Louisiana’s Palustris Experimental 

Forest: 75 Years of Research that 

Transformed the South

James P. Barnett, James D. Haywood, and Henry A. Pearson

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Southern 

Research Station

General Technical 

Report SRS–148
Cover

The J.K. Johnson Tract of the Palustris Experimental Forest is located near Elmer, LA. 

Photograph was taken by Donald P. Feduccia for Thomas E. Campbell in the late 1970s.

Photo credits

Unless otherwise noted, the photographs are from collections of the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, the Louisiana Forestry Commission (now Louisiana 

Department of Agriculture and Forestry), and the Louisiana Forestry Association. 

The organizations have extensive photographic collections, and many of the early 

photographs were interchanged among agencies. While working for these organizations, 

professional photographers Elemore Morgan and Tommy Kohara took many of the 

photographs. 

Disclaimer

The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does 

not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or 

service. Pesticide Precautionary Statement This publication reports research involving 

pesticides. It does not contain recommendations for their use, nor does it imply that the 

uses discussed here have been registered. All uses of pesticides must be registered by 

appropriate State and Federal agencies before they can be recommended. 

Caution 

Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, desirable plants, and fish or 

other wildlife—if they are not handled or applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively 

and carefully. Follow recommended practices for disposal of surplus pesticides and 

pesticide containers.

Authors:

James P. Barnett, retired Chief Silviculturist, Emeritus Scientist, 

and James D. Haywood, Supervisory Research Forester, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station, Pineville, LA 71360; Henry A. Pearson worked most of 

his career as Project Leader and Chief Range Scientist, and is now 

Emeritus Scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station, and retired from the USDA Agricultural 

Research Service. 

November 2011

Southern Research Station

200 W. T. Weaver Blvd.

Asheville, NC 28804
Louisiana’s Palustris Experimental Forest: 

75 Years of Research that Transformed the South

James P. Barnett, James D. Haywood, and Henry A. Pearson

Abstract—The Palustris Experimental Forest, located on Kisatchie National Forest,

has been in existence for 75 years. Research at Palustris has focused on southern pine 

reforestation technology, including seed production, bareroot nursery production, 

direct seeding, and planting container seedlings. After establishing pine plantations, 

researchers developed stand management guidelines for thinning, fertilizing, use 

of fire, stocking levels, and modeling of growth projections. Researchers elucidated 

knowledge of soil influences and plant competition, factors key to optimizing and 

maintaining plantation stand productivity. Researchers also emphasized range 

management that established guidelines for livestock utilization on forest ranges 

across the South. Today’s forest industry across the South maximizes productivity 

with the management practices developed by researchers on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest. 

Keywords: Agroforestry, history of southern forestry, pine plantation management, 

reforestation of southern pines, seed and seedling physiology

INTRoDuCTIoN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

THE NEED FoR RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

ESTABLISHmENT oF THE PALuSTRIS ExPERImENTAL FoREST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

J.K. Johnson Tract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Longleaf Tract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

FoREST ADmINISTRAToRS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Philip C. Wakeley. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

John T. Cassady. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

William F. (Bill) Mann, Jr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Vince L. Duvall. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Henry A. Pearson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

James P. (Jim) Barnett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

James D. (Dave) Haywood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

RESEARCH PRogRAmS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Forest Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Range Management and Agroforestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Intensive Culture Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Insect and Disease Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Fire Research and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Summary of the Research Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

CoNCLuSIoNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

LITERATuRE CITED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

ACKNowLEDgmENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Contents

1

In the late 1800s, forests in the United States were 

harvested with little regard for conserving or reforesting 

them. The combined threats of logging, wildfire, land 

clearing, and wildlife depletion called into question the 

supposed inexhaustibility of the Nation’s forests. 

As a result of this conservation impetus, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, the Forest Service, was 

established in 1905. The chief of the newly created 

Forest Service, Gifford Pinchot, helped persuade 

U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt to develop and 

promote conservation as the “wise use” of natural 

resources (MacCleery 2002). Under the “wise use” 

view, resources were to be managed to protect the basic 

productivity of the land and its ability to serve future 

generations.

Supporting the “wise use” philosophy, the Forest 

Service in 1915 created a research branch for scientific 

and technical investigations. Soon after, the U.S. 

