and culverts in the Highlands affect not

only fish migration (by impeding fish movement

directly or by creating new, impassable gravel bars) but

also gravel distribution in these streams.

Riparian areas are transition areas between the

uplands and water bodies. The riparian area filters

sediments and absorbs nutrients from upland runoff to

varying degrees before it reaches streams. Road construction and maintenance within riparian zones,

however, can reduce these filtering and absorption

processes.

The Aquatic Team focused on the potential effects

of roads in riparian areas (defined here as lands within

100 feet (ft) of streams). Effective management of

riparian areas not only produces direct benefits in terms

of stream health, it may also lessen the effects of roads

and other sources of pollution in the uplands.

All watersheds in the Assessment area have road

segments within 100 ft of streams (fig. 25). The Upper

Black River, Bull Shoals Lake, Current River, Beaver

Reservoir, and Illinois River watersheds have the most

road miles within riparian areas. Class 2 roads (State

highways and county roads) have the highest number of

road miles within riparian areas. Class 3 roads (county

and national forest system roads) have the most road

miles within riparian areas in national forests.

Agriculture and Silviculture

Agriculture and silviculture are sources of sediment,

which is a major nonpoint pollutant of aquatic habitats.

Sediment creates turbidity, fills in stream channels and

reservoirs, changes aquatic habitat, and carries nutrients

into streams. In 1991 and 1992, States attributed 41

percent of their nonpoint source pollution to agriculture

and 3 percent to silviculture.

“Potential erosion estimates” are predictions of

onsite erosion of agricultural and forested lands. Much

of the estimated eroded soil is trapped by vegetation or

in depressions in the land. A portion of the estimated

eroded soil could enter water bodies and become

sediment. Land management practices can influence

(positively or negatively) the amount of eroded soil that

Figure 25—Unpaved roads within 100 feet of streams are a major

source of sediment entering Highlands’ streams.

27
reaches water bodies. Best management practices

(BMP’s) and conservation measures can reduce the

amount of eroded soil that reaches water bodies.

Potential erosion. Total potential erosion declined

in more than half of the watersheds in the Assessment

area from 1982 to 1992. The land use category with the

highest potential erosion in most Assessment area

watersheds was pasture lands. Most watersheds in the

Assessment area, however, had no appreciable potential

erosion from rangelands. The South Grand watershed

had the highest average potential erosion rate in 1992.

Over the years studied, “forest potential erosion” as

a percent of total potential erosion in a watershed was

3 percent or less for most of the Assessment area

watersheds. Watersheds with the highest “forest

potential erosion” as a percent of total potential erosion

were in the southern part of the Assessment area. The

Fourche La Fave, Ouachita Headwaters, and Lower

Little River watersheds had the lowest average potential erosion rates.

Pesticide applications. In addition to sediment,

some agricultural and silvicultural activities produce

pesticide residues that end up in surface or ground

waters. Pesticides are chemicals, primarily synthetic

organic compounds, that are used to control unwanted

plants, animals, or fungi. These chemicals may have

effects other than those intended for their use, including

impacts on nontarget organisms, accumulation in soil

and water, and degradation of water quality.

Approximately 4.4 million pounds (lb) of active

ingredients per year from 130 pesticides were applied

on 25 crop types within the Ozark Plateaus Province

from 1987 through 1991. The herbicides 2,4-D, atrazine,

propanil, metolachlor, alachlor, trifluralin, dicamba, and

glyphosate were the eight pesticides used most extensively. The most frequently applied pesticide was 2,4-D,

used at an estimated rate of 750,000 lb per year.

Approximately 771,000 lb of active ingredients per

year from 128 pesticides were applied on 25 crop types

within the Arkansas Valley from 1987 to 1991. The

seven pesticides used most extensively were the

herbicides 2,4-D, propanil, trifluralin, atrazine,

metolachlor, and dicamba and the fungicide sulfur. The

most frequently applied pesticide was 2,4-D, used at an

estimated rate of 108,000 lb per year.

Approximately 356,000 lb of active ingredients per

year from 127 pesticides were applied on 22 crop types

within the Ouachita Mountains from 1987 to 1991. In

this area, the seven pesticides used most often were the

herbicides 2,4-D, dicamba, atrazine, metolachlor,

trifluralin, and glyphosate and the fungicide sulfur. The

most frequently applied pesticide in the Ouachita

Mountains was 2,4-D, with an estimated rate of application of 65,000 lb per year.

Pesticides in surface water. Pesticide data are

available for 1,002 samples from 141 surface water

sampling sites in the Ozark Plateaus. Many sites were

sampled only once (42 sites) or twice (19 sites) during

the 1970 through 1990 period of record. About 50

percent of the 1,002 samples were collected in the mid1970’s and early 1980’s. Thirty-four of the 50 pesticides were below the detection limit for all the samples

collected; 16 pesticides were detected in 132 samples

collected from 43 sites. The pesticide detected most

often was the insecticide toxaphene, which was detected in 17 of 866 samples from 5 of 112 sites. The

concentration of toxaphene in samples where the

pesticide was detected ranged from 0.1 to 6.0 mg/L.

Pesticide data are available for 53 samples from 14

sites in the Arkansas Valley. Many sites were sampled

only once (four sites) or twice (seven sites) during the

1975 through 1995 period of record.

About 65 percent of the 53 samples were collected in

the early and mid-1980’s. Three of the nine pesticides

were below the detection limit for all the samples

collected; six pesticides were detected in three samples

collected from three sites. Five pesticides (DDE, DDT,

aldrin, dieldrin, and lindane) were detected in 3 of 53

samples from 3 of 14 sites. The maximum concentration for these pesticides was 0.001 mg/L, except for

DDT (0.002 mg/L).

Pesticide data are available for 245 samples from 19

sites in the Ouachita Mountains. About 64 percent of

the 245 samples were collected in the late 1970’s and

early 1980’s. Sixteen of 23 pesticides were below the

detection limit in all the samples collected. Seven

pesticides were detected in 13 samples collected from

10 sites. The most commonly detected pesticide was

methyl parathion, found in 10 of 234 samples at 10 of

20 sites, with concentrations ranging from 0.001 to

0.002 mg/L.

Pesticides in ground water. Pesticides were

detected in 80 of 229 samples of ground water from 73

of 215 sites. Twenty pesticides were detected; a

28
maximum of five pesticides was detected in any one

sample. The most commonly detected pesticides were

tebuthiuron, atrazine, prometon, desethylatrazine, and

simazine. Maximum concentrations ranged from 0.003

to 1.0 mg/L.

The occurrence and distribution of pesticides are

related to land use. Samples with detectable pesticides

come from sites having a higher percent of land used

for agriculture than samples with no pesticides detected. Pesticides are detected more often in samples

from springs than in samples from wells.

For the Ouachita Province, very little data are

available from monitoring pesticides in ground water.

Commonly applied pesticides in forest land—2,4-D,

dichlorprop, hexazinone, and picloram—were not

found at any of the eight Ouachita Mountain sites

sampled in 1986.

Animal Wastes and Fertilizers. Livestock and

poultry wastes are a major source of nutrient loading in

parts of the Assessment area. The nutrient composition

of animal wastes varies widely with respect to animal

species, feed consumption and content, and age. Animal

wastes contain three major nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium) essential for plant production and

are, therefore, used as a fertilizer for pasture lands. The

quantity of nutrients ultimately available for use by

plants from livestock and poultry wastes varies substantially from the amount initially excreted. Greatly

affecting the nitrogen and phosphorus content of animal

wastes are the types of animal housing and waste

handling systems used. Also, the longer animal wastes

remain in the soil before plant uptake, the more nutrients

can be lost through leaching, erosion, and other means.

The Ozark Plateaus had the highest nutrient contributions from animal wastes in 1992—an estimated 7 tons

per square mile (tons/mi2

) of nitrogen and 3 tons/mi2 of

phosphorus. At 6 tons/mi2

 of nitrogen and 2 tons/mi2 of

phosphorus available from animal wastes that same year,

the Arkansas Valley was not far behind. An estimated 4

tons/mi2

 of nitrogen and 2 tons/mi2 of phosphorus were

available from animal wastes in the Ouachita Mountains

in 1992. Beef cattle contributed by far the largest

amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus throughout the

Highlands; chickens were a distant second.

Fertilizer use increased considerably in the Highlands from 1965 to 1985. In 1985, nitrogen fertilizer

application rates for the counties within the Ozark

Plateaus ranged as high as 12 tons/mi2

, while phosphorus fertilizer application rates ranged as high as 5 tons/

mi2

. In that same year, the range within the Arkansas

Valley was from 0 to an estimated 12 tons/mi2

 of

nitrogen fertilizer and from 0 to an estimated 1 ton/mi2

of phosphorus fertilizer, while in the Ouachita Mountains, nitrogen fertilizer application rates ranged from 0

to an estimated 3 tons/mi2

 and phosphorus fertilizer

application rates ranged from 0 to an estimated 0.5

tons/mi2

.

Urbanization

Increases in the human population serve as indicators of the many environmental stresses stemming from

urbanization, including land clearing, waste treatment,

and changes in runoff patterns. Between 1980 and

1990, an 8 percent population increase occurred within

the Assessment area watersheds. Twenty-four watersheds experienced population increases of 7 percent or

more. Between 1980 and 1990, the rate of urbanization

was greater within the Assessment area than nationwide. Two Assessment area watersheds (the Upper

Little River in southeastern Oklahoma and the Little

Missouri River in southern Arkansas) had a 7 percent

decrease in population from 1980 to 1990.

