Fernow Experimental Forest: 

Research History and Opportunities

U.S. Department 

of Agriculture

Forest Service

EFR-2

June 2012
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, 

national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, 

genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance 

program. (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, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, 

D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Mary Beth Adams1, Pamela J. Edwards2, 

W. Mark Ford3, Thomas M. Schuler4, 

Melissa Thomas-Van Gundy5, Frederica Wood6

U.S. Department 

of Agriculture

Forest Service

Fernow Experimental Forest: 

Research History and Opportunities

1

Research Soil Scientist, USDA Forest Service, Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV 26287; 2

Research Hydrologist, USDA Forest Service, 

Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV 26287; 3

Unit Leader, U.S. 

Geological Survey, Virginia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, 

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation, Virginia Polytechnic 

Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061; 4

Supervisory Research 

Forester, USDA Forest Service, Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, 

WV 26287; 5

Research Forester, USDA Forest Service, Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV 26287; and 6

Data Analyst, USDA Forest 

Service, Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV 26287.

EFR-2

June 2012

Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 1

Introduction

The Fernow Experimental Forest (39.03 ̊ N, 79.67 ̊ W) is located in north-central West Virginia near the community 

of Parsons, in the Allegheny Mountain section of the mixed 

mesophytic forest (Braun 1950). Named after Bernhard Fernow, 

an early forestry research pioneer, the Fernow Experimental 

Forest (Fernow) was established in 1934 from land originally 

purchased as the first tract for the Monongahela National Forest 

(Monongahela). The Fernow was set aside to “make permanently 

available for forest research and the demonstration of its results 

a carefully selected area representing forest conditions that 

are important in Northeastern West Virginia.” The Fernow 

Establishment Order, dated March 28, 1934, and on file at the 

Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV, was signed 

by Arthur A. Wood, supervisor of the Monongahela, and E.H. 

Frothingham, director of the Appalachian Forest Experiment 

Station, who, in the order, described the forest at the time and 

detailed working relationships between the Monongahela and the 

Appalachian Forest Experiment Station. 

Early research on the Fernow focused on silviculture. Put on hold 

during World War II because of manpower limitations, research 

began again in earnest when the Northeastern Forest Experiment 

Station established a branch unit on the Fernow in 1948 

(Trimble 1977). Early post-war work on the Fernow involved 

collecting inventory data, establishing study compartments, and 

constructing weirs on small watersheds (Trimble 1977). In 1964, 

headquarters were established at Parsons and named the Timber 

and Watershed Laboratory. 

The Fernow is managed by the Northern Research Station’s 

Research Work Unit NRS01, Ecological and Economic 

Sustainability of the Appalachian Forest in an Era of 

Globalization. The mission is to develop timely, relevant knowledge 

and provide management guidelines to sustain and enhance the 

ecological and economic function and value of Appalachian forests 

in the context of changing environments and human values. The 

Fernow serves as an outdoor laboratory where scientists from the 

Timber and Watershed Laboratory and cooperating institutions 

focus their work on two goals.

1. To provide useful management information critical for 

sustaining and enhancing Appalachian forests, we must 

understand forest ecosystem processes and properties and their 

responses to natural disturbances and management actions at 

multiple scales.

2. To support the sustainability and health of forest 

communities and forest-based industries in a changing 

world, we must discover and disseminate knowledge of forest 

management, silviculture, forest product economies and markets, 

and efficient resource utilization. Further, we must deliver tools 

and recommendations to help our partners and customers better 

sustain forests for a variety of outcomes, products, and uses.
2 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

The early history of the area that is now the Fernow Experimental Forest is well described by Trimble (1977) 

and Kochenderfer (2006). Most of the Elklick Run watershed, 

which was originally a land grant to Frances and William Deakin 

from the State of Virginia in 1783, is now part of the Fernow. 

A Deakin heir sold the 1,673-hectare (ha) Big Spring tract to 

Jonathan Arnold for $4,000 in 1856 (Fansler 1962). In 1915, 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service 

purchased 2,888 ha of land, which included the Big Spring tract, 

for about $40,000. The Forest Service established the Fernow 

on March 28, 1934. The original boundary of the Fernow 

contained 1,473 ha, encompassing almost the entire watershed 

of Elklick Run (fig. 1), a fourth order tributary of the Black Fork 

of the Cheat River, and was expanded to 1,902 ha in 1974. In 

the 1930s, the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) constructed 

many of the main access roads on the Fernow. Like the early 

railroads, many of these roads were located close to Elklick Run. 

The first permanent settlement near the Fernow was established 

in 1776 (Fansler 1962), but most of the settlement and some 

land clearing occurred later, in the 19th century. As late as 1880, 

less than 1 percent of the area surrounding the Fernow had been 

cleared, at least partly because the mountainous terrain was not 

well suited for agriculture (Maxwell 1884). The arrival of the 

railroad in 1890 to Parsons (Fansler 1962) stimulated timber 

harvesting and the rapid development of forest-based industries 

in the area that is now the Fernow. The largest sawmill near the 

Fernow, the Otter Creek Boom and Lumber Company, began 

operating in 1897 (Fansler 1962). Two tanneries that used 

hemlock and chestnut oak bark and a large pulp mill were also 

located nearby. The Elklick Lumber Co. established a single-band 

sawmill near the mouth of Elklick Run in 1902; this mill sawed 

the timber that was harvested from what is now the Fernow. 

Current Land Use

The Fernow is dedicated to research and demonstration, 

according to the original Establishment Order and the 

Monongahela’s Revised Forest Plan (2007, Section 8.5). Research 

is the primary land use, although the Fernow also is popular 

for wildlife viewing and recreational activities. The Fernow 

shares its eastern boundary with the Otter Creek Wilderness, 

and two trailheads into the Wilderness are located on the 

Fernow. Camping and fires are not permitted on the Fernow, 

but hunting, which is an important local pastime, is allowed. 

Collecting firewood is controlled through a permit system, 

but it is not allowed in many places on the Fernow. Collecting 

medicinal herbs or other vegetation is not allowed, because it 

could interfere with ongoing vegetation research. Approximately 

1,000 visitors per year visit the Fernow to learn about the 

research being conducted and about forest management and 

ecosystems. Groups of visitors range from school children to 

college students, to professional foresters and visiting scientists 

from around the world. 

General Description of the Research Area, 

Including Historical Perspective

Climate 

The growing season on the Fernow extends from May through 

October, and the average length of the frost-free season is 149 

days (unpublished data, Fernow Experimental Forest; on file at 

the Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV). Leaves 

begin emerging in late April, are fully developed by early June 

to mid-June, and begin to fall in late August or early September. 

Snowfall commonly occurs from December through March 

but can also occur intermittently in October, November, April, 

and May. Snowpacks typically are short lived; most of the snow 

accumulations generally melt within a few weeks at all but the 

highest elevations (elevations range from 533 to 1,112 meters 

(m)) and coolest aspects (east and north aspects).

Annual precipitation has averaged 145.8 cm over the past 30 

years and is relatively evenly distributed between growing and 

dormant seasons. The months of highest average precipitation 

are May (14.5 cm), June (13.9 cm), and July (16.1 cm), and 

the months of lowest average precipitation are February (10.1 

cm), September (10.6 cm), and October (9.2 cm). Precipitation 

during the growing season commonly occurs as convectional 

thunderstorms, and periods of high precipitation intensity 

are often associated with these storms. Although precipitation 

originating from regional frontal systems also occurs during 

the growing season, regional frontal systems are most common 

during the dormant season. These regional frontal systems can 

result in storms that span 2 or more days. Throughout the year, 

precipitation events occur, on average, about every 3 days (Patric 

and Studenmund 1975). 

Mean annual air temperature on the Fernow over a 30-year 

period is 9.3  ̊C, with a minimum of 7.3  ̊C occurring in 2003 

and a maximum of 10.9  ̊C in 1991 (unpublished data, Fernow 

Experimental Forest, based on the years 1978–2007, available 

at the Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV). Mean 

monthly temperatures range from -2.8  ̊C in January to 20.4  ̊C 

in July. Potential evapotranspiration was estimated to be 56 cm 

per year (Patric and Goswami 1968).

Disturbances

Prior to settlement, forests were shaped by a variety of natural 

and human-caused disturbances, including wind, fire, and 

agricultural practices (Maxwell 1910), resulting in “a diverse 

mosaic of forest stands whose age, tree species, and wildlife 

varied widely...” (MacCleery 1992). The Fernow was logged 

from 1903 to1911 using the conventional technologies of the 

day. A railroad was constructed along Elklick Run, and Climax 

and Shay steam engines transported logs to the company 

sawmill near the mouth of Elklick Run. Horses and, in some 

cases, log slides were used to move logs from the woods to the 

railroad. Logging was heaviest near railroads, and trees that were 

inaccessible or of low value were not felled (Kochenderfer 2006). 
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 3

Figure 1. The Fernow Experimental Forest.
4 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

Woody regeneration was abundant, and a 1932 cover type map 

indicated that the entire tract was forested, except for about 50 

hectares of pasture and fields. 

After this initial logging of the Fernow, the next major 

disturbance was the widespread death of American chestnut 

(Castanea dentata [Marsh.] Borkh.) due to the chestnut blight 

(Cryphonectria parasitica). Weitzman (1949) estimated that 25 

percent of the timber volume on the Fernow was composed of 

American chestnut before the blight. Using old land surveys and 

early timber cruises from the area, Schuler and Gillespie (2000) 

estimated American chestnut importance values as 8.3 percent in 

the 1856 old-growth forest, 15.1 percent in 1915 after the first 

logging, 5.5 percent in 1922 after the onset of the blight, and 

completely absent from the overstory by 1948. Because of its rotresistant wood, American chestnut coarse woody debris is still a 

major constituent in some watersheds (Adams et al. 2003).

More recently, several insects and diseases (Kuhlman 1978, 

USDA Forest Service 2003), most of them nonnative, have 

severely affected Appalachian forests. Those of potential or 

existing threat to the Fernow include butternut canker (Sirococcus 

clavigignenti-juglandacearum), dogwood anthracnose (Discula 

destructiva), hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae), Asian gypsy 

moth (Lymantria dispar), beech bark disease (Nectria coccinea 

var. faginata), Dutch elm disease (Ophiostoma ulmi), emerald ash 

borer (Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire), and chestnut blight. 

Air pollution is another chronic disturbance to which the Fernow 

has been exposed. In the 1980s, deposition of sulfate and nitrate 

in this region was among the highest in the United States. Since 

the enactment of the Clean Air Act amendments, wet deposition 

of sulfate and nitrate has decreased significantly (fig. 2a); 

nonetheless, these levels still represent some of the highest in the 

Northeast. Tropospheric ozone concentrations remain a concern 

(fig. 2b) (Adams et al. 2006, Edwards et al. 2004). 

Natural gas exploration and development are recent disturbances 

that must be added to the list. When the land was purchased 

in 1915, the subsurface mineral rights were not conveyed along 

with the surface rights, resulting in privately held mineral 

rights underneath the original Tract No. 1 (the Fernow and the 

northern quarter of the current Otter Creek Wilderness). In 

2008, a gas well was drilled in a research compartment on the 

southeastern side of the Fernow, and, upon discovery of natural 

gas, a buried pipeline connecting the gas well to a delivery 

pipeline was installed across the western part of the Fernow 

(Adams et al., 2011). Although the effects are generally localized, 

additional open space was created and will be maintained. In 

addition, other possible disturbances resulting from the gas well 

and pipeline must be considered and remain to be evaluated. 