Congress expanded forestry research and authorized 

regional forestry research stations. In 1921, the Southern 

Forest Experiment Station was established with 

headquarters in New Orleans, LA, and the Appalachian 

Forest Experiment Station in Asheville, NC. The 

Southern Forest Experiment Station had research 

responsibility primarily for pine forests in the Coastal 

Plain region and the Appalachian Station for mountain 

hardwood forests of the Southeast.

Experimental forests have their genesis in the Great 

Depression (circa 1930s), when U.S. President Franklin 

D. Roosevelt’s New Deal programs brought an influx 

of money and manpower to expanding conservation 

programs. With help from work crews in the Civilian 

Conservation Corps (CCC) and the Works Progress 

Administration (WPA), forest researchers began in 

earnest to create experimental forests across the Nation. 

Most of these forests had a particular focus shaped by 

conservation needs of their particular region. Some of 

these forests were closed after meeting their immediate 

objectives, but others still serve ever changing research 

needs.

In 1935, the Palustris Experimental Forest was 

established in central Louisiana as a site for a program 

of evaluating outplanting trials of pine seedlings grown 

in nursery experimental studies. The program’s goal 

was to provide scientific technology for reforesting 

millions of acres of denuded forest land throughout the 

South. The research initiative was successful, eventually 

forming the foundation for a published set of guidelines 

for southern pine reforestation, “Planting the Southern 

Pines” by Phillip C. Wakeley (1954). 

The Palustris Experimental Forest expanded in 1950 

following the 1946 establishment of the Alexandria 

Research Center in Pineville, LA. The purpose of 

the expansion was to provide technology that might 

minimize the adverse effects of cattle and hogs that 

ranged freely on denuded forest land and limited 

success of reforestation programs. 

The Palustris Experimental Forest has met many other 

significant research needs. Today, it is a testing site for 

a wide array of interdisciplinary research programs. 

Over its 75-year history, research on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest changed how forestry is practiced 

across the South and produced programs that have 

positively affected the economic value of southern 

forests.

The major influences of pine forest research programs 

conducted on the Palustris Experimental Forest and 

their impact on expanding the southern economy is the 

focus of this recorded history.

Introduction
2

The original southern pine forests were awesome in 

their vastness. Interrupted by occasional bottomland 

swamps, pine forests stretched throughout the Coastal 

Plain from Virginia to the Texas plains in what the early 

settlers must have considered an endless expanse—a 

distance of nearly 1,500 miles. The longleaf pine forests 

were estimated at 90 million acres. It was probably 

inconceivable to most people at the time that this 

enormous supply of wood someday could be consumed 

and result in a landscape of devastated forests. 

From the colonial period until the start of the Civil War, 

farmers throughout the southeastern Coastal Plain and 

Piedmont cleared forests for crop production. By 1860, 

in Virginia, more than 25 million acres, nearly half of 

the land, had been cleared. Soil erosion became a major 

problem, and by the end of the Civil War, declining soil 

productivity led farmers to abandon large amounts of 

land throughout the Southeastern United States (Fox 

and others 2007). 

After the Civil War, the South’s economy was in 

shambles and forested land was inexpensive. Northern 

industrialists purchased timberland and hired local 

labor to operate large sawmills, particularly in the 

Mid-South. While resulting in deforestation throughout 

the South, the massive harvesting of the South’s virgin 

forests nevertheless provided a basis for economic 

recovery of the South.

Railroads played a large role in the South’s forests. 

Their expansion across the country in the 1880s made 

it easy for people to move into the Great Plains and 

West, thereby feeding great need for building materials 

for new homes and businesses. At the same time, 

railroads, along with steam-powered logging and 

milling equipment, brought to the South the technology 

to quickly harvest and mill tremendous quantities of 

timber. Logging and milling took place mainly in the 

western portion of the Gulf Coastal Plain where virgin 

pine forests had remained largely untouched. 

The Need for Research

Virgin longleaf pines near Flatwoods, LA, typical of the old-growth forests in the West Gulf Region. Photograph is circa late 1940s.
3

Wakeley (1954) stated that there were 13 million acres 

of forest land in the South that needed to be planted. 

Later, Wahlenberg (1960) estimated that 29 million 

acres were in need of reforestation. These conditions 

resulted from abusive agricultural practices that 

degraded soil productivity and from exploitative timber 

harvesting without provision for regeneration. 

Reforestation techniques became a high priority for 

Southern Forest Experiment Station scientists. Philip C. 