Mineral Extraction

Extractions of some mineral resources have adversely affected aquatic systems within the Assessment

area. Effects of mining-related extraction activities

primarily come from two sources: (1) increased sediment discharges into streams from present-day operations and (2) runoff waters leaching metals and chemicals into streams from abandoned, unreclaimed mines

and ore tailings left by historical operations. (The

historical operations took place before modern environmental laws were enacted.)

The primary mining activity in the Assessment area

is surface mining of common variety minerals that

generally go to the building and road construction

industries. In 1996, approximately 698 mining-related

operations for hardrock and coal extraction occurred in

the Assessment area.

Several abandoned former mine sites continue to

contribute chemical and metal leachates and runoff to

29
streams and other water bodies, increasing acidity in

some cases and frequently affecting aquatic resources.

Effects on aquatic resources from present-day

mining activities are primarily associated with increased sedimentation of streams caused by instream

gravel and sand extraction. Approximately 595 mi of

rivers, streams, and lakes are impaired as a result of

mining activities within the Assessment area.

Introduced Species

The term “introduced species” refers to a population

of organisms of a given species that occurs in a particular locale due to human actions that inadvertently or

deliberately moved the species from one place to

another. Introduced species such as zebra mussels,

common carp, and certain aquatic weeds have become

pests and may be regarded as nonpoint sources of

environmental degradation.

Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma are making

concerted efforts to retard the spread of zebra mussels

both through public education and education of individual anglers and boaters. It is likely that zebra

mussels eventually will show up in most lakes and

reservoirs in the Assessment area as the result of a

transient boating public. Zebra mussels are expected to

ravage the native mussel fauna as well as disrupt the

food chain of any water body they colonize (fig. 26).

Water Use

The Ozark-Ouachita Highlands encompass headwaters for 13 major rivers (the Gasconade, Meramec, St.

Francis, Neosho, Illinois, White, Black, Kiamichi,

Little, Ouachita, and Saline Rivers and portions of the

Arkansas and Osage Rivers). These rivers serve

instream and offstream water needs for much of the

South-Central United States. Streamflow from these

rivers eventually empties into the Mississippi River.

In contrast to areas immediately to the east, south,

and southwest, the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands have

fresh water in abundance. Annual precipitation in the

Assessment area averages about 44 in., of which

roughly 70 percent evaporates. The rest is available as

streamflow, for offstream use, or to recharge ground

water reservoirs. Across the entire area in the average

year, only 6.7 percent of the 53.7 billion gal/d of water

yield is withdrawn for offstream use.

From 1985 to 1995, withdrawals increased in four

categories of water use (domestic and public, commercial, thermoelectric, and irrigation) and decreased in

three other categories (industrial, mining, and livestock). Increases in withdrawals, especially those at

thermoelectric plants and for irrigation, far outpaced

decreases, resulting in substantial net increases. Water

withdrawals increased 25 percent between 1985 and

1990 and 7 percent between 1990 and 1995. But water

supplies vastly exceeded use in most parts of the

Assessment area, and projected future use remains a

small fraction of supply in most years (fig. 27).

Total withdrawals in the Assessment area in 1995

were 6,622 gal/d (table 2). Of these withdrawals, 1,322

million gal/d (20 percent) were consumed and not

returned to a stream; 64 percent of withdrawn water

went toward cooling at thermoelectric plants, 20

percent toward crop irrigation. About 78 percent of all

withdrawals came from surface water.

Withdrawals vary widely among watersheds but

exceed 20 percent of available water in only four. In

three of these watersheds (South Grand, Illinois, and

Dardanelle Reservoir), withdrawals for thermoelectric

plants account for 83 to 97 percent of total withdrawals.

In the other (Lower Black) watershed, irrigation

accounts for 97 percent of total withdrawals. Thermoelectric plants use water in 15 of the 107 counties in the

Assessment area and very large amounts in 8 of those

Figure 26—Native mussel species such as this Ouachita

kidneyshell (collected from the James River, Webster

County, MO), are theatened by pollution, habitat alteration,

and zebra mussels. (Photo courtesy of M.C. Barnhart,

Southwest Missouri State University.)

30
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1995 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

Mgal/d

0

1

2

3

4

Percent change

Figure 27—The projected future use of water would remain a small fraction of the supply in most years.

Table 2—Fresh water uses in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands, 1985–1995

Uses 1985 1990 1995

 - - - - Million gallons/day - - - -

Withdrawal

Domestic and public 440 464 538

Commercial 97 277 203

Industrial 139 114 136

Thermoelectric 2,947 3,901 4,234

Mining 29 26 11

Livestock 210 149 184

Crop irrigation 986 1,216 1,315

Total 4,847 6,148 6,622

Consumptive use 1,006 1,205 1,322

Hydroelectric water use 141,942 116,793 102,884

counties. Although total annual energy production at

thermoelectric plants in the Assessment area is expected to increase significantly, total withdrawals for

thermoelectric plants are projected to drop from 4.2

billion gal/d in 1995 to 3.8 billion gal/d in 2040.

Hydroelectric plants operate in 22 Assessment-area

counties and use enormous quantities of water—about

103 billion gal/d—but nearly all of this use occurs

instream. The three counties using the most water for

hydroelectric power generation are Le Flore (OK),

Franklin (AR), and Muskogee (OK).

Municipal water supplies provide over 80 percent of

the drinking water in the Assessment area. The largest

drinking water supplies are located in the Meramec,

Arkansas, Kiamichi, and Upper White River Basins,

which serve about 1.6 million people. Smaller water

supplies in the Assessment area are located in less

populated watersheds such as the Upper Black and

Upper St. Francis River Basins. Total withdrawals for

domestic and public purposes are projected to increase

from 538 million gal/d in 1995 to 675 million gal/d in

2040.

Total withdrawals for crop irrigation are projected to

increase from 1.3 billion gal/d in 1995 to 2.0 billion

gal/d in 2040. Total industrial and commercial withdrawals are projected to decrease from 339 million gal/d

in 1995 to 214 million gal/d in 2040. Water withdrawals on the whole are projected to increase until

2020 and remain fairly stable after that, staying within

5 percent of 1995 levels. The increases in withdrawals

for domestic and public use and for irrigation should be

balanced, for the most part, by decreases in withdrawals for industrial, commercial, and thermoelectric uses.

While the overall picture is one of water abundance,

many communities and cities in the Highlands face

future shortages and are actively seeking new supplies

for domestic and commercial use. For example, Fort

Smith seeks to expand its existing water supply lake.

Little Rock, which currently has two reservoirs in the

Ouachita Mountains, seeks a third source to meet its

long-term needs. Many smaller communities (e.g.,

Benton and Marshall in Arkansas) are actively looking

31
for new supplies. For a variety of reasons, it is highly

likely that communities will look to Federal and State

lands for at least some of their future freshwater needs.

Aquatic Animals and Their Habitats

Fishes

The Ozark-Ouachita Highlands are part of a region—

the Southern United States plus the Missouri Ozarks—

that harbors the richest freshwater fish fauna on the

North American continent. The Highlands’ streams and

rivers alone are home to at least 190 native fish species,

representing 51 percent of the native freshwater fishes

of the entire Mississippi River Basin, about 24 percent

of those of the Continental United States, and 18

percent of all native freshwater fishes of North America.

The Highlands are drained by several major river

basins emptying into the Mississippi Alluvial Basin.

These can be divided into two major groups: easterly

flowing tributaries (primarily the Gasconade, Osage,

Meramec, St. Francis, Black, White, and Arkansas

Rivers) and southerly flowing tributaries (primarily the

Kiamichi, Little, and Ouachita Rivers).

Twenty-three fish families are represented by native

species in the Assessment area, with five families

containing about 78 percent of the fish fauna of the

region; more than half of the fish fauna belongs to two

families—the perches (Percidae) and minnows (Cyprinidae). Conservatively, at least 14 percent of the fish

fauna is endemic (restricted in geographic extent) to the

Assessment area (fig. 28). Endemic species are distributed among five fish families, with highest endemicity

among darters and minnows. Endemic fishes are

concentrated in 2 ecological sections: the Ozark

Highlands (16 endemic fish species) and the Ouachita

Mountains (7 endemic fish species).

Two geographic centers of primary levels of fish

species richness (89 to 114 species) occur in the

Assessment area (fig. 29). One, in the northeastern part

of the area, includes portions of Upper St. Francis

River, Upper Black River, and Upper White River

drainages; in the west, high species richness is concentrated in the drainages of the Neosho-Illinois Rivers

and western portions of the Arkansas River. Native fish

species density varies across the Assessment area, with

Figure 28—The leopard darter is one of many species that occur

only in the Highlands; as a conservative estimate, at least 14 percent

of the fish fauna is endemic to the area.

the highest densities of fish species associated with

units that are generally small and species rich or small

and adjacent to species-rich units.