Hydrology

Streams dominate surface water hydrology on the Fernow, 

although one small, spring-fed pond, which was constructed in 

the late 1980s, is located near the ridgetop on Fork Mountain. 

A reservoir that was used as the city of Parsons’ primary water 

source from 1936 to the mid-1990s also is present on Elklick 

Run (fig. 1). 

The watersheds on the Fernow tend to be bowl shaped. Streams 

in the Fernow generally begin as ephemeral reaches in the 

upper headwaters of watersheds and become intermittent and 

then perennial channels farther downstream. Some of the 

watersheds, however, have intermittently flowing springs that 

initiate tributaries, so the upper reaches of those channels may 

be intermittent. Most streams are ephemeral and intermittent 

channels. 

Different segments of these ephemeral channels vary in their 

hydrologic responsiveness. Some segments may have surface flow 

during most storms and snowmelt events, while others, especially 

those farther upstream, may flow much less frequently, during 

only a few of the larger or more intense storms each year. Because 

of differences in flow frequencies, the ephemeral channels may 

have different physical characteristics along their lengths. Some 

segments are distinguishable only by scouring on the litter 

layer and perhaps the soil surface. Other ephemeral streams, 

or segments of those streams, are much more well defined and 

physically discernable as channels. The streambed consists of a 

combination of gravel and cobble. 

Figure 2. (a) Mean annual nitrate and sulfate wet deposition measured at 

the Timber and Watershed Lab National Acid Deposition Program site and 

(b) 3-year mean 4th highest 8-hour annual ozone concentration measured 

at the Timber and Watershed Lab Clean Air Status and Trends Network 

site.
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 5

Intermittent reaches flow in response to the presence of 

underlying local or seasonal water tables; thus, the upper extent 

of these channels varies over time. In general, they achieve their 

greatest longitudinal extent into the headwaters during spring 

when local water tables are fully recharged. As the growing season 

progresses, the upper reaches of the intermittent channels dry up 

and surface flow exists only farther downstream where the local 

water table continues to intersect the bottom of the streambed. 

Typically, the entire length of the intermittent channels dries 

up from about late August or early September through early 

November when evapotranspiration is high and precipitation 

is low. If precipitation events recharge local water tables 

during these periods, however, surface flow can return, at least 

temporarily. Streamflow in intermittent channels usually restarts 

more or less continuously in late fall or early winter; however, if 

winter conditions are sufficiently cold, snowmelt may be delayed, 

resulting in intermittent streams remaining dry during much 

of the winter. This situation is generally rare because rain-onsnow events or incoming warm fronts are common during most 

winters. Because of their propensity to have streamflow during 

the wettest portions of the year, intermittent channels are well 

defined. 

Perennial channels also are well defined; they typically are wider 

and deeper than even the largest intermittent channels. Streams 

with perennial sections that flow into Elklick Run are John B. 

Hollow, Wilson Hollow, Camp Hollow, Big Spring Run, Bear 

Run, Hickman Slide, and an unnamed stream (fig. 1). Stonelick 

Run and Sugarcamp Run also have perennial sections on the 

Fernow (fig. 1). Long reaches of Elklick Run are eroded down 

to bedrock, particularly downstream from where Forest Service 

Road (FR) 704 crosses Elklick Run (fig. 1). Some reaches of 

Elklick Run above the intersection with FR 704 also have 

bedrock streambeds, but these reaches are much shorter (typically 

less than 3-5 m in length) than the downstream reaches. Overall, 

in the reaches not dominated by bedrock, the streambed of 

Elklick Run has moderate to relatively high amounts of materials 

less than 8 mm in diameter. Levels of fine sediment, less than or 

equal to 4 mm, are highest in portions of Elklick Run upstream 

of the reservoir (unpublished data; Fernow Experimental Forest; 

available at the Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV; 

fig. 1). 

Baseflow dominates stream discharge in the Fernow as it does 

throughout the central Appalachian Mountains. Stormflow 

discharge is considered to be fairly flashy; that is, the storm 

hydrograph responds relatively rapidly to precipitation inputs 

and then returns quickly to baseflow conditions. Typically, 

stormflow discharge occurs less than 15 percent of the time. 

The hydrologic, or water, year on the Fernow extends from 

May 1 through April 30. This water year is used because soil 

saturation is consistent and dependable in spring. Based on data 

for water years 1978–2007 from watersheds 1 through 13 (15 

to 50 ha), streamflow averages are about 71 cm per year. This is 

approximately 48 percent of precipitation inputs. On watershed 

14 (130 ha), streamflow has averaged 73 cm per year since 

gauging began in 1993. This larger catchment returns about 50 

percent of precipitation as streamflow. In both instances, most 

discharge (averaging 73 percent) occurs in the dormant season.

Geology and Soils

Today’s Appalachian Mountains are remnants of a much higher 

mountain system that was uplifted during the Appalachian 

Orogeny, which began about 250 million years ago (Cardwell 

1975). Practically all exposed rocks in West Virginia are 

sedimentary, originating during the Paleozoic Era (Core 1966). 

Late in the Cenozoic Era, less than 100,000 years ago, glaciers 

crossed the North American continent but did not extend into 

West Virginia (Cardwell 1975); therefore there are no glacial 

features in the vicinity of the Fernow. 

The geologic formations underneath the Fernow and the soils 

derived from them are closely related to elevation. The Upper 

Devonian Hampshire formation (Canon Hill Member) occurs 

on Fork Mountain between about 762 m and 854 m in elevation 

(fig. 3). This formation is typically associated with the Dekalb 

soil series (loamy-skeletal, mixed mesic Typic Dystrudept). The 

Upper Devonian Hampshire formation (Rowlesberg Member) 

occurs near the mouth of Elklick Run and extends to about 823 

m above sea level on Fork Mountain (fig. 3). The most common 

soil on the Fernow, Calvin channery silt loam (loamy-skeletal, 

mixed, active, mesic Typic Dystrudept), derives from this 

formation. The Lower Mississippian Price formation (Pocono 

Member) occurs at about the same elevation on the southeastern 

side of Elklick Run (fig. 3). The Dekalb soil series is associated 

with this formation on benches in the headwaters of Elklick 

Run. In general, these geologic members are largely composed 

of sandstones and acid shales that weather into soil with low 

supplies of base cations. The most productive soils on the Fernow 

are derived from the Middle Mississippian Greenbrier Limestone 

formation that occurs above the Pocono formation at about 793 

m elevation. Belmont silt loam (fine loamy, mixed, active, mesic 

Typic Hapludalf) is the most common soil associated with this 

formation on the Fernow. Early settlers of the region recognized 

the natural fertility of limestone-derived soils, often selecting 

them for agricultural use. The CCC also established a quarry on 

a limestone outcrop in this formation near Big Springs Gap in 

the 1930s to obtain stone for the Fernow road system.

The Mauch Chunk group occurs above the Greenbrier 

Limestone at around 854 m (fig. 3). The predominant soil 

associated with this group is the Cateache series, another 

highly productive soil (fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic Ultic 

Hapludalf). Soils derived from the Greenbrier Limestone and 

Mauch Chunk groups occur in the upper reaches of Elklick 

Run and on the eastern side of the Fernow, while soils on the 
6 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

western half of the Fernow are predominantly derived from 

the acidic sandstone and shale of the Hampshire formation. 

Early researchers established the experimental watersheds on 

the western side of the Fernow, away from the porous karst 

topography, so they could conduct water balance studies. The 

Lower Pennsylvanian Pottsville group occurs above 915 m on 

McGowan Mountain. The Dekalb soil series formed in the 

material weathered from sandstone is usually associated with this 

geologic group. 

Vegetation

The Fernow lies within the area classified as Allegheny Mountain 

Section of the Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest (M221B) 

(McNab and Avers 1994) and can be described as a mixed 

mesophytic forest (Braun 1950). The Fernow is primarily a 

hardwood forest with a canopy of northern red oak (Quercus 

rubra L.), yellow-poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera L.), black 

cherry (Prunus serotina Ehrh.), sugar maple (Acer saccharum

Marsh.), American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.), black birch 

(Betula lenta L.), red maple (A. rubrum L.), basswood (Tilia 

americana L.), white ash (Fraxinus americana L.), chestnut 

oak (Q. prinus L.), sassafras (Sassafras albidum [Nutt.] Nees), 

blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica Marsh.), and bitternut hickory (Carya 

cordiformis [Wangenh.] K. Koch). American chestnut was a 

major component of the Fernow before the chestnut blight. 

Eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis [L.] Carr) and scattered red 

spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.) provide a natural conifer component, 

although hemlock is threatened by the hemlock woolly adelgid. 

One area on the Fernow (watershed 6, 22.3 ha) has been 

converted from a hardwood forest to a Norway spruce (Picea 

abies [L.] Karst.) stand to study the effects of forest-cover type on 

streamflow. 

Understories often include striped maple (Acer pensylvanicum L.), 

sugar maple, American beech, and great laurel (Rhododendron 

maximum L.). Herbaceous plants on higher quality sites 

often include stinging nettle (Laportea canadensis L.), black 

snakeroot (Cimicifuga racemosa (L.) Nutt.), blue cohosh 

(Caulophyllum thalictroides Michx.), violets (Viola spp.), white 

snakeroot (Eupatorium rugosom Houtt.), and Christmas fern 

(Polystichum acrostrichoides (Michx.) Schott). A profusion of 

spring wildflowers also occurs on these good sites. Common 

understory woody plants on the more xeric sites include 

blueberry (Vaccinium spp.), greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia L.), 

serviceberry (Amelanchier arborea (Michx f.) Fern.), red maple, 

Figure 3. Northern view of the geologic cross-section of the Fernow Experimental Forest (after Taylor 1999).
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 7

and mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia L.). A partial list of species 

found on the Fernow includes more than 500 species of vascular 

flora (Madarish et al. 2002). Running buffalo clover (Trifolium 

stoloniferum Muhl. Ex. A. Eaton), a federally endangered species, 

occurs on areas that are periodically disturbed, such as logging 

roads (Madarish and Schuler 2002), primarily on limestonederived soils on the eastern portion of the Fernow.

Fauna

At the advent of European settlement, the Allegheny Mountain 

region supported several faunal species that have since been 

extirpated because of habitat change, largely from landscape 

conversion to agriculture and unregulated hunting. Surviving 

longer here than anywhere else in the Eastern United States, the 

largest herbivores, bison (Bison bison) and elk (Cervus elaphus), 

were extirpated from the eastern mountain region in the early 

1830s (Fansler 1962) and in the 1870s (Shoemaker 1939), 

respectively. The gray wolf (Canis lupus) was gone by the late 

1800s, as were river otter (Lutra canadensis), fisher (Martes 

pennanti), and beaver (Castor canadensis). Eastern cougars (Puma 

concolor) likely were extirpated during the same time period; 

however, persistent, albeit unreliable, sightings of cougars 

persist to this day (Trani and Chapman 2007). White-tailed 

deer (Odocoileus virginianus), scarce in West Virginia by the 

1890s (DeGarmo and Gill 1958), were believed absent from 

the Fernow during the 1903-to-1911 logging era (Pennington 

1975). In addition, populations of black bear (Ursus americanus) 

and wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) were still present but 

greatly reduced. Their populations, which depended on hard 

mast, suffered because of the loss of the American chestnut. 