Wakeley was assigned responsibility for reforestation 

research when he reported to work for the Southern 

Station in 1924. His early nursery research was done 

in collaboration with the Great Southern Lumber 

Company in Bogalusa, LA. The lumber company had 

begun nursery development in the early 1920s under 

the direction of J.K. Johnson, the company’s practical 

forester, and F.O. (Red) Bateman, the company’s head 

ranger. Bateman and Wakeley developed early nursery 

and planting practices that landowners across the South 

adopted and applied. Wakeley’s collaboration with the 

Great Southern Lumber Company ended in the early 

1930s when the company went into receivership due 

to economic pressures of the Great Depression and 

because of diminishing amounts of old-growth timber.

The Southern Station’s reforestation research moved 

to the Stuart Nursery established by the Kisatchie 

National Forest near Pollock in central Louisiana. The 

Stuart Nursery, established in 1934, was supported 

by a Civilian Conservation Corps camp that provided 

much of the needed technical support. The Southern 

Station developed an office and a laboratory at the 

nursery where assigned scientists worked under 

Wakeley’s direction.

Cutover conditions like those in this photograph, taken on 

the Longleaf Tract of the Palustris Experimental Forest, were 

common across millions of acres in the West Gulf Coastal Plain 

in the 1930s and 1940s. 

Philip C. Wakeley 

conducted reforestation 

research in 1935 at the 

Stuart Nursery.

This Southern Forest Experiment Station building at the Stuart 

Nursery served as an office and laboratory for Station employees 

assigned to the nursery in the mid-1930s.
4

Moving the Southern Station’s reforestation research to 

the Stuart Nursery required a field laboratory to serve 

as an outplanting site for evaluating the effectiveness 

of proposed nursery practices. In 1934, Philip Wakeley 

prepared documentation to establish the Palustris 

Experimental Forest, and its establishment was formally 

approved in 1935. 

J.K. Johnson Tract

The newly created Palustris Experimental Forest 

consisted of 2,030 acres of cutover (completely 

harvested) longleaf pine forest type about 20 miles 

southwest of Alexandria, LA. The name Palustris was 

chosen because it is the scientific name for longleaf pine 

(Pinus palustris), the species in the greatest need for 

reforestation technology.

Well before its establishment as an experimental 

forest, the Palustris originally supported a heavy 

stand of pure longleaf pine (Wakeley 1954). Around 

1907, a portion of the longleaf pine forests was logged 

with teams of oxen, and in 1917, the remainder of the 

forests was cleared with steam skidders. Subsequently, 

except for a few residual longleaf pines scattered and 

in clumps, the forest was open grassland with little 

natural longleaf reproduction. Fire protection was 

lacking until the late 1920s and imperfect until 1933. 

Fire and hog protection were fairly effective from 

1934, when experimental planting began, until 1941, 

when many of the country’s resources were diverted 

from domestic uses to military ones in support of 

World War II.

In 1946, the protection and use of the Palustris 

Experimental Forest was restored, and the tract still 

is used as a resource for many and varied research 

programs. This portion of the experimental forest 

was named the J.K. Johnson Tract in 1950 when the 

Longleaf Tract was added to the forest. This part of the 

Experimental Forest was named in recognition of J.K. 

Johnson, the first forester hired by the Great Southern 

Lumber Company. 

Johnson had no forestry education but great practical 

experience, and led the early reforestation efforts of 

the Great Southern. Hired by Great Southern Lumber 

Company in l920, Johnson came to be called the 

earliest industrial forester in the South (Campbell 

1976). Johnson’s support of reforestation was critical 

for the continuing and strong collaboration in the 1920s 

between Great Southern Lumber Company and the 

Southern Forest Experiment Station.

Longleaf Tract

In 1944 and 1945, Robert S. Campbell of the Southern 

Station in New Orleans started studies in forest grazing 

(Cassady and Mann 1954). Much of the Johnson Tract 

was committed to reforestation studies—more than 

750 acres were in plantings of nursery studies. Many 

of these plantations were used for studies of thinning 

methods and other management techniques. Additional 

sites for range and other long-term research were 

needed to address issues related to forest grazing, forest 

range improvement, and use of chemicals to control 

scrub oaks. In 1950, the Longleaf Tract, an area of 

5,800 acres, was purchased and added to the Palustris 

Experimental Forest. Much like the Johnson Tract area, 

the Longleaf Tract was a cutover longleaf pine site, 

primarily with blue-stem grass (Andropogon gerardii 

and Schizachyrium scoparium species) ground cover 

suitable for livestock grazing. 