Mussels

Freshwater mussels have been described as an

imperiled fauna threatened by habitat destruction,

overuse (for commercial or other purposes), disease,

predation, introduction of nonnative species, pollution,

hybridization, and restricted range. The single most

important cause of decline in mussel diversity and

abundance has been habitat destruction. Causes of this

destruction have ranged from the obvious—dams,

dredging, and channelization—to the subtler—siltation

and contaminants. Erosion, caused in part by deforestation, poor agricultural practices, and destruction of

riparian zones, has led to both increased silt loads and

shifting, unstable stream bottoms. While habitat

destruction continues, the introduced mollusks such as

the Asian clam and zebra mussel appear poised to

destroy many remaining native mussel populations.

Seventy-three species of native freshwater mussels

representing 37 genera occur within the Assessment

area. Eleven species are endemic to the Assessment

area; two, the Asian clam and the zebra mussel, are

introduced species. Twenty-four freshwater mussel

species are widely distributed across the Assessment

area, while 16 species are restricted to streams draining

32
Figure 29—High levels of fish species richness (89 to 114 species) occur in two geographic centers; the northeastern center includes

portions of the Upper St. Francis River and Upper Black River, and the western center includes drainages of the Neosho-Illinois River

and portions of the Arkansas River. (In this figure, watersheds have been subdivided according to ecological sections; see the Aquatic

Conditions Report for further information.)

Species richness

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

Outside units or insufficient data

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Missouri

the Ozark Highlands, and 8 species are restricted to

streams draining the Ouachita Mountains. North

American conservation status rankings for freshwater

mussel species in the Assessment area reveal that 40

species are considered currently stable, 18 species are

of special concern, 9 are ranked as threatened, and 6 are

listed as endangered.

Areas of relatively high species richness and density

occur primarily in clusters in the northeastern, central,

and southern portions of the Assessment area and

appear to be associated with hydrologic units containing

both headwater and main stem habitats (fig. 30). The

Aquatic Team calculated a relative importance index

value to rank hydrologic units in terms of combined

mussel species richness, species density, and habitat

availability for rare species. The five highest-ranking

hydrologic units were the Strawberry River (Upper

Black River Basin), the Bourbeuse and Big Rivers (both

33
Figure 30—Watersheds having relatively high mussel species richness and density occur primarily in tier-like clusters

in the northeastern, central, and southern portions of the Assessment area.

Species richness

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

Insufficient data

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Missouri

in the Meramec River Basin), the Upper Ouachita River

(Ouachita-Saline River Basin), and the Lower Osage

River (Osage River Basin).

Crayfishes

Large invertebrates often found in streams, rivers,

and lakes, crayfishes are significant components of

aquatic ecosystems. They facilitate important ecological processes, sustain recreational and commercial bait

fisheries, and are a profitable and popular food. Within

the Assessment area, crayfishes often make up a large

proportion of the biomass produced in aquatic systems

and provide a critical food resource for stream fishes.

Crayfish species representing 6 genera and 1 family

(Cambaridae) are present in the Assessment area. The

genera Orconectes (24 species), Procambarus (13

species), and Cambarus (9 species) comprise 84

percent of the crayfish fauna, which includes 37

endemic species (61 percent of the region’s crayfish

34
fauna). Most of these endemic species are confined to

the Ozark Plateaus and Boston Mountains (at least 22

endemic crayfishes), but endemicity is also relatively

high in the Ouachita Mountains (at least 13 endemic

crayfishes).

Crayfish species richness averaged 5.9 crayfish

species per hydrologic unit, with a range of from 2 to

14 species. However, most hydrologic units showed

diverse crayfish faunas, with 29 of 50 units having

crayfish richness values greater than 4 species. The

southeastern Ouachita Mountains and an area trending

southwest to northeast from the western Boston Mountains to the eastern Ozark Plateaus showed primary or

secondary levels of crayfish richness (6 to 14 species).

Concentrations of hydrologic units with primary

levels of crayfish density occurred along the northeastern edge of the Assessment area (Middle White unit,

Upper St. Francis unit, and most units in the Black

River and Meramec drainages) and in the southern part

of the Assessment area (most units in the OuachitaSaline drainage and the Lower Little unit of the

Kiamichi-Little drainage).

Aquatic Insects

The streams and rivers of the Ozark-Ouachita

Highlands harbor a richness of species representing

about 15 percent and 17 percent of all stoneflies and

caddisflies, respectively, known from North America.

Eight families, including 23 stonefly genera and 82

species, and 17 families, including 57 caddisfly genera

and 206 species, are known to occur in the OzarkOuachita Highlands Assessment area.

The Ouachita Mountains support the greatest richness of stoneflies and caddisflies (195 species) in the

Assessment area. Nineteen of the regionally endemic

stonefly species occur in the Ouachita Mountains; six

of these occur in no other subregion. Three of the 13

endemic caddisfly species found in the Ouachita

Mountains are not known elsewhere.

Endangered, Threatened, and Other Aquatic

Species of Special Concern

As is true elsewhere, conservation of aquatic

biodiversity in the Assessment area is a battle against

extinction. The loss of and decline in populations of

aquatic species are attributed primarily to alteration of

habitats, chemical pollution, overexploitation, and/or

the introduction of competitive nonnative organisms.

The process of extinction often can be related to

landscape- or basin-scale phenomena that decrease

habitat area or quality and increase isolation of populations. However, loss of diversity via extinction is not

usually observable or cataclysmic. Rather, the process

is gradual, with total extinction preceded by local or

regional annihilations. Understanding (and ultimately

preventing) human-caused imperilment and extinction

of aquatic organisms is likely to require far greater

focus on landscape-level patterns and processes than

traditional approaches to maintaining diverse aquatic

communities have used in the past.

A total of 125 aquatic taxa have 1 or more of the

following designations: Federal status (14 species),

globally imperiled through globally rare (78 taxa), and

State critically imperiled (68 taxa). Included are 7

insects; 37 mollusks, 35 of which are freshwater

mussels; 23 crustaceans, 15 of which are crayfish; 55

fishes; and 3 herptiles (amphibians or reptiles).

Of the 14 aquatic taxa with Federal status, 6 are

mollusks, 2 are crustaceans, and 6 are fishes. Sixty

percent of the hydrologic units have at least one

federally listed species. Hydrologic units with three or

four species with Federal status are located in the

southern Ouachita Mountains (Upper Little, Lower

Little, and Upper Ouachita units), in the NeoshoIllinois drainage (Lake O’ the Cherokees, Illinois, Elk,

and Spring units), and in the Sac unit (Osage River

drainage). Units with one to two species with Federal

status are scattered widely across the Assessment area

(fig. 31).

In the Assessment area, about 32, 50, and 26 percent

of the native fishes, mussels, and crayfishes, respectively, have Federal status, globally rare ranks, and/or

high State ranks. Two concentrations of hydrologic

units showed primary levels of endangered, threatened,

and other species of special concern (10 to 30 species

with Federal status and/or high global or State ranks):

(1) along the southern edge of the Assessment area in

the Ouachita Mountains and (2) along the northeastern

edge of the Assessment area in the Upper Black River

and Upper St. Francis drainages.

35
4 species

3 species

2 species

1 species

No species

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Missouri

Figure 31—Sixty percent of the watersheds in the Highlands have at least one federally listed threatened or

endangered species.

Recreationally and Commercially Important

Aquatic Species

In 1996, 35.2 million people 16 years of age and

older engaged in recreational fishing in the United

States. Within the Assessment area, fishing is one of

the more popular outdoor activities. The Assessment

area is home to world-class fishing; popular fishing

resorts; thriving fishing guide services; major fishing

boat and fishing tackle manufacturers, wholesalers, and

retailers; and major professional fishing tournaments.

These aspects of recreational fishing are highly visible

and generate considerable cash flow for the economies

of the Assessment area.

The high level of recreational fishing, of course,

would not have developed had the fishery resources not

been available. While the early inhabitants of the

Highlands found plentiful stream and river fishery

resources, these environments have been significantly

altered by the construction of dams, locks, levees,

36
reservoirs, lakes, and ponds and by increasing demands

on and harvests of fish. Fishery managers respond to

the challenge of altered habitats by trying to manage for

sustainable yield (through natural fish reproduction)

where possible. When necessary, managers supplement

and replenish stocks with fish from hatcheries.

Significant efforts have been made—mostly through

introductions of nonnative fish species—to manage

open-water habitats of large reservoirs within the

Assessment area and to utilize adequately cool and cold

water habitats within and downstream from these

reservoirs. State and Federal fisheries-management

agencies protect native stocks of smallmouth bass,

walleye, and sauger by foregoing some stocking

opportunities that might contaminate these native

stocks genetically. Where supplemental stocking is

needed in habitats containing protected native species,

hatcheries are using spawners of the same genetic stock

as the protected native species found in the receiving

water bodies.

Commercial fish harvesting within the Assessment

area is limited to Arkansas waters, where harvests and

the number of commercial fishers are somewhat stable.

Commercial mussel harvesting regulations in Arkansas

govern whether an area is open, closed, or set aside as a

protected area. Oklahoma had only one licensed shell

(mussel) buyer in 1997.

Demand for shells is driven by the market for pearl

blanks (a round piece of shell inserted in commercial

pearl oysters to stimulate pearl formation). Actual

harvest levels are lower than harvest limits because of

the pearl industry’s requirements for a specific color

and size.