Fairly common on the Fernow, ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) 

populations have declined as the second- and third-growth 

forests have matured and the percentage of early successional 

forests have declined (Dobony 2000) in the region. The West 

Virginia Division of Natural Resources successfully reintroduced 

beaver in 1930, fisher in 1968, and river otter in 1985 near 

the Fernow; all three species currently are considered present 

(West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, unpublished 

data). Following establishment of harvest restrictions and 

improvements in habitat condition and availability over the past 

five decades, white-tailed deer are now considered overabundant 

(Campbell et al. 2006) and black bear and wild turkey are very 

common on the Fernow and the surrounding Monongahela. 

Over the same period, coyotes (Canis latrans) expanded their 

distribution to include much of the Eastern United States and 

are now present on the Fernow. Overall, the Fernow is home to 

a high diversity of mammals (48 species) and birds (92 species), 

including many neotropical migratory songbirds, but lesser 

numbers of reptiles (8) and amphibians (18) (Madarish et al. 

2002). Of the nongame species present on the Fernow, the most 

notable are the approximately 300 endangered Indiana bats 

(Myotis sodalis) that hibernate in Blowing Springs Cave during 

the winter, as well as those individuals that day-roost locally 

during the spring, summer, and fall months (Ford et al. 2002a). 

This Indiana bat hibernaculum is the largest on public land in 

West Virginia. White nose syndrome, associated with the fungus 

Geomyces destructans, was first observed on bats in this cave in the 

winter of 2010/2011. 
8 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

Through the years, researchers at the Fernow Experimental Forest have investigated a variety of disciplines related to 

natural resource management (silviculture, watershed hydrology, 

wildlife, air pollution) in addition to addressing basic research 

topics related to ecosystem processes, structure, and function. 

The research trajectories for major areas of research are described 

below. 

Silviculture

The earliest silvicultural research, which started in the 1930s, 

focused on thinning and crop tree release efforts to facilitate 

recovery of the vast landscape in the central Appalachians that 

was greatly altered by the turn-of-the-century logging and the 

associated fires. The site conditions and species mixtures of the 

Fernow were diverse and reflected most of the conditions that 

were found regionally. Although some of the early research was 

published, research operations were put on hold in 1941 with 

the United States’ entry into World War II (Trimble 1977). 

In 1948, after the war, a research plan in silviculture 

and watershed management was initiated as part of an 

interdisciplinary approach to solving forest management 

problems—a hallmark of research on the Fernow that continues 

to the present day. The silvicultural research was designed to 

be applicable to both private landowners and public agencies. 

Research compartments were established ranging in size up to 

60 ha that allowed manipulative studies on a scale that would be 

appropriate to evaluate costs and returns in a typical operational 

sense within the region (Weitzman 1949). The road system 

was designed to accommodate the research compartments, 

most of which are still in use today, although some new roads 

and research compartments have been added over time. Parts 

of the road system were experimental and were used to better 

understand the relationship between road design, location, and 

drainage and the subsequent water and sediment movement. 

Although the emphasis and study objectives have shifted 

somewhat through the decades, many of the original treatments 

assigned to the individual compartments have continued as part 

of long-term studies and have enabled analyses pertaining to 

forest productivity, species composition, and log quality after 

many decades of repeated treatments.

One of the first studies established on the Fernow after World 

War II was designed to demonstrate the effects of different 

levels of management. Other experimental forests in the Eastern 

United States shared this initiative. These demonstration 

areas often are referred to as Cutting Practice Levels (CPL) or 

Management Intensity Demonstrations (MID). A CPL study 

was established on the Fernow in 1948 and has continued 

without interruption for six decades. This study includes 

diameter-limit cutting, commercial clearcutting, two forms of 

single-tree selection, and an unmanaged reference area (Lamson 

and Smith 1991, Schuler and Gillespie 2000). In the autumn 

of 2008, the seventh decadal single-tree selection harvest, with 

detailed residual stand guidelines, was completed as part of the 

Fernow CPL study. This study represents one of the longest 

examples of uneven-aged management in the Eastern United 

States. Recently, efforts have been initiated to compare the 

results of numerous CPL studies from throughout the Northern 

Research Station and include the Bartlett (NH), Dukes (MI), 

Fernow (WV), Kane (PA), Penobscot (ME), and Vinton Furnace 

(OH) Experimental Forests. This network of CPL installations 

represents a unique opportunity to synthesize silvicultural 

findings across forest types and ecoregions. Today, some of the 

early ideas regarding sustainability of different cutting practices 

and commonalities in treatment response across forest types are 

being explored in depth (fig. 4). Because the combined CPLs 

provide a data record of unparalleled length and spatial extent, 

this regionwide analysis will provide new perspectives on forest 

management that will address not only silvicultural issues but 

also regional questions of forest productivity and sustainability 

that span an era of global climate change, air pollution, invasive 

species, and exotic pathogens (Kenefic and Schuler 2008). 

Early Fernow silviculture research also recognized the importance 

of small private landowners and farm woodlot forestry 

operations. Small farms that derived both revenue and raw 

materials from forest products were common in the central 

Appalachians in the 1950s and still remain an important part of 

the regional ownership pattern today. After World War II, these 

lands often were in poor condition due to the common practice 

of repeated burning, grazing, and unregulated harvesting. 

Early researchers noted that fire had partially eliminated 

valuable sugar maple and other shade-tolerant trees. Grazing 

also damaged much of the regeneration in farm woodlots, and 

Research Program

Figure 4. Basal area of trees greater or equal to 12.7-cm d.b.h. before 

and after commercial clearcutting in conjunction with the Cutting Practice 

Level or Management Intensity Demonstration (CPL/MID) studies from five 

Experimental Forests in the Northern Research Station. See text for details 

of these studies.
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 9

demand for mine timbers provided an ever-present market 

for forest products. Although significant decreases in fire and 

grazing were achieved rather quickly, many questions remained 

about the impacts of these practices, or lack thereof, on the 

forest, and there was a need for economically desirable and 

ecologically sustainable silvicultural practices for small, private 

landowners (Holcomb and Weitzman 1950). The farm woodlot 

demonstration areas on the Fernow were designed to be 

easily accessible and were managed for five decades to provide 

demonstrations of techniques useful to small, nonindustrial 

landowners. Through the years, these so-called “farm woodlots” 

also provided an opportunity to demonstrate new techniques 

being evaluated in larger, replicated studies elsewhere on the 

Fernow (McGill and Schuler 2003). These and other easily 

accessible demonstration areas have been an important part 

of educational outreach for the past 60 years on the Fernow; 

approximately 1,000 visitors per year view these demonstrations 

and see the effects of a range of forest management practices on 

the forest. 

Overall, during the past 60 years, silvicultural research on 

the Fernow has been broad in scope and has reflected many 

important topics of the time. Silvicultural research has 

included crop tree release and other intermediate thinning 

options, economics of forest practices, even- and uneven-age 

management, natural and artificial regeneration, provenance 

testing, grapevine control, growth and yield predictions, 

silvicultural herbicide use, logging methods, and design 

and construction of forest roads. The body of this work has 

contributed significantly to the regional silviculture guidelines 

as is evident by the significant number of citations credited to 

researchers working on the Fernow (e.g., Barrett 1995). 

Because of research conducted on the Fernow and elsewhere, 

crop tree release has been widely accepted in the region as an 

efficient means of releasing desired stems and shaping species 

composition in young stands (Lamson et al. 1990, Schuler 

2006). Crop tree release has proven to be more useful than 

areawide thinning because of the wide range of values that exist 

among individual trees and species even within a relatively 

small operational area. Forest practice economics were also 

evaluated to determine where and when treatments were justified 

(Miller 1991, 1993) and when trees reach financial maturity 

(Schuler and McGill 2007, Trimble et al. 1974). Guidelines for 

combining economic and silvicultural selection have been tested 

and are still being studied on the Fernow in several research 

compartments that span four decades. 

The advantages and disadvantages of uneven-age management 

versus clearcutting or other forms of even-aged management 

have been the focus of much research on the Fernow, which has 

led to the development of a new silvicultural system known as 

deferment harvesting (or two-age management) that incorporates 

some of the benefits of each system (Miller et al. 1997, ThomasVan Gundy and Schuler 2008). In part, this system was an 

outgrowth of the clearcutting controversy of the 1970s, which 

arose from widespread clearcutting on several national forests, 

including the Monongahela. Deferment harvesting has been 

used extensively during the past two decades in the central 

Appalachians on both industrial and public ownerships sensitive 

to the aesthetic effects of clearcutting and has been one of the 

most widely adopted new practices pioneered on the Fernow. 

Although natural regeneration dominates in the central 

Appalachians, the Fernow staff have conducted significant work 

on artificial regeneration and related issues. Artificial regeneration 

research has focused most recently on the use of planted or 

natural seedlings and sprouts protected by tree shelters or wire 

cages to mitigate deer browsing effects on desirable species 

(Kochenderfer and Ford 2008, Schuler and Miller 1996). The 

species composition of even-aged stands approaching 20 years of 

age has been enhanced using this technique, and many tours of 

the Fernow include stops to view the results. This research has 

been recognized internationally and used by private landowners 

and public agencies alike. Also, for about three decades, the 

Fernow was part of regional provenance testing of white ash, 

black walnut, sugar maple, and white pine (Schuler 1994, 

Wendel 1980). Although these studies are no longer active, the 

outplantings have been protected, and recently, there has been 

renewed interest in them as scientists seek to understand how 

climate change may affect the relative competitive ability of seed 

sources from different latitudes. 

Foresters grapple with many issues during the regeneration 

phase of stand development, among which grapevine control 

is a critical issue on some sites. Grapevines exacerbate winter 

storm damage and can indefinitely delay canopy closure that 

can result in poorly stocked stands with low-quality stems. 

Although grapevine control studies have ended on the Fernow, 

the resulting management guidelines are still used throughout 

the region (Smith 1984, Smith and Lamson 1986). 

Growth and yield predictions, which were developed for many 

tree species and forest types in the latter part of the 20th century, 

are the foundation for numerous models often used in forest 

management. Fernow researchers developed predictive equations 

for a number of hardwood species by site class, and these local 

volume tables are still in use (Miller and Sullivan 1993, Yandle 

et al. 1988). Fernow researchers programmed the first version 

of the Northeast Decision Model Stand Inventory Processor 

and assembled long-term permanent plot data to measure the 

performance of numerous growth and yield models being used 

from Ohio to Maine (Schuler et al. 1993). This work was a 

research station-wide effort that eventually evolved into a family 
10 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

of expert decision models referred to as the Northeast Decision 

Model. These models incorporate research results into everyday 

decisionmaking and are an excellent technology transfer tool. 

Controlling species composition is a major challenge for all 

natural regeneration methods, and the use of herbicides has 

been shown to be an effective silvicultural tool in some cases. 