Outside the southern boundary of the Kisatchie National 

Forest when purchased, the Longleaf Tract was added to 

Kisatchie National Forest landholdings for management 

purposes. The Longleaf Tract is near McNary, LA, 

about 15 miles from the Johnson Tract.

Establishment of the 

Palustris Experimental Forest

J.K. Johnson, chief 

forester for the Great 

Southern Lumber 

Company.
5

For many years, the J.K. Johnson Tract and the 

Longleaf Tract were run as distinct entities from 

one another, meaning that each tract was overseen 

by its own manager. Even with this requirement of 

management staffing, relatively few scientists have 

managed the Palustris Experimental Forest during its 

75 years of existence.

Philip C. wakeley 

A 1924 graduate of Cornell University, Philip 

Wakeley was responsible for establishing the Palustris 

Experimental Forest in 1935. He also managed the J.K. 

Johnson Tract until the end of World War II. In the late 

1930s, Wakeley, with help from Civilian Conservation 

Corps crews, planted about 750,000 seedlings on the 

Johnson Tract in reforestation studies (Wakeley and 

Barnett 2011). Data from these studies became an 

important resource for his “Planting the Southern Pines” 

(Wakeley 1954), which, along with an earlier version 

(Wakeley 1935), provided guidelines for establishing 

southern pine plantations across the South. During 

World War II, no resources were available to maintain 

or even protect these studies, and forest management on 

the Johnson Tract necessarily languished until 1946. 

Wakeley also was responsible for establishing early tree 

improvement and genetics efforts with southern pine 

species. His efforts were instrumental in demonstrating 

the potential benefits of genetics programs. The 

Palustris Experimental Forest served as a significant 

resource for much of this early effort.

John T. Cassady

John Cassady was named officer-in-charge for the 

Alexandria Research Center when it was created in 

1946, and his responsibilities included supervision of the 

Palustris Experimental Forest. Trained at the University 

of Arizona and a former lieutenant colonel in the U.S. 

Army Air Corps, Cassady was more aligned with range 

management issues than forest management. Because 

open grazing of cattle, sheep, and hogs on cutover 

land impeded reforestation efforts, range management 

was a major concern. Range studies led by Robert S. 

Campbell—begun in 1944 on the Kisatchie National 

Forest’s Chandler Tract near Dry Prong, LA—became 

the basis for this program of research at the Alexandria 

Research Center. 

Cassady followed up on the range studies. He promoted 

creating the Longleaf Tract portion of the Experimental 

Forest to provide enhanced capability for grazing 

studies. The Longleaf Tract was established in 1950 

to develop better methods of planting and growing 

longleaf pine and to conduct research into increasing 

beef production on pine forest ranges without damage to 

the timber crop.

In 1951, William F. Mann, Jr., was transferred to 

the Alexandria Research Center to head timber 

management research programs, when a number of 

other scientists were added to the center’s staff to work 

on a significant multidisciplinary research effort.

One of Cassady’s strengths was his ability to bring 

together State and Federal agencies, private industries, 

and others for work on the research of the Alexandria 

Center. Through collaboration with the Southern Forest 

Experiment Station, Roy O. Martin Lumber Co., and 

the Louisiana Forestry Commission, residential and 

supporting structures were built on the Longleaf Tract 

in 1953. In 1956, Cassady transferred to head the 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station’s range program 

at Fort Myers, FL.

Forest Administrators

R.S. Campbell and John Cassady measuring samples of forage 

produced under varying overstory conditions.
6

william F. (Bill) mann, Jr.

Bill Mann replaced Cassady as leader of the Alexandria 

Research Center. Mann had forestry training at 

Pennsylvania State University and experience from 

other research locations. With increasing funding and 

cooperation from other organizations, the Alexandria 

Research Center significantly expanded its professional 

staff. Research widened to include seed physiology, 

direct seeding, nursery culture, soil relations, plantation 

establishment and management, range management, 

chemical control of hardwoods, forest insects, wildlife, 

and tree improvement. Mann built collaborative 

relationships with organizations that developed political 

influence, resulting in Congressional support that 

funded excellent new facilities in Pineville, LA, in 1963. 

When the Forest Service reorganized it’s research 

initiatives in 1964, Alexandria Research Center 

programs were completely restructured. The center’s 

large program of many disciplines of research was 

divided into a number of smaller projects with much 

narrower research aims. Mann was named project leader 

for Timber Management Research (TMR), the largest 

of the new research work units. Other projects were 

Forest Insect Research, Forest Range Research, Forest 

Products Research, and Forest Fire Research.