Aquatic and Riparian Habitats

The presence and abundance of aquatic organisms

(e.g., fish and aquatic invertebrates) and features of

physical habitats (e.g., stream size) are primary tools to

assess the quality of aquatic habitats. To examine the

status of aquatic habitats, a series of measurements and

samples usually is taken at a specific site or series of

sites within a stream or river. Such specific information

is unavailable for large portions of the Assessment area.

The Aquatic Team used the number of stream types

within hydrologic units to examine the large-scale

patterns of diversity of aquatic habitats across the

Assessment area. Each “stream type” is a unique

combination of three landscape-scale attributes: (1)

hydrologic unit, (2) ecological section, and (3) stream

size. Each of these attributes may include habitat

conditions that influence the number and kinds of

aquatic organisms found across the Assessment area.

For example, endemic and other native aquatic species

are associated with specific drainage systems (“hydrologic units”). Likewise, sections within hydrologic

units often have different stream water chemistry and

differing conditions arising from the distinctive geological evolution of each section’s landscape, riparian

zones, and water bodies). Consequently, streams show

differences in the makeup of their aquatic communities.

Finally, different stream sizes within different ecological sections within a hydrologic unit generally support

different numbers of aquatic species.

When combined, these three attributes—hydrologic

unit, ecological section, and stream size—provide a

description of large-scale differences among runningwater habitats within and among hydrologic units. For

example, a first-order stream (i.e., smallest headwater)

in the Ozark Highlands of the Upper White River

hydrologic unit represents a distinctly different stream

type than a first-order stream in the West Gulf Coastal

Plain section of the Upper Ouachita River hydrologic

unit. Likewise, a small stream is expected to differ in

physical habitat and faunal composition from a medium-sized river within the same province and hydrologic unit.

Over half of the hydrologic units in the Assessment

area have 10 or more stream types per hydrologic unit,

and no hydrologic unit has fewer than 5 stream types.

Primary levels of stream type diversity (11 to 15 stream

types per hydrologic unit) are located mostly in the

southern half of the Assessment area; secondary levels

(10 stream types per hydrologic unit) are located in

hydrologic units along the periphery of the Assessment

area.

Native fish species richness is associated significantly and positively with the number of different

stream types in hydrologic units. Hydrologic units with

primary and secondary levels of stream type diversity

and native fish species richness may be considered of

particular significance in maintaining present and

future aquatic biodiversity within the Ozark-Ouachita

Highlands (fig. 32).

37
Of the almost 3 million ac of riparian areas identified within the Assessment area, approximately 57

percent of the acres are forested, 37 percent are agricultural, 2 percent are urban, and 4 percent are classified

as “other.” The Upper Saline watershed has the greatest

percentage (87.4 percent) and the South Grand watershed has the lowest percentage (14.9 percent) of

forested riparian cover in the study area. National

forests generally have highly forested riparian areas (86

to 93 percent).

Since the 1780’s, wetland losses in Assessment area

States have ranged from 50 to greater than 75 percent.

According to the State 305(b) inventory reports of

water quality, most of the wetlands in Arkansas,

Missouri, and Oklahoma have been converted to

agricultural production during historical times.

Most of the State Soil Geographic data base soilmap units that include hydric soils are found along the

Grand, Sac, Black, White, Arkansas, Ouachita, and

Little Rivers. These areas are potential wetlands

because they have saturated soils, one of the essential

components of the designation “wetlands.”

Camden and Taney Counties, MO, and Pulaski

County, AR, had the most Clean Water Act 404 permits

issued from 1988 through 1996. If the number of permits

issued indicates activity in wetlands and other water

bodies, the Osage, Upper White, and Arkansas River

Basins had the most activity from 1988 through 1996.

Levels of stream type diversity

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

Oklahoma

Arkansas

Missouri

Figure 32—The number of native fish species in a watershed is associated significantly and positively with the number of

different stream types in that watershed.

38
Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife Conditions and Trends

The ecosystems of the Highlands are constantly

changing. Various kinds of disturbances—including

fire, wind, and insect outbreaks—have been integral

parts of these ecosystems throughout the history of the

area. Humans were present (having arrived some

10,000 years before the present time) as “modern”

ecosystems developed, and they likely influenced the

structure and function of ecosystems. Beginning in the

1830’s, European settlers made dramatic changes to the

land by clearing forests and, later, by suppressing fire;

settlers also had an impact on animals through hunting

and habitat alteration.

Status and Trends of Vegetation

Many people picture the Ozarks and Ouachitas as

heavily forested, but grasslands, open woodlands, and

savannas are also part of the natural vegetation cover.

Some portions of the Highlands (e.g., southwestern

Missouri) are primarily nonforest. In the Assessment

area as a whole, forests cover about 64 percent of the

land.

As measured by Advanced Very High-Resolution

Radiometer (AVHRR) data, oak-hickory forest is the

most extensive vegetation type in the Assessment area,

covering 15 million ac or 36 percent of the area (fig. 33).

Oak-pine forest is the second most extensive within the

region, covering 4.4 million ac (11 percent of the

Assessment area). The largest acreage of this type

(660,000 ac) occurs within the Fourche Mountains

subsection of the Ouachita Mountains. The abundance

of oak in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands is noteworthy;

it is matched or exceeded in only two other Eastern

United States ecoregions (the Central Appalachian and

Eastern Broadleaf Forest Provinces).

Roughly 95 percent of the forested land in the

Assessment area is considered “commercial timberland,”

Figure 33—Oak-hickory forest is the most extensive vegetation type in the Assessment area,

covering 15 million acres or 36 percent of the area.

39
that is, physically capable of producing timber for

harvest and not located in a wilderness or other area

formally withdrawn from timber production. Although

some forest cover data are now available without regard

to timber capability, the surveys of commercial timberland that the research branch of the Forest Service has

conducted about every 10 years—since the 1940’s in

Missouri and the 1950’s in Arkansas and Oklahoma—

represent the best information available about forest

trends in the latter half of the 20th century.

Commercial forest land area in the Highlands

declined from the 1950’s to the 1970’s due primarily to

conversion of some forest lands to other uses. According to the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) surveys,

the largest declines took place in the Arkansas Ozarks

and in Oklahoma, where forest cover declined 17.5

percent between the 1950’s and 1970’s (about 2 million

ac and 1.7 million ac, respectively). From the 1940’s to

the 1980’s, Missouri forest cover declined an estimated

14.1 percent (1.44 million ac).

Forested area has been increasing since the 1970’s in

five of the six survey regions in the Highlands, the sole

exception being the Missouri Eastern Ozarks, which

continued to show forest cover decreases through the

1980’s. Combining all six regions, the net gain in forest

area from the 1970’s to the 1980’s was slightly more

than 1.89 million ac. However, the 1990’s forest area in

the Highlands of Arkansas and Oklahoma is still almost

7 percent less than it was in the 1950’s (15.23 million

ac versus 16.35 million ac, respectively). Some of the

decrease not attributable to conversion was probably

due to adjustments made in the estimated natural limit

of commercial forest land in the post oak belt of eastern

Oklahoma.

The total forest area stocked primarily with small

diameter trees (seedlings, saplings, and poletimber) has

decreased and the total area of larger diameter trees

(“sawtimber”) has increased. The total sawtimber

volume also increased over time. From the 1950’s to

the 1990’s, sawtimber area in Arkansas and Oklahoma

increased from 17 percent to 37 percent of the total

commercial forest area; in Missouri, sawtimber area

increased from 10 percent to 46 percent.

The area in pine forest cover declined in Arkansas

and Oklahoma from more than 3.8 million ac in the

1950’s to 2.2 million ac in the 1960’s but has since

grown steadily except for a minor downturn in the

Ouachitas during the 1980’s (fig. 34). By the 1990’s,

pine forest area in Oklahoma and the Arkansas Ozarks

had returned to 1950’s levels, but in the Arkansas

Ouachitas, pine covered only 60 percent of the area

occupied in the 1950’s. Oak-hickory acres in the

Ouachitas in the 1990’s were somewhat higher than in

the 1950’s—the representation of the oak-hickory type

rose from about 22 to 30 percent of the total commercial

forest acres. Oak-pine acreage doubled in the Ouachitas

from the 1950’s to 1960’s, but part of this increase was

due to changes made in FIA measurement standards. It

is also likely that an increase in agricultural land uses

was responsible for part of the apparent decline in pine.

The largest declines in oak-hickory forest between

the 1950’s and 1990’s occurred in Arkansas and

Oklahoma (fig. 35); today these areas have 1.7 million

fewer acres of this type than were present in the

1950’s—a 17.7 percent decrease. Most of the decline

took place in the Arkansas Ozarks and in Oklahoma

between the 1960’s and 1970’s—probably due to

conversions to pasture and other agricultural uses. Oakhickory acreage declined only about 1 percent in

Missouri from the 1940’s to the 1980’s; oak-hickory

made up at least 82 percent of the forest cover measured in all three Missouri regions during the 1980’s.

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

1940's 1950's 1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's

Decennial interval

Pine types, thousand acres

OK AR Ouachita

AR Ozark MO Eastern Ozark

MO SW Ozark MO NW Ozark

Figure 34—The total area in pine forest cover declined in Arkansas

and Oklahoma from more than 3.8 million acres in the 1950’s to

2.2 million acres in the 1960’s; since then, except for a few minor

downturns during the 1980’s, there has been steady growth.