Much of the research focus on the Fernow has been on using 

stem-injected herbicides in valuable cherry-maple stands and 

using cut-stump treatments to control aggressive sprouting and 

vegetative reproduction of American beech (Kochenderfer et al. 

2004, Kochenderfer et al. 2006). Stem-injected herbicides offer 

many advantages over other control methods, including minimal 

effects on nontarget resources and greater ease of use, safety, and 

effectiveness. This research was the foundation for guidelines 

that have been readily adopted by small landowners and public 

agencies. 

Logging techniques and related costs were the subjects of Fernow 

research for several decades. From its beginning in 1948, the 

research plan for the Fernow included a three-person logging 

crew that would test new techniques and maintain records of 

equipment use so researchers could evaluate efficiencies of both 

silvicultural practices and different logging methods (Weitzman 

1952, Wendel et al. 1974). The Fernow logging crew used one 

of the first two-person chain saws for tree felling and has been 

involved in subsequent trials of novel logging equipment. The 

logging crew remains an integral part of the research operations 

on the Fernow because of its inherent ability to harvest smaller 

research compartments within limited timeframes. The Fernow 

logging crew is the only Forest Service logging crew in the 

Nation. It has an outstanding safety record, and the crew’s 

conscientious efforts are essential for continuing long-term 

studies that require periodic harvests within strictly defined 

operational windows. 

More recently, new silvicultural research topics have emerged, 

including the use of prescribed fire for mixed-oak forest 

sustainability and the ecology and management of high-elevation 

montane forests. Oak regeneration failure is a widely recognized 

forest management problem of serious magnitude throughout 

the hardwood regions of the Eastern and Central United States. 

Both managed and unmanaged forest stands exhibit declining 

oak abundance as overstory oaks experience natural mortality 

or are harvested (Schuler 2004). Sustaining oak forests that 

have been present for thousands of years is critical to both 

economic and ecological objectives in the eastern and central 

hardwood regions. Researchers are evaluating fire as a restoration 

tool to reduce interfering vegetation and alter forest structure 

to favor numerous oak species (Brose et al. 2001, Schuler and 

McClain 2003). They are also evaluating the effects of fire on 

other ecosystem attributes, including acorn pests, woodland 

salamanders, soil water chemistry, herbaceous layer vegetation, 

and the seed bank (Ford et al. 2002b, McCann et al. 2006). 

Researchers from other Northern Research Station units and 

cooperating universities have been actively involved in fire 

research on the Fernow. Landscape level analyses have been 

completed to model locations where fire can be most effectively 

used to restore oak competitiveness (Thomas-Van Gundy et al. 

2007). 

High-elevation spruce-fir forests, dominated by red spruce in the 

central and southern Appalachians, have been identified as one 

of the most highly endangered forest types in the United States. 

The red spruce forests in this region were exploited a century 

ago, and cutover stands suffered from high-intensity wildfires 

and subsequent wind and water erosion. The red spruce forests 

that exist today are a small fraction of what existed before the 

exploitative logging era. Research to facilitate the recovery of 

this forest type is critical to improving the status of numerous 

endangered or sensitive species that rely on or are endemic to 

this ecosystem and for buffering anticipated effects associated 

with global climate change. Scientists on the Fernow led the way 

for advocating the need for increased research emphasis on this 

forest type and are now actively involved in studying the ecology 

and management of this critical landscape component (Adams 

and Eagar 1992, Rentch et al. 2007). They have also contributed 

significant information about the habitat and extent of the West 

Virginia northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus fuscus), an 

endemic of this forest type (Ford et al. 2004), leading to removal 

of this species from the endangered species list between 2008 and 

2010, with the final decision pending conclusion of litigation. 

Although most of the Fernow is lower in elevation than that 

where red spruce is dominant, Fernow scientists are actively 

involved in research on other State and Federal ownerships to 

facilitate the recovery of this critical landscape component.

Hydrology and Watershed Management 

Of the 10 gauged watersheds on the Fernow (fig. 5), 5 

(watersheds 1 through 5) have been gauged since 1951 (table 1). 

About that same time, scientists also established a network of 

precipitation monitoring sites (consisting of standard rain gauges 

and recording rain gauges) (fig. 5). They later installed streamgauging stations on an additional five watersheds (table 1). The 

largest gauged watershed on the Fernow (watershed 14), which 
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 11

Figure 5. Gauged watersheds and rain gauge network on the Fernow Experimental Forest. Dots indicate rain gauge locations. 
12 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

includes three gauged subwatersheds in its headwaters, was the 

most recently instrumented. To accommodate needs of various 

studies, scientists added weather- and air-quality-monitoring 

stations over time and implemented studies quantifying basic 

physical conditions. These include studies on solar radiation 

measurements (Hornbeck 1970), soil moisture (Patric 1973), 

evapotranspiration (Patric and Goswami 1968, Tajchman et al. 

1997), and dendroclimatology (Pan et al. 1997, Schuler and 

Fajvan 1999). 

In 1957, scientists chose watershed 4 to serve as the primary 

control watershed on the Fernow. That same year, after 6 years 

of calibration, they initiated the first watershed management 

studies on the Fernow on watersheds 1, 2, 3, and 5 (table 1). 

They harvested these watersheds using different silvicultural 

treatments and varying degrees of environmental protection 

during forest operations (Hornbeck and Reinhart 1964, Reinhart 

et al. 1963). Watershed 1 was commercially clearcut without 

Table 1. Watershed characteristics and treatments.

Watershed Established Size (ha) Treatment Treatment date

1 1951 30.1 Clearcut to 15.2-cm d.b.h. except culls, no soil or water resource protectionMay 1957–June 1958

2 1951 15.5 43.2-cm diameter limit cut

Repeat treatment on 10.8 ha

Repeat treatment on 4.7 ha

Repeat treatment on 10.8 ha

Repeat treatment on 4.7 ha

Repeat treatment on 10.8 ha

June 1958-Aug. 1958

Aug. 1972

Jan. 1978

May–July 1988

Feb.–Apr. 1997 

Jan.–Mar. 2004

3 1951 34.3 Intensive selection harvest in trees >12.7-cm d.b.h.

Repeat treatment

Patch clearcuts on 2.3 ha

Clearcut to 2.5-cm d.b.h.

Acidification by ammonium sulfate fertilizer applied 3 times per year

Oct. 1958–Feb. 1959

Sept.–Oct. 1963

July–Oct. 1968

July 1969–May 1970

Jan. 1989–present

4 1951 38.7 Control

5 1951 36.4 Extensive selection harvest in trees >27.9-cm d.b.h.

Repeat treatment

Repeat treatment on 31.6 ha

Repeat treatment on 4.8 ha 

Repeat treatment on 31.6 ha

Repeat treatment on 4.8 ha 

Repeat treatment on 31.6 ha

Aug.–Dec 1958

Feb.–May 1968

Jan.–June 1978

Feb.–Mar. 1983

Feb.–May 1988

Oct.–Nov. 1998

Jan.–Apr. 2007

6 1956 22.3 Clearcut lower half (11.2 ha)

Lower half herbicided

Clearcut upper half (11.1 ha)

Entire watershed herbicided

Planted Norway spruce

Mar.–Oct. 1964

May 1965–Oct. 1969

Oct. 1967–Feb. 1968

May 1968–Oct. 1969

Spring 1973

7 1956 24.2 Clearcut upper half (12.1 ha)

Upper half herbicided

Clearcut lower half (12.1 ha)

Entire watershed herbicided

Nov. 1963–Mar. 1964

May 1964–Oct. 1969

Oct. 1966–Mar. 1967

May 1967–Oct. 1969

10 1984 15.2 Control

13 1988 14.2 Control

14 1993 131.5 Includes watersheds 6, 7, and 13, and 2 silviculture compartments

d.b.h. = diameter at breast height.
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 13

regard for protecting soil and water resources, or in more modern 

terms, without the use of best management practices (BMPs). 

Watersheds 2, 3, and 5 were selectively harvested under different 

intensities. Effects of the harvesting treatments on streamflow 

were determined primarily by using the traditional paired 

watershed approach (Reinhart 1958). 

The first four harvesting treatments demonstrated that at least 

25 percent of the basal area of a watershed must be harvested 

before a significant increase in annual streamflow is measurable, 

annual streamflow increases proportionally to the basal area 

removed, most of the annual streamflow increases occur during 

the growing season because of decreasing evapotranspiration 

after harvesting, and even the most extreme streamflow increases 

are generally short lived because of rapid regrowth of vegetation 

(Hornbeck et al. 1993). In addition, the lack of resource 

protection during clearcutting on watershed 1 showed that very 

large increases in sediment losses can result from poor road 

location, lack of water control on the roads, and disturbance of 

the streambed and streambanks during skidding (Reinhart et al. 

1963). Although elevated sediment in streamflow also was short 

lived, returning to predisturbance levels in 2 to 3 years (Reinhart 

et al. 1963), the legacy effects of poor road location and lack 

of BMPs remain today. Portions of the stream are still deeply 

incised and appear to be unstable and eroding; active headcutting 

has extended the head of the channel to near the ridge top of the 

watershed. None of the other three watersheds appear to have 

been so severely affected by the initial harvesting treatments or 

by any other more recent treatments.

In the early 1960s, an extended, severe drought in the Eastern 

United States created concerns about water availability in 

several major cities. Because forested watersheds are important 

sources of drinking water, scientists conducted research to 

determine if they could use forest management to increase 

water yields. Previous findings on the original four watersheds 

showed that traditional forest harvesting would result in only 

short-term increases in streamflow, so they initiated research 

into more intensive watershed treatments on watersheds 6 

and 7. They applied harvesting, in combination with repeated 

annual herbicide applications to maintain the watersheds free 

of most vegetation, to determine if these treatments could 

increase streamflow even more. Indeed, stream discharge 

increases were about double those from clearcutting in terms 

of maximum annual amounts (Kochenderfer et al. 1990, Patric 

and Reinhart 1971) and duration (Edwards and Troendle, in 

press; Kochenderfer et al. 1990). Despite the positive outcomes, 

the interest in augmenting streamflow for water supplies passed 

quickly because the eastern drought ended and concerns about 

the effects of herbicides on drinking water quality developed. 

Interest in streamflow augmentation has recently been rekindled, 

linked to concerns about climate change and water availability. 

After terminating herbicide applications, scientists used 

watershed 6 to investigate the effects of species conversion 

on stream discharge; this study was a companion to another 

species conversion study performed at the Coweeta Hydrologic 

Laboratory in North Carolina. In 1973, scientists planted 

watershed 6 with Norway spruce and, 30 years later, spruce 

cover had progressed to 65 percent of the watershed (Adams 

and Kochenderfer 2004). Streamflow began decreasing about 10 

years after the spruce was planted and, by year 15, streamflow 

declined below that of the original deciduous forest because 

of year-round increased interception and evapotranspiration 

(Edwards and Troendle, in press). Streamflow continued to 

decline until around 2003 (fig. 6). The greatest deficits in water 

yield occurred during the dormant season. 

Streamflow reductions over the past 15 years on watershed 

6 have resulted in a substantial change in stream channel 

morphology. The active channel has decreased in width and 

depth to a fraction of what it had been as a hardwood watershed 

due to filling with mosses and streambed aggradation (Edwards 

and Watson 2002). In less than two decades, the channel has 

changed from a typical Rosgen A type channel to an E4 channel. 