In the TMR project’s purview were reforestation (e.g., 

seed physiology, nursery production and direct seeding), 

competition control, soil-related issues, plantation 

growth and yield, tree improvement, and related 

silvicultural research. 

In 1969, a portion of Mann’s TMR program was 

withdrawn to create an Intensive Culture Research 

Project, with assigned programs including techniques 

to maximize stand productivity with a focus on 

fertilization, irrigation, soil management, and postplanting competition control. This unit was led by 

Eugene Shoulders.

During Mann’s tenure as leader of TMR, the unit gained 

regional, national, and international recognition for 

productivity and significant research accomplishments. 

The research center received the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) Superior Service Award in 1961 for 

contributions in direct seeding, chemical competition 

control, and range management research. Scientists 

from many parts of the world came to Pineville to study 

the project’s research accomplishments.

Mann died on the job in 1980 while evaluating a study 

site in the Kisatchie National Forest.

Vince L. Duvall

Vince Duvall joined the Southern Station to lead range 

research on the Palustris Experimental Forest in 1959. 

During the research reorganization of 1964, he was 

named project leader for Forest Range Research. Duvall 

assumed administrative responsibility for the Longleaf 

Tract of the Palustris Experimental Forest while Mann 

retained responsibility for the Johnson Tract. Duvall 

came to the Southern Station a mature scientist and 

quickly developed meaningful research programs that 

built on the ongoing efforts in range management.

Duvall built a small but well-trained staff of botanists 

and range specialists. Considerable scientific effort 

went into understanding forage plants, their seasonal 

availability and their nutritional value. From this 

information, researchers developed supplemental winter 

feeding guidelines. This range program was designed to 

support grazing under forested conditions, but as forest 

stands developed, the availability of forage declined. 

Researchers began working with cooperating cattlemen 

Bill Mann built 

collaboration with 

Federal, State, and 

private organizations that 

led to excellent facilities 

and research programs.

Vince L. Duvall (left) with U.S. Senator Allen Ellender, longtime chair of the U.S. Senate’s Agriculture Committee, at a field 

day held for Ellender. Whit Whitaker (right) was the first range 

technician hired by the Southern Station at the Alexandria 

Forestry Center.
7

on recommendations for the level of tree stocking 

that was compatible with sustainable levels of forage 

production. 

Duvall served as project leader and administrator of the 

Longleaf Tract until 1968 when he was transferred to an 

assistant director position in New Orleans. 

Henry A. Pearson

Henry Pearson accepted leadership of the range 

research unit in 1969 and expanded the role of the 

Palustris Experimental Forest to include evaluating the 

interrelationships among the South’s livestock, trees, 

and wildlife. Cattle had grazed on the Longleaf Tract, 

both before and after the designation of Palustris as 

an experimental forest. Under Pearson’s leadership, 

the research program on the Longleaf Tract began to 

provide land managers with alternatives for attaining 

multiple-use objectives. Research provided data to 

quantify the effects of livestock and timber management 

practices on trees, forage, livestock, watershed, 

and wildlife. In-depth ecological relationships and 

descriptions for forest-range management practices were 

based on an understanding of overstory tree, understory 

herbage and browse relationships, and forage responses 

to direct-seeded and planted pines, prescribed burning, 

and livestock grazing.

As both economics of grazing cattle under forested 

conditions and availability of open forest lands declined, 

Pearson led a shift in the range program to embrace 

a broader agroforestry context. His research on the 

Palustris Experimental Forest pioneered dual land use 

with livestock and trees in the South, leading to better 

wildlife habitat as well as increased food and fiber 

supplies for commercial use. 

The range-related studies on the Palustris Experimental 

Forest focused on an array of interacting resource values 

long before there was emphasis to do so. These studies 

provided a vital link in multiple-use management of 

natural resources throughout the South, providing much 

of the ecological basis for managing multiple resources 

on both governmental and private lands. One highlight 

of this effort was the pooling of research information at 

a 1987 workshop, culminating with the publication of 

“Ecological, Physical, and Socioeconomic Relationships 

within Southern National Forests” (Pearson and others 

1987).