40
Hard hardwood growing-stock volumes show

upward trends across all FIA survey regions in the

Highlands, roughly doubling across the measured four

decades, except in the Arkansas Ozarks, where hard

hardwood volume nearly trebled. Pine growing-stock

volumes also increased dramatically in most survey

regions (including the three regions that today have at

least 1 billion cubic feet of pine growing-stock volume). The biggest absolute increase was in the Arkansas Ozarks, which saw an increase of eight billion board

feet of sawtimber between the 1950’s and 1980’s.

Pine sawtimber volume has increased in all regions

over time, but the greatest percentage increase (400

percent over four decades) was in the Missouri Ozarks

(fig. 36). The greatest actual increase (from 6 to 10

billion board feet) was in the Ouachitas. Today, the

annual net growth of hardwoods and softwoods is more

than double the annual removals. Despite these impressive numbers, forest stands with greater than 1,000

cubic feet per acre of volume occupy only 30 percent of

the timberland acreage in the Highlands.

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

1940's 1950's 1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's

Decennial interval

Oak-hickory type, thousand acres

AR Ozark MO SW Ozark

MO Eastern Ozark MO NW Ozark

OK AR Ouachita

Figure 35—Most declines in oak-hickory forest acreage

occurred in the Arkansas Ozarks and Oklahoma.

Figure 36—Pine sawtimber (large tree) volume has increased in all

regions over time, but the greatest percentage increase was in the

Missouri Ozarks.

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

1940's 1950's 1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's

Decennial interval

Sawtimber area, thousand acres

OK AR Ouachita

AR Ozark MO Eastern Ozark

MO SW Ozark MO NW Ozark

Hardwood forest types occupy 85 percent of the

timberland and account for 85 percent of the live trees

in the Assessment area. Pine types occupy the remaining 15 percent of timberland area. About 65 percent of

the pine types are in shortleaf pine stands of natural

origin and about 35 percent are in plantations of either

shortleaf or loblolly pine.

Five species—shortleaf pine, white oak, black oak,

post oak, and northern red oak—account for 66 percent

of the growing stock and 75 percent of the sawtimber in

the Assessment area. The proportion of pines that are of

growing-stock quality is higher than that of the hardwoods; fully one third of the sawtimber volume on the

timberlands of the Assessment area is shortleaf pine.

Half of the pine sawtimber volume is on national

forests.

About 79 percent of the timberland is privately

owned; of that, nonindustrial private forest owners hold

86 percent. Of the 22 percent of the timberland that is

publicly owned, 76 percent (about 4 million ac) is in

the National Forest System.

41
Silvicultural Practices and Trends

Between the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, timber

harvesting in the Highlands declined slightly. More

recent data suggest that harvests have since increased.

Still, the ratio of tree growth to removal is higher for

this region than for other areas of the South.

Nonindustrial private owners dominate the timberland ownership pattern in the northern half of the

Highlands, and they have significant portions of the

land and timber harvests in the southern half. These

timberland owners could well play an increasingly

important role in local as well as regional and national

timber markets.

Upland hardwood forests comprised of relatively

shade-intolerant species generally are best suited to

even-aged management. Except for one case in

Missouri, the few successful examples of uneven-aged

management in upland oak forests required aggressive

chemical control of competing hardwoods.

Shortleaf pine forests can be managed using a

variety of even-aged or uneven-aged methods, but

successful regeneration under single-tree selection

typically requires chemical and/or mechanical control

of competing vegetation. Natural regeneration also

depends upon the co-occurrence of good seed crops,

suitable seed beds, and sufficient light.

The volume of timber offered for sale on the three

national forests in the Highlands declined from about

300 million board feet in 1986 to 225 million in 1997.

The low point over the 10-year period—primarily the

result of a drop in sales on the Ouachita National Forest

in 1991—was 192 million board feet. These three

national forests now provide about 10 percent of total

national forest “green” timber harvests in the United

States.

In 1988, clearcutting accounted for nearly 94 percent

(about 27,700 ac) of all acres subject to reproduction

cutting on these forests; in 1996, it accounted for less

than 3 percent (about 700 ac). This decline in

clearcutting represents the single-most significant

silvicultural trend on national forests in the Assessment

area.

From 1991 through 1996, reproduction cutting on the

national forests using the seed-tree method averaged

2,382 ac per year (8.6 percent of the 1988 clearcutting

level). During the same period, the area harvested using

the shelterwood method averaged 3,157 ac per year

(11.4 percent of the 1988 clearcutting level).

The largest increase in the use of a silvicultural

method on the national forests was for single-tree

selection (fig. 37). This increase was due more to its

attribute as the polar opposite of clearcutting than to

any innate advantages for either pine or oak-hickory

silviculture. Together, the Ozark and Ouachita National

Forests applied single-tree selection on an average of

8,916 ac annually from 1991 through 1995.

Herbicide applications for site preparation declined

on the national forests from 12,705 ac in 1988 to 2,132

ac in 1997, an 83 percent decrease over the 10-year

period. Conversely, acres burned for site preparation on

the Ouachita National Forest increased from 536 ac in

1989 to 3,137 ac in 1997. Each year, more acres have

been burned than the previous year, which suggests that

the limits to using prescribed fire for site preparation

have not yet been reached.

The use of prescribed burning as a tool for managing

intermediate stands on the national forests increased

nearly fourfold in the mid-1990’s and exceeded

100,000 ac in 1997 (fig. 38). The Ouachita National

Figure 37—The largest increase in the use of a silvicultural

method on national forests was in single-tree selection;

clearcutting has declined dramatically on the national

forests.

42
Figure 38—The use of prescribed (controlled) burning as a

tool for managing intermediate stands on the national

forests increased nearly fourfold in the mid-1990’s and

exceeded 100,000 acres burned in 1997.

Forest has increased the use of prescribed burning to

restore shortleaf pine-bluestem grass communities over

extensive areas of the western Ouachitas (fire is the

primary ecological tool used in this effort), to sustain

wildlife habitat diversity, and to encourage natural

regeneration.

Plant and Animal Populations

Species of Special Concern

The long-term viability of at least 333 species of

terrestrial plants and animals native to the Highlands

is uncertain. Nearly three-fourths of these “viability

concern” species live in specialized habitats such as

seeps, prairies, glades, and rock outcrops, which can

be degraded easily (table 3). Thirty-five (about 10

percent) of these species are imperiled (having 20 or

fewer known populations) or critically imperiled (5 or

fewer populations).

More than half (53 percent) of the species with

viability concerns in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands are

known to occur there only on national forest lands.

About one-third of these species are known to occur on

private lands only.

Sixteen terrestrial species in the Ozark-Ouachita

Highlands are federally listed as threatened or endangered (but two of these—the bald eagle and peregrine

falcon—apparently were close to being removed from

the list as this report was finalized). The Arkansas

Valley section has 10 threatened and endangered

species, the Ozark Highlands section has 8, and the

Ouachita Mountains and Boston Mountains sections

each have 5.

Due to many people’s interest in birds, much more

information is available about bird species of special

concern than any other group. The Terrestrial Team’s

Table 3—Species with viability concerns in selected habitat associations of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands

Habitat association Animals Plants Total

Percent Percent Percent

Riparian wetlands, seeps, fens 7 12 70 26 77 23

Mesic forest 9 15 50 18 59 18

Glades, talus slopes, cliffs, rock outcrops 3 5 53 19 56 17

Prairie 15 25 37 14 52 16

Fire-maintained pine/oak woodland 7 12 44 16 51 15

Bottomland hardwood forest 9 15 13 5 22 7

Nonspecific (habitat generalists) 7 12 1 0 8 2

Unknown 3 5 5 2 8 2

43
analysis of data from the North American Breeding

Bird Survey reveals that the populations of more than

one-fourth (21 of 90) of the species monitored in the

Highlands declined significantly from 1966 to 1996.

Six species showed a significant increase during the

same period.

The team also determined that nearly one-fourth of

the 157 species of birds that probably breed within the

Highlands are faced with sufficiently serious problems

that they are rated “management concern” species by

Partners in Flight. Some of these birds are subjects of

international conservation efforts. Neotropical migratory birds (those that winter in the neotropics of Latin

and South America and breed in North America) are

the focus of one of the largest international conservation efforts ever undertaken for nongame species that

are not yet endangered.

In the majority of cases, scientists have insufficient

information to conclude which changes—e.g., threats on

wintering grounds versus ones in breeding territory—

are most influencing populations of the bird species in

question. Still, it is notable that forest or shrub/sapling

(very young forest) conditions are the primary breeding

habitats for 75 percent of these “management concern”

species (50 percent require forest and 25 percent

require shrub/sapling habitats) (fig. 39).

As an extensively forested region, the OzarkOuachita Highlands area is probably of great value to

the long-term viability of certain songbirds in North

America. Yet only about one-fifth of the species that

appear to be declining in the region require forest

conditions as their primary breeding habitat. Thirtyeight percent of the songbirds require shrub/sapling

habitats, 19 percent need savanna/glade conditions, and

10 percent require grassland habitats. Birds requiring

shrub/sapling conditions exhibit some of the steepest

population declines in the region.

These trends in bird populations reinforce the need

to maintain a mix of younger forests and more open

kinds of habitats along with older forests. No single

habitat condition is good for all species. Thus, for

example, it would be a mistake to assume that the best

course for bird conservation in the Highlands is to

maximize mature forests or forest cover with a continuous canopy.