Figure 6. Watershed 6 streamflow deviations from amount predicted, over 

time.
14 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

Over the past several decades, Fernow scientists have remained 

interested in erosion and sedimentation caused by forest 

management activities. Results from the first harvesting 

experiment on watershed 1, in which no attention was paid to 

soil and water resource protection, were compared to those from 

watershed 3, where soil losses were much lower because care 

was taken during harvesting and road layout and construction. 

Research on the Fernow, and at other experimental forests, was 

used to develop methods of road planning and construction that 

could reduce erosion and sedimentation (Kochenderfer 1970, 

Kochenderfer and Helvey 1984, Kochenderfer and Helvey 1987) 

and to transferring that information in user-friendly forms to 

forest managers and the public (e.g., “Building Roads” and 

“Water in the Forest” from Managing Your Woodlot, a nine-part 

video series that Fernow scientists developed cooperatively with 

the West Virginia University Extension Service). In large part, 

scientists working on the Fernow developed or recommended 

many of the West Virginia forestry BMPs. Currently, Fernow 

researchers are helping to develop protocols for evaluating BMP 

implementation and effectiveness regionally and nationally 

(Ryder and Edwards 2005, 2006). 

Studies involving water chemistry became a more integral part 

of the Fernow’s research in the 1970s as more sophisticated 

analytical techniques became available and the Fernow waterquality laboratory was formally established. Chemistry-based 

studies became an even more important part of the Fernow’s 

research portfolio around 1980 when the laboratory became 

more automated. Since then, scientists have conducted analyses 

of major cations and anions and various metrics of alkalinity 

or acidity on water samples from the Fernow. Studies involve 

examining data sets from long-term monitoring of precipitation, 

streamwater, and soil water chemistry and focusing on specific 

chemical relationships and responses to treatments. 

Among the first studies able to exploit the capabilities of the 

water-quality laboratory were fertilizer studies, which were 

designed to examine the effects of typical forest application rates 

on streamwater quality. Initial studies evaluated applications 

of urea or ammonium nitrate plus triple superphosphate 

fertilizers. Regardless of the type of nitrate fertilizer applied, 

about 20 percent of that applied was exported during the first 

2 to 3 years (Aubertin et al. 1973, Edwards et al. 1991, Patric 

and Smith 1978). Changes in streamwater concentrations of 

nitrogen and cations from the urea applications were small, and 

nitrate concentrations did not exceed drinking water standards 

(Aubertin et al. 1973). Streamwater nitrogen concentrations 

resulting from the ammonium nitrate application remained 

elevated for 3 years, however, and exports of nitrogen increased 

by more than 18 times the prefertilization rates. These elevated 

nitrogen concentrations also exceeded drinking-water standards 

for 3 weeks (Helvey et al. 1989). Phosphate concentrations did 

not increase in response to the fertilization because Fernow soils 

are generally low in available phosphorus (Edwards et al. 1991).

Streamwater and precipitation chemistry from weekly samples 

collected since the startup of the water chemistry laboratory 

also provided opportunities to study biogeochemical cycling 

on the Fernow. Helvey and Kunkle (1986) constructed the first 

input-output nutrient budget for the Fernow—for watershed 

4. The most important findings of this research were that 

sulfate inputs exceeded outputs and that they provided the 

first descriptions of possible future scenarios of accelerated 

base cation leaching and subsequent watershed acidification. 

Building on this work, DeWalle et al. (1988) developed a more 

intensive biogeochemical budget for the control watershed, 

which showed that parent materials played an important role 

in controlling soil and streamwater acidification. Later analyses 

of streamwater chemistry from watershed 4 showed that nitrate 

concentrations in streamwater had increased over time (Edwards 

and Helvey 1991) in relation to increasing nitrogen deposition. 

This response had been hypothesized in the literature under 

conditions of increasing nitrogen deposition, but it was not 

widely accepted at that time because forests traditionally have 

been considered nitrogen limited. 

These findings, linked with results from air pollution research 

that began in the 1980s on the Fernow and other locations, 

suggested that the central Appalachian Mountains were among 

the ecosystems most at risk for acidic deposition effects (Herlihy 

et al. 1993). This finding of risk was part of the impetus for the 

initiation of the Fernow whole-watershed acidification study that 

began in 1989. As one of only two whole-watershed acidification 

studies in the United States aimed at examining biogeochemical 

responses to soil acidification, it was originally funded by the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and then was entirely 

funded by the Forest Service for many more years. Currently, the 

study is a partnership between Forest Service Work Unit NRS01, 

West Virginia University, and the Long-Term Research in 

Environmental Biology Program (Grant DEB-0417678) at the 

National Science Foundation. Results have been published and 

widely presented, and the major findings from the first 15 years 

of watershed acidification are described in Adams et al. (2006). 

The Fernow and the Timber and Watershed Lab also participate 

in numerous nationwide research and monitoring efforts in soil, 

water, and air quality research. The Timber and Watershed Lab 

was the site of the first installation of the National Atmospheric 

Deposition Program in July 1978. It also participates in 

the Clean Air Status and Trends Network; the Interagency 
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 15

Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments Network; the 

Long Term Soil Productivity Network, the HydroDB and 

ClimDB (http://www.fsl.orst.edu/climhy/); and international 

networks, such as the Global Terrestrial Observing System/

Terrestrial Ecosystem Monitoring Sites Network (http://www.

fao.org/gtos/tems/index.jsp) and the EcoTrends Project (http://

www.ecotrends.info). Recently, the Fernow also became part 

of the Experimental Forest and Range Synthesis Network. 

Established in 2007, the network is a group of scientists affiliated 

with Forest Service experimental forests and ranges who have 

joined forces to address transcontinental questions concerning 

effects of environmental change on ecosystem function and 

services. Networking the Fernow with other long-term research 

sites expands the statistical inference of the work conducted in 

these forests to regional, national, and global scales.

Wildlife Ecology and Management

Although to a lesser extent than forestry research or hydrologic 

research, wildlife investigations have been part of the research 

program on the Fernow for nearly 40 years. Depending on the 

taxa studied, complete wildlife-oriented research projects have 

been contained on the Fernow. In other instances, research 

requiring large areas or multiple treatments used the Fernow as 

a replicate in the matrix of a larger overall project (Keyser and 

Ford 2005). The first documented wildlife study on the Fernow 

examined the production of white-tailed deer browse across a 

variety of cutting practices (Cromer and Smith 1968) at a time 

when similar research was being conducted in the southern 

Appalachians (Della-Bianca and Johnson 1965). From a wildlife 

research perspective, ongoing and varied forest manipulation 

has provided excellent templates for forest-habitat relationship 

studies. Gehring (1997) used forest management compartments 

on the Fernow to assess wildlife habitat-quality rankings for 

numerous species in the central Appalachians. Research on 

nongame and threatened, endangered, or sensitive species has 

predominated, focusing mainly on herpetofauna, avifauna, and 

bats. 

Research on woodland salamanders (Plethodontidae) has 

dominated herpetological investigations on the Fernow. Kees 

(1994), Marcum (1994), and Ordiway (1994) examined various 

facets of salamander natural history, including reproduction, 

growth, and niche separation dynamics among species in the 

genera Plethodon and Desmognathus. Little et al. (1990) and 

Barrett (1996) examined woodland salamander response across 

a variety of successional series following timber harvest, whereas 

Pauley et al. (1990) took advantage of drought conditions to 

examine the interactions of abiotic factors and forest recovery 

on salamander detection and aboveground activity patterns. 

In general, woodland salamander abundances were correlated 

with time since harvest and forest age. Rowan (2004) assessed 

the effect of spring burning for oak restoration purposes on 

woodland salamanders on the Fernow and found little or no 

measurable change in extant salamander communities after a 

single fire. The gauged watersheds on the Fernow have provided 

an excellent template for more rigorous experimental work 

with salamanders. Using an information-theoretic, modelbuilding approach, Moseley et al. (2008) observed a subtle but 

negative long-term effect of timber harvest and roads on aquatic 

salamander abundance in surveyed timber compartments and 

gauged watersheds on the Fernow that was congruent with the 

aforementioned descriptive studies. Both Pauley (1995) and 

Moseley (2008) observed little biological effect on woodland 

salamanders immediately and several years after the application 

of diflubenzuron for gypsy moth control. Pauley et al. (2006) 

and then Moseley (2008) also assessed the effect of experimental 

acidification treatments in watershed 3 on salamanders; both 

authors found little or no meaningful response in terms of either 

salamander community assemblage or relative abundance in 

either the short or long term (more than 15 years), respectively. 

These findings collectively suggest that terrestrial and aquatic 

woodland salamanders in the central Appalachians are 

moderately tolerant of disturbance as is observed in the southern 

Appalachians and elsewhere in the East (Russell et al. 2004), in 

contrast with other research (Petranka et al. 1994).

Research on avifauna, in many cases, has mirrored that of 

herpetofauna on the Fernow. Most work has concentrated on 

understanding songbird assemblages and ecological response to 

changes in forest condition after harvest or other disturbance 

or among various forest types and structures, beginning with 

the work of McArthur (1980) and Mauer and Whitmore 

(1980). McArthur (1980) was among the earliest in the central 

Appalachians to show that forest structure rather than forest 

age per se is an important determinant in the residing bird 

community at the stand level. Moreover, many years before the 

concepts of adaptive and ecosystem management were applied to 

national forest lands, he observed that active forest management 

could be used to manage for early-successional shrub-scrub 

guilds, whereas passive forest management would favor interior 

forest songbird assemblages. DeMeo (1999) used point-count 

methodologies across the Monongahela, including the Fernow, to 

better define patterns of songbird association with defined forest 

types, such as mixed mesophytic forests, northern hardwood 

forests, and xeric oak-dominated forests, and to compare 

upland and riparian areas within forest types. In addition, he 

examined the influence of edge and forest fragmentation on 
16 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

interior species, finding discernable edge effects only to about 

25 m into the forest. DeMeo (1999) also observed virtually no 

difference in composition or abundance of songbirds between 

smaller, less contiguous forest patches and large, unfragmented 

patches within this largely forested landscape of the central 

Appalachians. Williams (2002) used the Fernow and adjacent 

portions of the Otter Creek Wilderness to examine nesting 

ecology and reproductive success of wood thrush (Hylcocihia 

mustelina) at various landscape- and stand-level scales. Building 

on the associations of forest type and stand structure observed by 

McArthur (1980) and DeMeo (1999), Williams (2002) found 

that wood thrush production was negatively correlated with 

increasing amounts of open area at the landscape scale.

With the exception of Rowan et al. (2005), who studied homerange size response of eastern chipmunks (Tamias striatus) and 

found little difference in home range or core area among burned 

and unburned forest stands, mammal research on the Fernow in 

the 21st century has been heavily skewed toward bats. Acoustical 

sampling techniques have been widely used to better understand 

bat movements and habitat (fig. 7). Using these acoustical 

sampling methodologies, Owen et al. (2004) compared bat 

activity in older, second-growth stands on the Fernow’s reference 

areas with clearcut, leave-tree, and diameter-limit harvested 

stands on the MeadWestvaco Wildlife and Ecosystem Research 

Forest and in riparian zones in both areas. Owen et al. (2004) 

documented distinct bat species use associated with varying stand 

structures, as has also been documented elsewhere for songbirds. 