Pearson’s tenure as leader of the range program between 

1969 and 1991 was interrupted for 2 years (1976-77) 

while he served as branch chief for Range, Wildlife, 

and Fish Habitat Research in the Forest Service’s 

Washington Office. During this period, Warren P. Clary 

served as project leader for the range program. Clary 

was a range specialist from the Rocky Mountain Forest 

Experiment Station and returned to a position there in 

1977.

International involvement characterized Pearson’s 

leadership. In 1974, he represented the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture at the 12th International Grassland 

Congress in Moscow, Russia, presenting research 

findings from the Longleaf Tract. His presentation was 

well received, and he participated in most grassland 

congresses since around the world. Compared to range 

programs in the Western United States, range programs 

in the Southern United States were small, but Pearson 

represented the Southern Station and the Forest Service 

well internationally.

The range program was closed by the Southern Forest 

Experiment Station in 1991 as a result of budgetary 

limitations and shifts in program emphases. Pearson 

was a creative and energetic leader, and was highly 

regarded by land managers across the South. When 

the program closed, Pearson transferred to a similar 

position in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Agricultural Research Service in Booneville, AR, 

where he developed an agroforestry research program. 

Management of the Longleaf Tract moved back to the 

Forest Management Research program.

James P. (Jim) Barnett

Jim Barnett began his research career at the Alexandria 

Research Center in 1961 after release from active duty 

in the U.S. Coast Guard Reserve. He was assigned 

to southern pine seed research in Mann’s Timber 

Management Research program. After Mann’s death in 

1980, Barnett was named project leader of the Timber 

Management Research unit, where he managed the J.K. 

Johnson Tract. In 1992, after the closure of the range 

program, he was assigned the additional responsibility of 

managing the Longleaf Tract. He continued with these 

responsibilities until he retired in 2005.

The Palustris Experimental Forest became a site 

for much of Barnett’s research in southern pine 

reforestation. A seed-testing laboratory was housed 

Henry A. Pearson, 

a noted leader in 

conducting and 

transferring range 

research results.
8

on the Johnson Tract until new facilities were built in 

Pineville, LA. Studies related to direct seeding and 

planting were conducted there as well. In the early 

1970s, Barnett began researching the technology of 

growing seedlings in containers, work that supports 

current reforestation methodology for longleaf pines.

During more than 40 years at the Alexandria Forestry 

Center, Barnett advanced basic and applied knowledge 

about successful techniques for seed physiology, nursery 

practices, and reforestation worldwide. He received 

national recognition from the Chief of the Forest 

Service, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Society 

of American Foresters. In addition, he participated in 

scientific exchanges with more than a dozen countries 

and made a number of international keynote addresses. 

With more than 300 publications related to reforestation 

of southern pine species, he helped shape the current 

southern pine plantation establishment technology that is 

applied across the South.

In addition to his personal research, Barnett led a 

productive research work unit that provided critical 

information for establishing and managing southern 

pine plantations. The research program’s focus areas 

include over- and under-story plant competition, 

stand growth and yield prediction models, soil-site 

relationships, fire effects on stand management, and 

physiology of silvicultural practices. 

Barnett led the development of the Forest Service’s 

National Reforestation, Nurseries, and Genetic 

Resources (RNGR) program, which emerged in 

response to a loss, across the Forest Service, of technical 

expertise in reforestation. Supported by Forest Service 

branches (State and Private Forestry, Research and 

Development, and National Forest System), the program 

addresses forestry and conservation land management 

issues and wildland restoration. An important aspect of 

the RNGR program was an outreach program to Native 

Americans.

James D. (Dave) Haywood

Dave Haywood joined the Timber Management Project 

in 1978 as a silviculturist. His research has focused 

on the ecology and management of the longleaf pine 

ecosystem. Even before taking over management of 

the Palustris Experimental Forest, he was assigned 

the responsibility of coordinating with the Kisatchie 

National Forest on thinning and harvesting activities 

and on the scheduling of prescribed burning.

Haywood is recognized as one of the premier 

silviculturists of the longleaf pine ecosystem. His 

research on longleaf pine regeneration and restoration 

has covered the influences of vegetation control, 

fertilization, prescribed fire, and pine straw harvesting 

on long-term productivity and stability of plant 

communities of the longleaf pine ecosystem. He also 

has published widely on the management of loblolly 

pine (Pinus taeda) stands, especially on the effects of 

thinning on growth and yield of young plantations as 

well as on the effects of harvesting and regeneration 

practices on the productivity of pine stands in the next 

rotation. 