Similarly, no single silvicultural practice is inherently good or bad for birds. What any given practice

Figure 39—Distribution of (A) primary breeding

habitat of all birds, (B) primary habitats of species

of management concern (Partners in Flight

Landbird Database), and (C) primary habitats of

species with significant population declines based

on the North American Breeding Bird Survey for

the Ozark-Ouachita Plateau region. (Due to

rounding, percentages may not sum to 100.)

A

Agriculture

7%

Aquatic

16%

Forest

37%

Grassland

8%

Developed

3%

Savanna/

glade

8%

Shrub/

sapling

21%

B Aquatic

5%

Shrub/

sapling

29%

Savanna/

glade

7%

Grassland

5%

Forest

54%

C

Grassland

10%

Shrub/

sapling

37% Forest

19%

Developed

5%

Agriculture

10%

Savanna/

glade

19%

44
will do (whether the prescription is even-aged or

uneven-aged management or wilderness, i.e., “handsoff” management) is to create habitat for some species

that is unsuitable for others. A variety of forest management practices is needed to help meet the habitat

needs of the songbirds native to the Highlands. The mix

of practices used will heavily influence the abundance

of individual species.

Cave Animals

Caves in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands are habitats

for a rich and diverse fauna. The diversity of aboveground habitats, such as forests and springs, contributes

to an abundance of cave-dwelling species in the

Highlands. These subterranean and surrounding forest

habitats are sanctuaries for a number of State and

federally listed threatened and endangered species.

There are 409 known caves on the Mark Twain

National Forest, of which 306 have been nominated as

significant under the Federal Cave Resource Protection

Act and 140 have been mapped. These caves are habitat

for five federally listed species, including the endangered gray and Indiana bats. Seven of these caves have

been gated to control human disturbance.

The endangered gray and Indiana bats and the Ozark

big-eared bat use at least 10 caves in the Ozark

National Forest. Two of only five known remaining

hibernating colonies of Indiana bats in Arkansas occur

on the Sylamore Ranger District of this national forest.

Blanchard Springs Caverns, also on the Sylamore

Ranger District, demonstrates the vulnerability of bat

colonies to disturbance. After the Forest Service began

constructing trails in the cave in 1963 and opened it to

the public for guided tours in 1973, a hibernating

colony of 5,000 to 7,000 gray bats dwindled to about

150 in the winter of 1978 to 1979 and dropped to only

33 bats during the winter of 1985 to 1986. Since then,

the Forest Service has limited disturbance at the roost

site and the bat population has increased dramatically

to more than 50,000 in 1995. During the summer of

1996, there were about 34,000 bats present.

Nine species of bats and six species of salamanders

use caves and abandoned mines in the Ouachita

National Forest. One hibernating cluster of seven

Indiana bats occurs in Bear Den Caves during the

winter.

Game Animals

Available data for game species in the Highlands

show that the numbers of most have increased or

remained stable since 1970. White-tailed deer, black

bear (fig. 40), eastern wild turkey, and raccoon have

higher population densities in the Highlands today than

they did in 1970. Bobwhite quail populations are down

slightly, eastern cottontail rabbit numbers have remained about the same, and fox and gray squirrel

populations have fluctuated, but 1996 numbers for

squirrels in Missouri are not much changed from those

in 1970.

Extirpated or Extinct Species

Twenty-five species of terrestrial plants and animals

that once lived in the Highlands no longer exist there in

wild populations. Most of these species were eliminated from the Highlands through habitat loss or

overhunting. Mammal and bird species that congregated in large numbers, such as bison and Carolina

parakeets, or which people considered destructive

predators, such as golden eagles, wolves, and mountain

lions, are gone from the landscape (except in captivity

in some cases, e.g., bison and mountain lion). Passenger pigeons, once abundant throughout Eastern North

America (including the Highlands), were driven to

extinction by overhunting.

Figure 40— Available data for game species in the Highlands,

including the black bear, show that most populations have increased

or remained stable since 1970.

45
Biological Threats to Forest Resources

The European gypsy moth, a defoliator of hardwood

trees, has been found in the Assessment area. The

outbreaks have been minor, and eradication has been

successful. Scientists expect a general infestation might

reach the Assessment area between 2025 and 2050.

Red imported fire ants are invading the Assessment

area from the south and are expected to continue a

gradual northward expansion. Eradication is probably

impossible. An integrated pest management program is

the best approach to this problem.

The southern pine beetle is indigenous to the

southern part of the Assessment area. Serious

outbreaks will continue to occur in the Ouachita

Mountains section.

Knapweeds, invasive nonnative plants, have been

present for several decades on some roadsides in

southern Missouri. These plants pose both health

concerns for humans and livestock. Purple loosestrife, a

serious pest in wetlands, is present in the OzarkOuachita Highlands and may spread. Other invasive,

nonnative plants that threaten resources in the Highlands include multiflora rose, kudzu, Japanese honeysuckle, sericea lespedeza, crown vetch, musk thistle,

tall fescue, Johnson grass, white and yellow sweet

clovers, garlic mustard, teasel, and two species of

privet.

46
Air Quality Conditions and Trends

The major types of air-pollution emissions with the

potential to impact the natural resources of the OzarkOuachita Highlands are particulate matter, nitrogen

oxides, volatile organic compounds, and sulfur dioxide.

Emissions of particulate matter are greatest along the

northern and western boundaries of the Assessment

area, where they are usually generated by fugitive dust

sources (e.g., sources of uncontrolled or unducted dust

emissions such as dirt roads or agricultural fields).

Emissions in the future are expected to remain constant

unless wildland fires or prescribed fires increase

beyond current levels.

Motor vehicles and electrical utilities are the usual

sources of nitrogen oxides nationally. In the Assessment area, however, fuel combustion at industrial

sources is the major source of these emissions. Current

measures by the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) are likely to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides

from electrical utilities and possibly from other sources.

Nationally and in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands,

motor vehicles are the main source of volatile organic

compounds caused by human activities. Available data

were insufficient to enable the Atmospheric Team to

project how volatile organic compounds will change in

the future.

Fuel combustion from electrical utilities is the

greatest source of sulfur dioxide in the Highlands area.

The Atmospheric Team expects the amount of emissions to decrease in the future due to the enactment of

and full compliance with the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990.

Particulate Matter

Particulate matter (PM10) concentrations show a

definite seasonal trend over the Assessment area, with

the highest concentrations (averaging 33.05 micrograms per cubic meter [μg/m3

]) between 1991 and 1995

occurring during the summer months. The average

winter concentration was 19.84 μg/m3

.

There is also spatial distribution of PM10 across the

Assessment area, with the lowest annual average PM10

concentrations occurring in western Arkansas (fig. 41).

Rural areas have lower PM10 concentrations than urban

areas. The Assessment area as a whole is well within

the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for PM10.

Implementation of proposed new PM2.5 regulations

may create a challenge to the prescribed burning

programs of farmers and land management agencies

such as the Forest Service. Approximately 70 percent

of the particulate matter produced by wildland fuels is

within the PM2.5 size class (particulates with a diameter

of 2.5 microns or smaller). Proposed new regulations

call for the 24-hour standard to be less than 65 μg/m3

and the annual average to be less than 15 μg/m3. The

1992 to 1995 annual average concentration of such fine

mass particles was estimated at between 9 and 11 μg/

m3

 over the more rural parts of the Assessment area.

These concentrations represent 60 to 73 percent of the

proposed new standard annual average of 15 μg/m3

 and

18 to 22 percent of the current annual standard of 50

μg/m3

. Thus, even with the implementation of the

proposed PM2.5 standards, the more rural sections of the

Assessment area should still be in compliance if current

PM2.5 concentration averages continue to characterize

the region.

According to Forest Service records, most prescribed

burning in the Assessment area occurs during March.

Average PM10 concentrations in the Assessment area

during March in 1991 and 1995 ranged from minimums

of 10 to 20 μg/m3

 to maximums of 30 to 40 μg/m3, with

a mean of 22.7 μg/m3

. If prescribed fire becomes a

more prominent land management tool in the Assessment area during the normal prescribed fire season,

total PM10 and PM2.5 emissions and concentrations in

the atmosphere will likely increase during the springtime.

47
Figure 41—Emissions of particulate matter are greatest along the northern and western boundaries of the Assessment area,

where they are usually generated by fugitive (unducted) dust sources. Wildland or prescribed fires also contribute emissions

of particulate matter.

Visibility

A definite seasonal pattern exists for visibility. The

best visibility occurs during the fall, and the worst

visibility occurs during the summer. The Upper Buffalo

Wilderness on the Ozark-St. Francis National Forests

has the best visibility of the three Class I wilderness

areas on national forests within the Assessment area

(fig. 42).

Visibility impairment in the form of regional haze

exists within the Assessment area. Sulfates are the

primary aerosols responsible for such impairment.

Compliance with the Clean Air Act amendments of

1990 should reduce sulfates and improve visibility.

New PM2.5 and ozone regulations, while targeted to

improve human health, should have the added benefit

of improving visibility through anticipated reductions

in atmospheric sulfate concentrations.

Ground-Level Ozone

Ozone exposures result from the chemical reaction

of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds. The

volatile organic compounds are so abundant that it

appears nitrogen oxides may be the limiting factor in

ozone formation.