For example, the big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), a large bat 

with a high wing loading, lower frequency echolocation, and 

feeding preferences for flying Coleopterans, was recorded more 

often in leave-tree harvests than in the more structurally cluttered 

intact forests. The reverse was true for bats in the genus Myotis—

presumably mostly the northern bat (Myotis septentrionalis)—

that have low wing loading, higher frequency echolocation, 

and gleaning feeding preferences. Activity of all bat species was 

highest along forested riparian habitats relative to any other type 

or stand condition. Also using acoustical methodologies, Ford et 

al. (2005) conducted species-specific, fine-scale habitat modeling 

for bats on the Fernow, linking metrics such as canopy gap 

width, canopy height, and stream order to bat activity. This work 

was notable for showing the preference of endangered Indiana 

bats for second- and third-order stream corridors over first-order 

corridors or surrounding upland forests. 

The fact that most bats on the Fernow day roost in trees 

and snags during the growing season has prompted a need 

to understand possible effects of forest harvesting on bats. 

Consequently, the Fernow has hosted three completed dayroost studies: two on male Indiana bats (Ford et al. 2002a, 

unpublished data; C. Stihler, West Virginia Division of Natural 

Resources) and one on male northern bats (Ford et al. 2006). 

Male Indiana bats tended to select tree species with sloughing 

bark characteristics, such as shagbark hickory (Carya ovata (Mill.) 

K. Koch) or sugar maple, although species selection, tree size, 

and tree position were highly variable. Male northern bats almost 

exclusively selected large, sawtimber-size black locust (Robinia 

pseudoacacia L.), similar to females in terms of species preference, 

but not in size, on the nearby MeadWestvaco Wildlife and 

Ecosystem Research Forest (Menzel et al. 2002). 

Long-Term Data Sets

Silviculture

Timber management research data collection began in 1949 

with stand structure measurements on the CPL and farm 

woodlot compartments (fig. 8). For these long-term stand 

structure measurements, all stems greater than 12.7-cm 

diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) were tallied by species, 5-cm 

d.b.h. class, and condition: merchantable, cull, or dead – these 

measurements have continued until the present. Data for 

additional compartments were collected as studies were initiated. 

Data typically are classified as pretreatment, volume treated, 

and post-treatment with multiple iterations for compartments 

Figure 7. Fall acoustical activity of Myotid bats (northern bat, little brown 

bat, Indiana bat) at Blowing Springs Cave, Fernow Experimental Forest, 

2000–05.
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 17

Figure 8. Research compartments and watersheds on the Fernow Experimental Forest grouped by experimental treatment.
18 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

receiving repeated harvest treatments. Log grade data were 

collected with the first harvest treatments in 1949. Reproduction 

data collection began in 1950. Seedling- and sapling-sized stems 

generally are tabulated by species, size, condition, and origin. 

The first permanent growth plots were established on the Fernow 

in 1979. All trees either larger than 2.5-cm d.b.h. or larger than 

12.7-cm d.b.h. are tagged and their species, d.b.h., crown class, 

and condition recorded. Today, approximately 400 permanent 

growth plots are being measured on either 5- or 10-year cycles 

on the Fernow. Data collection on the effects of tree shelter use 

began in 1989 and continues on several areas on the Fernow. Size 

and condition of the sheltered tree as well as distance to and size 

of its nearest neighbor are collected annually or biannually. 

Watershed Management

Long-term streamflow records are available for 10 gauged 

watersheds on the Fernow. Data have been collected almost 

continuously on the five original watersheds (watersheds 1 

through 5) (fig. 5) and five watersheds that were instrumented 

later (table 1). Data gaps exist on watershed 2 (water years 

1980–1987) and watershed 5 (water years 1973–1990). Weekly 

maximum and minimum stream temperature data were collected 

on several Fernow watersheds from 1959 to 2002. Continuous 

hourly stream temperature data have been collected since 

2002 on watersheds 2, 4, 6, and 10. Stream chemistry data 

collection began in 1951 on watersheds 1 through 5 with the 

intermittent measurement of pH, conductivity, and alkalinity; 

weekly or biweekly sampling began in 1958 and was expanded 

to the other watersheds, typically as they were instrumented for 

streamflow measurement. Anion and cation analyses were added 

in 1971, but data collected before 1981, when the laboratory 

acquired an ion chromatograph and an atomic absorption 

spectrophotometer, are considered less reliable. Additional waterquality data include suspended sediment and turbidity measured 

for watershed 4 from 1978 to1999.

A network of standard and recording rain gauges has collected 

precipitation data since 1951. Daily watershed-weighted 

precipitation amounts were calculated by the Theissen method 

(Brakensiek et al. 1979) for all watersheds except watershed 14 

for the same periods as for streamflow but without the watershed 

2 and 5 gaps. Air temperature and relative humidity data 

collection began in 1951, first as daily maximum and minimum 

values, then in 1959 as hourly data. Continuous hourly data 

collection continued in 1997 with the installation of digital data 

loggers. In 1996, when a weather station was installed on Fork 

Mountain, the meteorological data set was expanded to include 

wind direction and speed and quantum and solar radiation. 

Precipitation chemistry sampling began in 1983 at two sites on 

the Fernow. Weekly samples are analyzed for pH, conductivity, 

acidity, anions, and cations when precipitation amounts are 

sufficient.

Many of these hydrologic and climatic data are available from 

the HydroDB and ClimDB Web server (http://www.fsl.orst.

edu/climhy/). Other data are available on the Fernow Web page 

(http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/ef/locations/wv/fernow/). A full-time 

data manager ensures the quality, security, and timeliness of the 

data sets. 
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 19

Abundant opportunities for collaborative research exist on the Fernow. Collecting additional measurements from ongoing, 

long-term research plots is welcome, as are using existing data 

sets in a collaborative manner and proposing new research. 

Because of the close proximity of the Timber and Watershed 

Lab to the Fernow, it is possible to make frequent and repeated 

measurements as necessary. Submitting a proposal to the project 

leader of Work Unit NRS01 is a good way to initiate the 

conversation about collaborative research. 

The Fernow provides show-me trips and educational field tours for groups ranging from school children to college 

students to visiting scientists. One of the Fernow scientists 

usually leads the tours, which can accommodate small- to 

medium-sized groups (around 30 to 50 people). Each tour 

is tailored to the specific needs of the visitors. In addition, 

visitors may choose a driving tour of the Fernow, which follows 

well-marked signs posted to indicate the research activities in 

particular compartments of the forest. 

Research 

Opportunities

Education and 

Outreach
20 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

Collaborative, interdisciplinary research on the Fernow is a longstanding tradition and one that is deeply embedded in 

the culture of Forest Service personnel who work there. Decades 

of research on the Fernow have strongly influenced development 

of forest management guides and recommendations and, 

thereby, have affected management of public and private forest 

lands in the central Appalachians. The importance of research 

findings related to forest management, watershed management, 

wildlife management, and basic ecosystem science speaks to 

the rich future of research opportunities on the Fernow. The 

opportunities are outstanding, thanks to the invaluable legacy 

of past Forest Service scientists, technicians, the Fernow logging 

crew, and support staff.

Solar panels or batteries run the facilities on the Fernow because no electrical lines have been run into the forest. The 

only buildings on the Fernow proper are weir houses and storage 

buildings. Facilities available at the Nursery Bottom (15 minutes 

away) include a small historic bunkhouse, quarters for up to six 

people, dirty labs, a water-quality laboratory, office and meeting 

space, and a small greenhouse. 

Facilities Conclusion
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 21

Literature Cited

Adams, M.B.; DeWalle, D.R.; Hom, J.L., eds. 2006. The Fernow 

watershed acidification study. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. 

279 p.

Adams, M.B.; Eagar, C. 1992. Impacts of acidic deposition on highelevation spruce-fir forests: results from the Spruce-Fir Research 

Cooperative. Forest Ecology and Management. 51: 195–205.

Adams, M.B; Edwards, P.J.; Ford, W.M., et al. 2011. Effects of 

development of a natural gas well and associated pipeline on 

the natural and scientific resources of the Fernow Experimental 

Forest. NRS-GTR-76. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 24p.

Adams, M.B.; Kochenderfer, J.N. 2004. Forest floor accumulation 

under a developing Norway spruce plantation. In: Annual meetings 

abstracts, 2004. Seattle: American Society of Agronomy with the 

Canadian Society of Soil Science: CD-ROM. 

Adams, M.B.; Schuler, T.M.; Ford, W.M.; Kochenderfer, J.N. 2003. 

Large woody debris in a second-growth central Appalachian 

hardwood stand: volume, composition, and dynamics. In: 

Proceedings: 13th central hardwood forest conference, 2002. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NC-234. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, North Central Research Station: 237–244.

Aubertin, G.M.; Smith, D.W.; Patric, J.H. 1973. Quantity and quality 

of streamflow after urea fertilization on a forested watershed: 

first-year results. In: Proceedings: Forest fertilization symposium. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-3. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station: 

88–100.

Barrett, B.A. 1996. Herpetofaunal diversity and forest succession in 

the Monongahela National Forest. M.S. Thesis. Washington, DC: 

Howard University. 74 p.

Barrett, J.W. 1995. Regional silviculture of the United States, 3rd 

edition. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 643 p.

Brakensiek, D.L; Osburn, H.B.; Rawls, W.J., coords. 1979. Field 

manual for research in agricultural hydrology. Agriculture handbook. 

224. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 550 p.

Braun, L.E. 1950. Deciduous forests of eastern North America. 

Philadelphia, PA: Blakiston Co. 596 p.

Brose, P.; Schuler, T.; Van Lear, D.; Berst, J. 2001. Bringing fire back: 

the changing regimes of Appalachian mixed-oak forests. Journal of 

Forestry. 99(11): 30–35.

Campbell, T.A.; Laseter, B.R.; Ford, W.M., et al. 2006. Abiotic factors 

influencing deer browsing in West Virginia. Northern Journal of 

Applied Forestry. 23: 20–26.

Cardwell, D.H. 1975. Geologic history of West Virginia. Morgantown, 

WV: West Virginia Geological and Economic Society. 64 p.

Core, E.L. 1966. Vegetation of West Virginia. Parsons, WV: McClain 

Printing Co. 217 p.

Cromer, J.I.; Smith, H.C. 1968. Sufficient deer-browse produced by 

a wide range of cutting practices. Transactions of the Northeastern 

Fish and Wildlife Conference. 25: 25–33. 

DeGarmo, W.R.; Gill, J. 1958. West Virginia white-tails. Bull. No. 4. 

Charleston, WV: Conservation Commission of West Virginia. 87 p.

Della-Bianca, L.; Johnson, F.M. 1965. Effect of an intensive cleaning 

on deer-browse production in the southern Appalachians. Journal of 

Wildlife Management. 29: 729–733.

DeMeo, T.E. 1999. Forest songbird abundance and viability at multiple 

scales on the Monongahela National Forest, West Virginia. Ph.D. 