After Jim Barnett’s retirement, the Pineville forest 

management research program was reorganized. The 

unit’s project leader, Kristina F. Connor, is stationed in 

Auburn, AL. To meet the need for local management 

of the Palustris Experimental Forest, Haywood was 

assigned administrative responsibility for both tracts. 

In this role, he has built an excellent relationship with 

the managers of the Kisatchie National Forest that is 

essential for the protection and management of the 

experimental forest.

Dave Haywood 

assumed management 

responsibility of the 

Palustris Experiment 

Forest in 2005.

Jim Barnett’s 

reforestation research 

over 40 years has shaped 

plantation establishment 

technology used across 

the South.
9

Through the 75 years of its existence, the Palustris 

Experimental Forest has served as a resource for 

conducting many and varied research programs 

designed to restore the South’s devastated forests and 

enhance their productivity. The list of research efforts is 

long, and documentation of some programs is limited. 

It is possible, then, to focus only on major research 

initiatives.

Cassady and Mann (1954) document well the conditions 

in the South in the late 1940s and early 1950s that 

required a major research initiative. The forests of 

Louisiana and east Texas, in particular, were devastated 

by aggressive harvesting. About 20 percent of the 

forest land, or 1,250,000 acres, had been clearcut so 

completely that it was barren of trees and in need of 

artificial regeneration. Another 3 million acres of 

timberland were producing much below full potential 

because scrub oaks and other low-value hardwoods 

were overabundant and pine stands were inadequate.

The cutover pine lands supported an abundant stand of 

native grasses, and range livestock grazing became an 

important industry. Grazing was mostly on the freerange principle. Most of the land was unfenced, and all 

kinds, grades, and ownership of stock grazed together.

The Alexandria Research Center was established in 

1946 to develop improved methods of reforestation and 

management with the aim of guiding forest landowners 

in the task of attaining optimum production and income. 

Initially, five lines of investigation were selected:

1. Reforesting cutover pine lands.

2. Managing pine plantations for optimum returns.

3. Controlling low-grade hardwoods with chemicals.

4. Improving management of livestock and forage on

forest ranges.

5. Determining costs and returns of good forest

management.

Programs were established to address these research 

needs, and periodically the research programs were 

reevaluated and modified to meet new developments 

and program needs. The Palustris Experimental Forest 

became a field laboratory for developing and evaluating 

ongoing research programs in reforestation and 

management of southern pine plantations.

Research Programs

Because of open range laws, livestock was to allowed to graze on unfenced, cutover land that had been planted to pine.
10

Forest management

The early emphasis of research on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest was called timber management. 

In the 1980s, the name for the emphasis switched to 

forest management to suggest a broader context of 

management objectives. Much of the forest management 

research undertaken on the Palustris Experimental 

Forest is described in the following sections.

Artificial Regeneration 

Natural regeneration on cutover lands was limited 

by the scarcity of remnant stands or seed trees. 

Artificial regeneration, then, became a critical research 

area in restoring the South’s forests. However, the 

supply of quality seed was insufficient to support the 

regeneration effort. Seed research was initiated to 

address this problem.

Seed research—Wakeley’s “Planting the Southern 

Pines” (1954) provided considerable information on 

collecting and producing pine seeds for nursery use. It 

was difficult to produce and store enough longleaf pine 

seeds for planting, and research concentrated on how 

to quantify collecting, processing, storing, and treating 

procedures. In the late 1950s, B.F. (Bob) McLemore, 

recruited to address seed problems, started seed storage 

evaluations and a wide range of seed physiology 

studies. He was joined in the effort in 1961 with the 

assignment of Jim Barnett to the project. Under the team 

of McLemore and Barnett, seed physiology research 

was expanded to all four major pines and those minor 

species of pines that have a range in the South. 

Early seed studies were conducted in a seed testing 

laboratory on the experimental forest. With construction 

of the Alexandria Forestry Center facilities in 1963, 

testing moved there. Seed collecting, processing, and 

storing studies continued on the experimental forest.

This seed research is reported in many publications, 

including research on collection and processing (Barnett 

1976a, 1988, McLemore 1959, Pawuk and Barnett 1979), 

storage (Barnett 1969, 1970, Barnett and McLemore 

1970, Barnett and Vozzo 1985, McLemore and Barnett 

1966), dormancy (Barnett 1972, 1976b, Barnett and 

McLemore 1984), and seed treatments (Barnett 1971, 

Barnett and McGilvray 2002a, McLemore 1971, 

McLemore and Czabator 1961). 