48
Figure 42—The Upper Buffalo Wilderness on the Ozark-St. Francis National Forests has the best visibility of the three Class I wilderness area

national forests.

49
Using available ozone monitoring data, it appears

that ground-level ozone had a minimal impact on forest

tree growth in the Assessment area between 1990 and

1995. There are few ozone monitors within the Highlands, however, and there could be localized areas

where growth losses occurred in trees that are highly

sensitive to ozone. Implementation of and compliance

with the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 should

reduce nitrogen oxide emissions nationally by 2 million

tons and may reduce ozone exposures further within the

Assessment area.

Recently, the EPA notified State and local air

pollution control agencies in 22 Eastern States that

further reductions in nitrogen oxides are needed for

some urban areas to satisfy the national standards for

ground-level ozone. Included were Illinois, Kentucky,

Missouri, and Tennessee, where the needed reduction

of nitrogen oxides is between 35 and 43 percent.

Implementation of nitrogen oxide reductions of this

magnitude likely will reduce the amount of groundlevel ozone in the Assessment area.

Acid Deposition

Acid deposition can pose a threat to forest ecosystems—especially on poorly buffered, higher elevation

watersheds. Acid deposition patterns in the Assessment

area are affected by emissions of sulfur dioxide and

nitrogen oxides and by the patterns of precipitation

over the region. Future reductions in the emissions of

sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides should lead to

reduced atmospheric sulfate and nitrate concentrations,

thereby reducing the potential for acid deposition

episodes. However, future changes in precipitation

patterns as a result of changes in regional climate may

also influence the amount of acid deposition over the

Assessment area.

Atmospheric wet acid loadings in the Assessment

area are less than the loadings observed in the Southern

Appalachian region and other parts of the Eastern

United States. Nitrate and sulfate loadings are expected

to decrease in the future in response to regulatory

programs.

Most surface waters within the Assessment area do

not appear to be adversely impacted by the previous

and present rate of acid deposition (fig. 43). The low

acid neutralizing capacity headwater areas of the

Ouachita Mountains make them most at risk while the

limestone areas of the Ozark Plateau are least at risk.

Figure 43—Most surface waters within the Assessment area do not appear to be

adversely impacted by the previous and present rate of acid deposition.

50
Glossary of Terms

abiotic: nonliving.

advance reproduction: the young trees in the understory of

a forest stand that will sprout and grow when the overstory trees are cut and removed.

amphipod: crustacean with a thin body and one set of legs

for jumping or walking and another set for swimming.

animal unit month (AUM): the unit of measurement for the

amount of forage that a cow-calf pair will consume in 1

month.

anthracnose: a disease causing large, irregular dead areas on

leaf tissues and often cankers on twigs or stems.

Audubon Society Watchlist: a national list of bird species

not yet threatened or endangered but considered of

concern because of downward trends in their populations.

autoaccumulating ecosystem: one in which “pools” of

suppressed oak seedlings representing at least four cohorts

(seedlings of the same age) persist for two decades or

more in the understory of a forest. These seedlings

germinate and develop without the benefit of natural or

human-caused disturbance, but many die before growing

into saplings or full-sized trees; in other words, seedling

recruitment and depletion typically occur continuously.

Once a canopy disturbance (e.g., wind-throw or timber

harvest) occurs, the suppressed stems may or may not

develop into overstory trees. (See Johnson 1993 for

further discussion.)

basal area: the area in square feet of the cross section at

breast height of a single tree, a group of trees, or all of the

trees in a stand, usually expressed in square feet per acre.

biotic: living or biological.

blow down: tree that has been blown down and lies on the

ground.

bract: a modified or reduced leaf-like structure.

cambium: dividing tissue that produces secondary tissues

(inner bark and wood).

canker: a visible dead area, usually of limited extent, in the

cortex or bark of a plant.

chlorosis: yellowing of plant foliage.

clearcutting: the removal of all the trees on a site for the

purpose of utilization and to provide for regeneration of

an even-aged stand of trees, usually of a species requiring

full sunlight for proper development and growth.

community: an assemblage of organisms interacting in an

environment where they form a distinct living system with

its own composition, structure, environmental relations,

development, and functions.

conservation: the controlled use and systematic protection of

natural resources, such as forests and waterways.

d.b.h.: diameter at breast height, usually assumed to be 4.5

feet.

dieback: dying back of twigs and branches from the terminal

portions downward.

disturbance factor: any physical or biological factor

responsible for change in an ecosystem.

epicormic: a shoot arising spontaneously from a dormant

bud on the branch or stem of a woody plant.

extant: currently in existence.

extirpation: the loss of a species from a specific area.

fen: a nonalluvial wetland fed by water seepage and generally characterized by the absence of an overstory canopy.

feral: having escaped from domestication and become wild.

fire-dependent: the characteristic of requiring periodic fire

as part of the ecosystem.

fire-tolerant: the characteristic of tolerating periodic fire in

the ecosystem, but not requiring fire as part of the

ecosystem.

floodplain: low, relatively flat land adjoining inland and/or

coastal waters, which is subject to periodic flooding.

forb: an herbaceous plant other than grass.

forest: an assemblage of woody vegetation typically attaining positions in a plant community at the tallest level;

attains height and diameter growth of canopy-layer trees

within established averages for the species.

forest fragmentation: the breaking up of large, contiguous

forested tracts into smaller or less contiguous tracts.

gap-phase dynamics: the process by which overstory trees

in a mature forest are gradually replaced by seedlings and

saplings in the understory.

51
glade: an opening in the forest canopy, characterized by

herbaceous vegetation.

indicator species: a species of plant or animal whose

presence or absence indicates the general health of the

community upon which the species is most dependent.

Generally, providing for the needs of the indicator species

will also meet the needs of most other organisms in the

community.

mast: the fruit of flowering trees used by wildlife for food.

mesic: describing sites with a moderate amount of moisture,

which support plants that require a moderate amount of

moisture.

necrosis: death of host tissue.

neotropical migratory birds: birds which migrate to the

neotropics (South and Central America and the Caribbean) during the winter, but breed and nest in North

America.

old-growth stand: a stand of trees characterized by a

diversity of tree species in several size classes, advanced

age, downed logs and snags, large canopy trees, tree fall

gaps, undisturbed soils, and other plants and animals that

prefer old growth.

pathogen: a parasite that causes disease.

population density: the number of individuals of a species

per unit area.

preservation: to protect from damage.

rare: a classification reflecting a species’ scarcity in a given

area. Rare plants and animals (and eventually communities) are assigned rarity ranks according to The Nature

Conservancy’s global ranking system.

regeneration cutting: a cutting that provides conditions

necessary for the establishment of a new stand of forest

trees.

restoration: the process of reintroducing the natural actions

(e.g., clearing by wind damage) required by a community

in order to restore critical components of the community.

riparian: describing lands associated with bodies of water.

rotation age: the age at which an even-aged stand of trees is

scheduled for harvest or regeneration cutting (the actual

age depends on management objectives, the tree species

involved, and local site conditions).

retention: the process by which areas of special interest are

provided a measure of protection while allowing restoration efforts or other natural actions to occur.

savannah: an assemblage of woody vegetation having a

scattered distribution with an understory dominated by

grasses and forbs maintained by recurring fire; height and

diameter growth of canopy-layer trees may be stunted by

environmental factors (i.e., weather, shallow soils) or

within established averages for the species.

seed tree: an even-aged silvicultural harvest and regeneration

system that removes most of the mature stems. A number

of trees (generally, 4 to 10 per acre, singly or in groups)

are retained to provide seeds to establish the new stand.

seep: a place where groundwater oozes slowly to the surface,

often forming a pool; a small spring.

shelterwood cutting: a regeneration cutting method that

removes the overstory stand in two or more operations,

spaced in time.

silvicultural: of or relating to the culture of trees or forests.

silviculture: the element of forestry that deals with the

establishment, development, reproduction, and care of

forest trees.

single-tree selection: an uneven-aged silvicultural harvest

system that removes selected trees to create canopy gaps.

Trees selected for removal may be healthy or diseased,

depending on the goals of the landowner.

shelterwood: an even-aged silvicultural harvest and regeneration system that gradually removes most or all trees in

a series of partial cuttings, which resemble heavy thinning. Regeneration establishes under the protection of

partial canopy cover.

talus: a sloping mass of rocky fragments, usually without

vegetation.

tolerance: the ability of a species to develop and attain

maturity under the influence of various degrees of

shading. Trees said to be shade-tolerant do well in shady

environments. Shade-intolerant species require a minimum solar exposure to robustly mature.

vascular: relating to tissues within a tree that carry water,

carbohydrates, and minerals up and down the tree.

wildfire: any fire that is not burning for a prescribed management purpose or being managed as a prescribed fire.

woodland: an assemblage of woody vegetation having a

scattered distribution more dense than savanna and less

than forest; height and diameter growth of canopy-layer

trees may be stunted or within established averages for the

species.

xeric: describing sites without significant moisture, very dry

sites.

52
Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

ac: acre(s)

BMP’s: best management practices

EPA: Environmental Protection Agency

ft: foot or feet

gal: gallon(s)

gal/d: gallon per day

GIS: Geographic Information System.