Dissertation. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University. 149 p. 

DeWalle, D.R.; Sharpe, W.E.; Edwards, P.J. 1988. Biogeochemistry of 

two Appalachian deciduous forest sites in relation to episodic stream 

acidification. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 40: 143–156.

Dobony, C.A. 2000. Factors influencing ruffed grouse productivity and 

chick survival in West Virginia. M.S. Thesis. Morgantown, WV: 

West Virginia University. 97 p. 

Edwards, P.J.; Helvey, J.D. 1991. Long-term ionic increases from a 

central Appalachian forested watershed. Journal of Environmental 

Quality. 20: 250–255.

Edwards, P.J.; Huber, C.; Wood, F. 2004. Ozone exposures and 

implications for vegetation in rural areas of the central Appalachian 

mountains, U.S.A. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 98: 

157–174.

Edwards, P.J.; Kochenderfer, J.N.; Seegrist, D.W. 1991. Effects of forest 

fertilization on stream water chemistry in the Appalachians. Water 

Resources Bulletin. 27(2): 265–274.

Edwards, P.J.; Troendle, C.A. [In press]. Water yield and hydrology. 

In: Cumulative watershed effects of fuel management: an eastern 

synthesis. http://www.na.fs.fed.us/fire/cwe.shtm. 
22 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

Edwards, P.J.; Watson, E. 2002. Converting a hardwood watershed to 

spruce: effects on channel morphology. In: Proceedings: 2002 annual 

water resources conference, 2002. Middleburg, VA: American Water 

Resources Association: 163.

Fansler, H.F. 1962. History of Tucker County, West Virginia. Parsons, 

WV: McClain Printing Co. 702 p.

Ford, W.M.; Menzel, J.M.; Menzel, M.A.; Edwards, J.W. 2002a. 

Summer roost-tree selection by a male Indiana bat on the Fernow 

Experimental Forest. Res. Note NE-378. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research 

Station. 7 p. 

Ford, W.M.; Menzel, M.A.; Rodrigue, J.L. et al. 2005. Relating bat 

species presence to simple habitat measures in a central Appalachian 

forest. Biological Conservation. 126: 528–539. 

Ford, W.M.; Owen, S.F.; Edwards, J.W.; Rodrigue, J.L. 2006. Robinia 

pseudoacacia (black locust) as day-roosts of male Myotis septentrionalis

(northern bats) on the Fernow Experimental Forest, West Virginia. 

Northeastern Naturalist. 13: 15–24. 

Ford, W.M.; Russell, K.R.; Moorman, C.E., eds. 2002b. Proceedings: 

the role of fire for nongame wildlife management and community 

restoration: traditional uses and new directions; 2000 September 15; 

Nashville, TN. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-288. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research 

Station. 145 p.

Ford, W.M.; Stephenson, S.L.; Menzel, J.M.; Black, D.R.; Edwards, 

J.W. 2004. Habitat characteristics of the endangered Virginia 

northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus fuscus) in the central 

Appalachian Mountains. American Midland Naturalist. 152: 430–

438.

Gehring, J.L. 1997. Wildlife habitat quality in central Appalachian 

hardwood forests following three different timber harvest techniques. 

M.S. Thesis. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University. 113 p. 

Helvey, J.D.; Kochenderfer, J.N.; Edwards, P.J. 1989. Effects of forest 

fertilization on selected ion concentrations in central Appalachian 

streams. In: Proceedings: 7th central hardwood conference, 

1989. Gen. Tech. Rep. 132. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment 

Station: 278–282.

Helvey, J.D.; Kunkle, S.H. 1986. Input-output budgets of selected 

nutrients on an experimental watershed near Parsons, West Virginia. 

Res. Pap. NE-584. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 7 p.

Herlihy, A.T.; Kaufman, P.R.; Church, M.R., et al. 1993. The effects 

of acidic deposition on streams in the Appalachian Mountain and 

Piedmont region of the mid-Atlantic United States. Water Resources 

Research. 29: 2687–2703.

Holcomb, C.J.; Weitzman, S. 1950. Working plan for farm woodlands 

management on the Fernow Experimental Forest. Unpublished 

file report. Parsons, WV: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Timber and 

Watershed Laboratory. 25 p.

Hornbeck, J.W. 1970. The radiant energy budget of clearcut and 

forested sites in West Virginia. Forest Science. 16: 139–145.

Hornbeck, J.W.; Adams, M.B.; Corbett, E.S., et al. 1993. Longterm impacts of forest treatments on water yield; a summary for 

northeastern USA. Journal of Hydrology. 150: 323–344.

Hornbeck, J.W.; Reinhart, K.G. 1964. Water quality and soil erosion 

as affected by logging in steep terrain. Journal of Soil and Water 

Conservation. 19(1): 23–27.

Kees, G.M. 1994. Temporal and spatial niche structure of Plethodon 

cinereus (green) and Desmognathus ochrophaeus (cope) in Fernow 

Experimental Forest, Tucker County, West Virginia. M.S. Thesis. 

Huntington, WV: Marshall University. 93p.

Kenefic, L.S.; Schuler, T.M. 2008. Regional synthesis of longterm findings from U.S. Forest Service management intensity 

demonstrations. In: Proceedings: Poster abstracts of the central 

hardwood forest conference, 2008. FNR-402-W. West Lafayette, IN: 

Purdue University, Purdue Extension Publication: 9.

Keyser, P.K.; Ford, W.M. 2005. Ten years of research on the 

MeadWestvaco Wildlife and Ecosystem Research Forest: an 

annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-330. Newtown Square, 

PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Research Station. 27 p. 

Kochenderfer, J.N. 1970. Erosion control on logging roads in 

the Appalachians. Res. Pap. NE-158. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station. 28 p.
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 23

Kochenderfer, J.N. 2006. Fernow and the Appalachian hardwood 

region. In: Adams, M.B.; DeWalle, D.R.; Hom, J.L., eds. The 

Fernow watershed acidification study. Dordrecht, Netherlands: 

Springer: 17–39.

Kochenderfer, J.D.; Kochenderfer, J.N.; Miller, G.W. 2006. Controlling 

beech root and stump sprouts using the cut-stump treatment. 

Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 23(3): 155–165.

Kochenderfer, J.D.; Kochenderfer, J.N.; Warner, D.A.; Miller, G.W. 

2004. Preharvest manual herbicide treatments for controlling 

American beech in central West Virginia. Northern Journal of 

Applied Forestry. 21(1): 40–49.

Kochenderfer, J.N.; Edwards, P.J.; Helvey, J.D. 1990. Land management 

and water yield in the Appalachians. In: Proceedings: IR conference, 

watershed management/IR DIV/ASCE, watershed planning and 

analysis in action symposium, 1990. Reston, VA: American Society 

of Civil Engineers: 523–532.

Kochenderfer, J.N.; Ford, W.M. 2008. Utility of wire cages, tree 

shelters, and repellants to minimize herbivory to oak by white-tailed 

deer. Res. Pap. NRS-5. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 8 p.

Kochenderfer, J.N.; Helvey, J.D. 1984. Soil losses from a “minimumstandard” truck road constructed in the Appalachians. In: Peters, 

P.A.; Luchok, J., eds. Proceedings, mountain logging symposium; 

1984 June 5-7; Morgantown, WV. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia 

University: 215–225.

Kochenderfer, J.N.; Helvey, J.D. 1987. Using gravel to reduce soil losses 

from minimum-standard forest roads. Journal of Soil and Water 

Conservation. 42(1): 46–50.

Kuhlman, E.G. 1978. The devastation of American chestnut by blight. 

In: Proceedings: American chestnut symposium. Morgantown, WV: 

West Virginia University Books: 1–6.

Lamson, N.I.; Smith, H.C. 1991. Stand development and yields of 

Appalachian hardwood stands managed with single-tree selection for 

at least 30 years. Res. Pap. NE-655. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment 

Station. 6 p.

Lamson, N.I.; Smith, H.C.; Perkey, A.W.; Brock, S.M. 1990. Crown 

release increases growth of crop trees. Res. Pap. NE-635. Radnor, 

PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Forest Experiment Station. 8 p.

Little, M.; Pauley, T.K.; Kochenderfer, J.; Edwards, P. 1990. The 

association of forest maturity with salamander abundance. West 

Virginia Academy of Science. 62(1): 18. 

MacCleery, D.W. 1992. What on earth have we done to our forests? 

A brief overview on the conditions and trends of U.S. forests. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 26 p.

Madarish, D.; Schuler, T.M. 2002. Effects of forest management 

practices on the federally endangered running buffalo clover 

(Trifolium stoloniferum Muhl. Ex. A. Eaton). Natural Areas Journal. 

22: 120–128.

Madarish, D.M.; Rodrigue, J.L.; Adams, M.B. 2002. Vascular flora 

and macroscopic fauna on the Fernow Experimental Forest. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NE-291. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. 37 p. 

Marcum, C. 1994. Ecology and natural history of four plethodontid 

species in the Fernow Experimental Forest, Tucker County, West 

Virginia. M.S. Thesis. Huntington, WV: Marshall University. 254 p. 

Mauer, B.A.; Whitmore, R. 1980. Foraging changes by canopy birds in 

a clearcut forest. West Virginia Forestry Notes. 8: 7–12. 

Maxwell, H. 1884. History of Tucker County. Kingwood, WV: Preston 

Publishing Co. 590 p.

Maxwell, H. 1910. The use and abuse of forests by the Virginia Indians. 

William and Mary Quarterly. 19: 73–103.

McArthur, L.B. 1980. The impact of various forest management 

practices on passerine community structure. M.S. Thesis. 

Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University. 121 p. 

McCann, D.P.; McGill, D.W.; Schuler, T.M.; Ford, W.M. 2006. Shortterm effects of springtime prescribed fires on adult populations 

of soil-emerging weevils in central Appalachian hardwood stands. 

In: Connor, Kristina F.; ed. Proceedings: 13th biennial southern 

silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-92. Asheville, 

NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern 

Research Station: 490–495.

McGill, D.W.; Schuler, T.M. 2003. USDA Forest Service farm 

woodlands case study, 50-year results from West Virginia. In: 

Proceedings: 13th central hardwood forest conference; 2002 April 

1-3; Urbana, IL. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-234. St. Paul, MN: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research 

Station: 64–74.
24 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

McNab, W.H.; Avers, P.E., comps. 1994. Ecological subregions of 

the United States. Publ. WO-WSA-5. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 267p.

Menzel, M.A.; Owen, S.F.; Ford, W.M.; Edwards, J.W.; Wood, P.B.; 

Chapman, B.R.; Miller, K.V. 2002. Roost-tree selection by northern 

long-eared bats (Myotis septentrionalis) maternity colonies in an 

industrial forest of the central Appalachian Mountains. Forest 

Ecology and Management. 155: 107–114.

Miller, G.W. 1991. Practicing uneven-age management: does it pay: 

some economic considerations. In: Vodak, M.C., ed. Proceedings: 

uneven-aged management of hardwoods in the northeast, 1991. 

New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University: 47–59.

Miller, G.W. 1993. Financial aspects of partial cutting practices in 

central Appalachian hardwoods. Res. Pap. NE-673. Radnor, PA: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station. 9 p.