GLO: General Land Office.

in.: inch

lb: pound(s)

μg/m3: microgram(s) per cubic meter

NIPF: nonindustrial private forest

NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

tons/mi2: tons per square mile

53
List of Tables and Figures

Page

Table 1—Industrial output, employment, and employee compensation across selected industrial sectors

of the Assessment area, 1977 and 1993, and percent change in these measures from 1977 to 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Table 2—Fresh water uses in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands, 1985–1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Table 3—Species with viability concerns in selected habitat associations of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands . . . 43

Figure 1—The Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment area includes 107 counties and 6.5 million acres of

public lands managed by the Federal and State agencies listed in the legend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

Figure 2—Extensive, natural-appearing forests cover large portions of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands;

prairies, pastures, and human communities cover smaller areas.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Figure 3—Large reservoirs, many built and maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, cover about

673,000 acres in the Highlands and provide strong draws for retirees and recreation visitors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 4—The “Natural Amenities Index” for 43 percent of the counties in the Assessment area was within

the top 25 percent of counties in the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Figure 5—Metropolitan counties in the Assessment area tended to have the highest rates of

population growth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure 6—A string of 15 “retirement destination counties” extends in a north-south band from Benton and

Morgan Counties in the Missouri Ozarks to Garland County in the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas. . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 7— The Economic Research Service classifies 37 nonmetropolitan counties in the Assessment area

as having “persistent poverty” (high rates of poverty in 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990). Nearly half of the 49

nonmetropolitan “national forest counties” have persistent poverty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Figure 8—The proportion of the total output, employment, and/or compensation that the minerals

industry contributed in 21 counties was at least twice the average for the Assessment area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Figure 9—In 35 counties, an average of 15.7 percent of total output, 8 percent of employment, and

11 percent of total employee compensation was from the forest products industry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 10—In 23 counties, the travel industry’s share of the economy averages 25.5 percent of

industrial output, 28.9 percent of employment, and 24.7 percent of employee compensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 11—Public lands harbor many historic sites, including cemeteries, fire towers, home sites, and

Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) structures such as cabins and lodges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Figure 12—Although the economic importance of minerals, recreation, and timber (the three principal national

forest programs that generate revenue) varies significantly among the three Highlands forests, timber has the

greatest overall influence on employment, employee compensation, and total income when the forests are

considered together. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Figure 13—National forests provide about 63 percent of the trail miles in the Assessment area. . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Figure 14—Richland Creek in the Arkansas Ozarks is one of 11 National Wild and Scenic Rivers in the

Highlands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Figure 15—About 57 million people live within a 1-day drive of the Assessment area; residents of

this “draw area” exceed the national average in percent of population participating in every major category

of outdoor recreation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

54
Page

Figure 16—Horseback riding is one of many recreation activities expected to increase in the Highlands

between 2000 and 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Figure 17—Although national forests account for 41 percent of the total softwood-sawtimber volume in the

Assessment area, they account for only 20 percent of softwood-sawtimber removals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Figure 18—Projections to 2020 show increasing softwood harvests on private lands in the Highlands—

more than double the rate experienced in 1990. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Figure 19—Despite projected increased harvesting of hardwood trees in parts of the Highlands, hardwood

inventory in 2020 is projected to be greater than current levels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Figure 20—Between 75 and 80 percent of the Nation’s lead production comes from the Mark Twain National

Forest. (Photo courtesy of Doe Run Mining Company, Viburnum, MO.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Figure 21—Most citizens apparently approve of managing public forests for multiple uses as long as

forest health and environmental quality are not compromised. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Figure 22—In stream sample sites within the Highlands, concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus, and

suspended solids did not change substantially over 20-year study periods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Figure 23—The Assessment area is drained by 10 major river basins, each of which is subdivided into

watersheds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Figure 24—Lakes and ponds cover less than 1 million acres within the Assessment area, but they have

tremendous importance to the economies, lifestyles, and environments of the Highlands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Figure 25—Unpaved roads within 100 feet of streams are a major source of sediment entering Highlands’

streams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Figure 26—Native mussel species such as this Ouachita kidneyshell (collected from the James River, Webster

County, MO) are threatened by pollution, habitat alteration, and zebra mussels. (Photo courtesy of

M.C. Barryhart, Southwest Missouri State University.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Figure 27—The projected future use of water would remain a small fraction of the supply in most years. . . . . . 31

Figure 28—The leopard darter is one of many species that occur only in the Highlands; as a

conservative estimate, at least 14 percent of the fish fauna is endemic to the area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Figure 29—High levels of fish species richness (89 to 114 species) occur in two geographic centers;

the northeastern center includes portions of the Upper St. Francis River and Upper Black River and

the western center includes drainages of the Neosho-Illinois River and portions of the Arkansas River. . . . . . . 33

Figure 30—Watersheds having relatively high mussel species richness and density occur primarily in tier-like

clusters in the northeastern, central, and southern portions of the Assessment area.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Figure 31—Sixty percent of the watersheds in the Highlands have at least one federally listed threatened or

endangered species. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Figure 32—The number of native fish species in a watershed is associated significantly and positively

with the number of different stream types in that watershed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Figure 33—Oak-hickory forest is the most extensive vegetation type in the Assessment area, covering

15 million acres or 36 percent of the area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Figure 34—The total area in pine forest cover declined in Arkansas and Oklahoma from more than 3.8 million

acres in the 1950’s to 2.2 million acres in the 1960’s; since then, except for a few minor downturns during

the 1980’s, there has been steady growth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

55
Page

Figure 35—Most declines in oak-hickory forest acreage occurred in the Arkansas Ozarks and Oklahoma. . . . . . 41

Figure 36—Pine sawtimber (large tree) volume has increased in all regions over time, but the greatest

percentage increase was in the Missouri Ozarks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Figure 37—The largest increase in the use of a silvicultural method on national forests was in single-tree

selection; clearcutting has declined dramatically on the national forests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Figure 38—The use of prescribed (controlled) burning as a tool for managing intermediate stands on

the national forests increased nearly fourfold in the mid-1990’s and exceeded 100,000 acres burned in 1997. . 43

Figure 39—Distribution of (A) primary breeding habitat of all birds, (B) primary habitats of species of

management concern (Partners in Flight Landbird Database), and (C) primary habitats of species with

significant population declines based on the North American Breeding Bird Survey for the Ozark-Ouachita

Plateau region. (Due to rounding, percentages may not sum to 100.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Figure 40—Available data for game species in the Highlands, including the black bear, show that most

populations have increased or remained stable since 1970. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Figure 41—Emissions of particulate matter are greatest along the northern and western boundaries of the

Assessment area, where they are usually generated by fugitive (unducted) dust sources. Wildland or

prescribed fires also contribute emissions of particulate matter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Figure 42—The Upper Buffalo Wilderness on the Ozark-St. Francis National Forests has the best visibility of

the three Class I wilderness areas on the Highlands’ national forests.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Figure 43—Most surface waters within the Assessment area do not appear to be adversely impacted by

the previous and present rate of acid deposition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

56
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1999. Ozark-Ouachita

Highlands Assessment: summary report. Report 1 of 5. Gen. Tech. Rep.

SRS-31. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Southern Research Station. 56 p.

This publication summarizes four other reports prepared as part of the

Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment. The summary report addresses

social and economic conditions and trends, aquatic conditions, air quality,

and terrestrial vegetation and wildlife of the Highlands in Arkansas,

Oklahoma, and Missouri.

Keywords: Air quality, aquatic conditions, national forests, social-economic

conditions, terrestrial vegetation and wildlife.

The Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, provides leadership in

the management, protection, and use of the Nation’s forests and rangelands.

The Agency takes an ecological approach to the implementation of multipleuse management, providing sustained yields of renewable resources such as

water, forage, wildlife, wood, and recreation. The Forest Service has embraced ecosystem management as its operating philosophy and is committed to the preservation of

wilderness, biodiversity, and landscape beauty as well as the protection of the basic

resources of soil, water, and air quality.

The Forest Service is responsible for the 191.8-million-acre National Forest System, with

its 155 national forests and 20 grasslands in 44 States, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

In addition, the Agency works with State land management organizations to help private

landowners apply good natural resource management practices on their lands. The

International Program of the Forest Service enables the Agency to share its technical

expertise and managerial skills with other nations. The Research and Development

Program of the Forest Service conducts extensive research to enhance and protect

productivity on all of America’s forests and rangelands, with special attention to long-term

natural resource issues of national and international scope.

The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs

and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability,

political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or familial status. (Not all prohibited bases

apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact

USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room

326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250, or

call 202-720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal employment opportunity provider

and employer.
This report summarizes the findings of four technical reports—Air Quality, Aquatic

Conditions, Social and Economic Conditions, and Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife—

that document the results of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment.

Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife

Air Quality

Highlands Assessment

Ozark-Ouachita

General Technical

Report SRS-32

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

REPORT

2

OF 5

Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife

REPORT

5

OF 5

Highlands Assessment

Ozark-Ouachita

General Technical

Report SRS-35

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

REPORT

4

OF 5

Ozark-Ouachita

Highlands Assessment

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

General Technical

Report SRS-34 Social and Economic Conditions

Aquatic Conditions

REPORT

3

OF 5

Highlands Assessment

Ozark-Ouachita

General Technical

Report SRS-33

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service