Miller, G.W.; Johnson, J.E.; Baumgras, J.E. 1997. Deferment cutting 

in central Appalachian hardwoods: an update. In: Meyer, D.A., 

ed. Proceedings: 25th annual hardwood symposium, 25 years 

of hardwood silviculture: a look back and a look ahead, 1997. 

Memphis, TN: National Hardwood Lumber Association: 83–97.

Miller, G.W.; Sullivan, J. 1993. Formulating a stand-growth model for 

mathematical programming problems in Appalachian forests. In: 

Gillespie, Andrew R.; Parker, George R.; Pope, Phillip E.; Rink, 

George, eds. Proceedings: 9th central hardwood forest conference, 

1993. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-161. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment 

Station: 353–362.

Moseley, K.R. 2008. An assessment of Monongahela National Forest 

management indicator species. Ph.D. Dissertation. Morgantown, 

WV: West Virginia University. 258 p.

Moseley, K.R.; Ford, W.M.; Edwards, J.W.; Schuler, T.M. 2008. 

Long-term partial cutting impacts on Desmognathus salamander 

abundance in West Virginia headwater streams. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 254: 300–307. 

Ordiway, L.D. 1994. Factors influencing spatial distribution and natural 

history of Desmognathus ochrophaeus in West Virginia. M.S. Thesis. 

Huntington, WV: Marshall University. 147 p.

Owen, S.F.; Menzel, M.A.; Edwards, J.W.; Ford, W.M.; Menzel, J.M.; 

Chapman, B.R.; Wood, P.B.; Miller, K.V. 2004. Bat activity in 

harvested and intact forest stands in the Allegheny Mountains. 

Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 21: 154–159. 

Pan, C.; Tajchman, S.J.; Kochenderfer, J.N. 1997. Dendroclimatological 

analysis of major forest species of the central Appalachians. Forest 

Ecology and Management. 98: 77–87.

Patric, J.H. 1973. Deforestation effects on soil moisture, streamflow, 

and water balance in the central Appalachians. Res. Pap. NE-259. 

Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 12 p.

Patric, J.H.; Goswami, N. 1968. Evaporation pan studies—forest 

research at Parsons. West Virginia Agriculture and Forestry. 1(4): 

6–10.

Patric, J.H.; Reinhart, K.G. 1971. Hydrologic effects of deforesting two 

mountain watersheds in West Virginia. Water Resources Research. 7: 

1182–1188.

Patric, J.H.; Smith, D.W. 1978. Some effects of urea fertilization on 

a forested watershed in West Virginia. In: Proceedings: central 

hardwood conference II, 1978. Lafayette, IN: Purdue University: 

210-227.

Patric, J.H.; Studenmund, W.R. 1975. Some seldom-reported statistics 

on precipitation at Elkins, West Virginia. West Virginia Agriculture 

and Forestry. 6(2): 14–16.

Pauley, T.K. 1995. Effects of diflubenzuron on non-target organisms 

(salamanders) in broadleaf forested watersheds in the northeast. 

Publ. FHM-NC-0595. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, National Center for Forest Health 

Management: 42–52.

Pauley, T.K.; Little, M.; Edwards, P.; Kochenderfer, J. 1990. The effects 

of 1988 drought on surface abundance of terrestrial salamanders. 

West Virginia Academy of Science. 62(1): 19. 

Pauley, T.K.; Watson, M.B.; Kochenderfer, J.N.; Little, M. 2006. 

Response of salamanders to experimental acidification treatments. 

In: Adams, M.B.; DeWalle, D.R.; Hom, J.L., eds. The Fernow 

watershed acidification study. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer: 

189–200.

Pennington, W. 1975. Personal communication. Interviews conducted 

by Kochenderfer, J.N.. Unpublished notes on file at the Timber and 

Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV.

Petranka, J.W.; Brannon, M.P.; Hopey, M.E.; Smith, C.K. 1994. Effects 

of timber harvesting on low elevation populations of southern 

Appalachian salamanders. Forest Ecology and Management. 67: 

135–147.
Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities 25

Reinhart, K.G. 1958. Calibration of five small forested watersheds. 

American Geophysical Union Transactions. 38: 933–936.

Reinhart, K.G.; Eschner, A.; Trimble, G.R., Jr. 1963. Effect on 

streamflow of four forest practices in the mountains of West 

Virginia. Res. Pap. NE-1. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 

79 p.

Rentch, J.S.; Schuler, T.M.; Ford, W.M.; Nowacki, G.J. 2007. Red 

spruce stand dynamics, simulations, and restoration opportunities in 

the central Appalachians. Restoration Ecology. 15(3): 440–452.

Rowan, E.L. 2004. Effect of a spring prescribed fire on chipmunk 

home ranges and a woodland salamander community in a central 

Appalachian forest. M.S. Thesis. Athens, GA: University of Georgia. 

87 p. 

Rowan, E.L.; Ford, W.M.; Castleberry, S.B.; Rodrigue, J.R.; Schuler, 

T.M. 2005. Response of eastern chipmunks to single application 

spring prescribed fires on the Fernow Experimental Forest. Res. Pap. 

NE-727. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. 10 p. 

Russell, K.R.; Wigley, T.B.; Baughman, W.M., et al. 2004. Responses of 

southeastern amphibians and reptiles to forest management: a review.

In: Rauscher, H.M.; Johnsen, K., eds. Southern forest science: past, 

present, and future. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-75. Asheville, NC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station: 319–334.

Ryder, R.; Edwards, P.J. 2005. Development of a repeatable regional 

protocol for performance-based monitoring of forestry best 

management practices. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-335. Newtown Square, 

PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Research Station. 15 p.

Ryder, R.; Edwards, P.J. 2006. A regional protocol for evaluating the 

effectiveness of forestry best management practices at controlling 

erosion and sedimentation. In: Proceedings: 8th Federal interagency 

sedimentation conference, 2006. Reno, NV. 7 p.

Schuler, T.M. 1994. Survival and growth of white ash families and 

provenances 15 years after establishment in West Virginia. Res. 

Pap. NE-684. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 7 p.

Schuler, T.M. 2004. Fifty years of partial harvesting in a mixed 

mesophytic forest: composition and productivity. Canadian Journal 

of Forest Research. 34: 985–997.

Schuler, T.M. 2006. Crop tree release improves competitiveness of 

northern red oak growing in association with black cherry. Northern 

Journal of Applied Forestry. 23(2): 77–82.

Schuler, T.M.; Fajvan, M.A. 1999. Understory characteristics and 

disturbance history of a central Appalachian forest prior to oldgrowth harvesting. Res. Pap. NE-710. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. 12 p.

Schuler, T.M.; Gillespie, A.R. 2000. Temporal patterns of woody species 

diversity in a central Appalachian forest from 1856 to 1997. Journal 

of the Torrey Botanical Society. 127(2): 149–161.

Schuler, T.M.; Marquis, D.A.; Ernst, R.L.; Simpson, B.T. 1993. Test of 

four stand growth simulators for the northeastern United States. Res. 

Pap. NE-676. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 14 p.

Schuler, T.M.; McClain, W.R. 2003. Fire history of a ridge and 

valley oak forest. Res. Pap. NE-724. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research 

Station. 9 p.

Schuler, T.M.; McGill, D.W. 2007. Long-term assessment of financial 

maturity, diameter-limit selection in the central Appalachians. Res. 

Pap. NRS-2. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 16 p.

Schuler, T.M.; Miller, G.W. 1996. Guidelines for using tree shelters to 

regenerate northern red oak. In: Brissette, J.C., ed. Proceedings: tree 

shelter conference, 1995. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-221. Radnor, PA: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station: 37–45.

Shoemaker, H.W. 1939. Vanished game. In: Ely, A.; Anthony, H.E.; 

Carpenter, R.M., eds. North American big game. New York: Charles 

Scribner’s Sons: 15–34.

Smith, H.C. 1984. Forest management guidelines for controlling wild 

grapevines. Res. Pap. NE-548. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 

15 p.

Smith, H.C.; Lamson, N.I. 1986. Wild grapevines—a special problem 

in immature Appalachian hardwood stands. In: Smith, H. Clay; Eye, 

Maxine C., eds. Proceedings: guidelines for managing immature 

Appalachian hardwood stands; 1986 May 28-30; Morgantown, 

WV. SAF Publ. 86-02. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University 

Books, Society of American Foresters: 228–239.

Tajchman, S.J.; Fu, H.; Kochenderfer, J.N. 1997. Water and energy 

balance of a forested Appalachian watershed. Agricultural and Forest 

Meteorology. 84: 61–68. 

Taylor, S.B. 1999. Geomorphic controls on sediment-transport 

efficiency in the central Appalachians: a comparative analysis of 

three watersheds underlain by the Acadian clastic wedge. Ph.D. 

Dissertation. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University. 330 p.
26 Fernow Experimental Forest: Research History and Opportunities

Weitzman, S. 1949. The Fernow Experimental Forest. Misc. Publ. 

Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 16 p.

Weitzman, S. 1952. Mountain logging. Southern Lumberman. 

185(2321): 199–202.

Wendel, G.W. 1980. Sugar maple provenance study: West Virginia 

outplanting—10-year results. Res. Pap. NE-460. Broomall, PA: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station. 5 p. 

Wendel, G.W.; Kochenderfer, J.N.; Biller, C.J. 1974. Skyline cable 

logging in West Virginia. Northern Logger. 22(12): 14–15.

Williams, G.E. 2002. Relations of nesting behavior, nest predators and 

nesting success of wood thrushes (Hylocichla mustelina) to habitat 

characteristics at multiple scales. Ph.D. Dissertation. Morgantown, 

WV: West Virginia University. 145 p. 

Yandle, D.O.; Myers, J.R.; Mayo, J.H.; Lamson, N.I. 1988. 

Development and application of a stand-based growth model 

for mixed hardwood stands. In: Forest growth modeling and 

prediction, volume 1. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-120. St. Paul, MN: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest 

Experiment Station: 230–238.

Thomas-Van Gundy, M.A.; Nowacki, G.J.; Schuler, T.M. 2007. Rulebased mapping of fire-adapted vegetation and fire regimes for the 

Monongahela National Forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-12. Newtown 

Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northern Research Station. 24 p.

Thomas-Van Gundy, M.A.; Schuler, T.M. 2008. Deferred rotation 

harvests in central Appalachia: 20- and 25-year results. In: 

Proceedings: 16th central hardwood forest conference, 2008. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NRS-P-24. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station: 423–435.

Trani, M.K.; Chapman, B.R. 2007. Puma concolor (mountain lion). In: 

Trani, M.K.; Ford, W.M.; Chapman, B.R., eds. The land manager’s 

guide to mammals of the South. Durham, NC: The Nature 

Conservancy: 457–462. 

Trimble, G.R., Jr. 1977. A history of the Fernow Experimental Forest 

and the Parsons Timber and Watershed Laboratory. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

NE-28. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 46 p.

Trimble, G.R., Jr.; Mendel, J.J.; Kennell, R.A. 1974. A procedure 

for selection marking in hardwoods combining silvicultural 

considerations with economic guidelines. Res. Pap. NE-292. 

Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 13 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2003. Forest 

insect and disease conditions in the United States 2001. Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Health 

Protection. 112 p.