McLemore was transferred to the Southern Forest 

Experiment Station’s research work unit in Monticello, 

AR, in 1978, but Barnett continued seed research 

specifically related to nursery problems until his 

retirement in 2005.

Seed research was critical to successful artificial 

regeneration programs across the South—where more 

than 1 billion southern pine seedlings are produced 

annually—as well as in many countries where southern 

pines have been introduced.

Direct seeding—In the late 1940s, researchers estimated 

that it would take 50 years to reforest the treeless longleaf 

pine land of Louisiana and east Texas if nursery seedlings 

were planted at the then-current rate (Cassady and Mann 

1954). Direct seeding promised to be cheaper, faster, and 

more effective than planting, and its development became 

a priority of the Alexandria Research Center. Early on, 

researchers understood that major failures of longleaf 

top: Bob McLemore removing seeds from cold storage for testing.

bottom: A germinating longleaf pine seed.
11

pines to seed could be attributed to predation by birds and 

rodents. Harold J. Derr became leader of this research 

initiative. He and Bill Mann, the Center Leader, got 

Brooke Meanley of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to 

help them evaluate potential animal repellents (Mann and 

others 1956). 

In a number of studies on the Palustris Experimental 

Forest, a chemical mixture of thiram (as bird repellent) 

and endrin (as a rodent repellent) was found to be 

effective in protecting the seeds from predation (Derr 

1964).

During the 1960s and 1970s, direct seeding was used 

to reforest hundreds of thousands of acres of cutover 

land in the West Gulf Region. This technology was 

extended to other regions of the country, as well as 

internationally. Seeding, which works well where large 

areas need reforestation, has been used effectively 

following large wildfires. Aerial application was the 

most efficient method of seeding, but it often resulted 

in overstocked stands. To better control tree spacing, 

row and hand seeding were then developed and worked 

well for smaller tracts of land. These techniques are 

described in Derr and Mann’s “Direct-seeding Pines of 

the South” (1971). 

Development of direct seeding was one of the major 

accomplishments that led to the research unit receiving 

the USDA Superior Service award in 1961. Large 

acreages of cutover land were reforested. But direct 

seeding fell into disfavor due to lack of stocking control 

and less consistent establishment success. There was 

also concern that endrin entering streamways might be 

toxic to fish. Under a U.S. Department of Agriculture 

reevaluation of such chemicals in the mid-1970s, 

Barnett led a multi-agency team that helped determine 

the relative safety of endrin to the environment in small 

applications (Barnett and others 1980). Barnett also 

helped lead a search for a replacement for endrin, and 

with other researchers found that the most promising 

chemical, when used with thiram, is capsicum, a 

concentrated hot pepper sauce (Nolte and Barnett 2000). 

Direct seeding was a major advance in the reforestation 

of millions of acres of open cutover land. It is rarely 

used today because conditions where it is best applied 

are now infrequently encountered. (Direct seeding 

works best on large open areas where competition 

Flocks of Eastern Meadowlarks ate large quantities of seeds.

top: Harold J. Derr sowing longleaf seeds with a cyclone seeder.

bottom: Tommy Rhame, first technician on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest, supervised and trained a core group 

of technicians who spent their careers supporting research 

programs.
12

control can be readily applied and where areas are large 

enough so seed predator populations from surrounding 

areas do not overwhelm repellent effectiveness.)

Bareroot nursery research—The Palustris 

Experimental Forest was established in 1935 to provide 

an experimental area to study the bareroot nursery 

procedures under development at the Kisatchie National 

Forest’s Stuart Nursery. With assistance from Civilian 

Conservation Corps crews, nearly 750,000 seedlings 

were planted in studies on the experimental forest. The 

bareroot nursery research shaped Wakeley’s “Planting 

the Southern Pines” (1954), a publication vital to the 

effective application of artificial regeneration and 

which, while long out of print, is still relied on as a solid 

reference on the seedling physiology of southern pines. 

Studies continued at the Stuart Nursery until it was 

closed in the mid-1960s. A small nursery was established 

on the Johnson Tract to evaluate the effectiveness of seed 

treatments, and after the small nursery closed in the late 

1960s, nursery research was mostly limited to studies 

of seed treatments for optimizing germination and early 

seedling development in nurseries. 

William H. Pawuk, a plant pathologist funded by 

the Southern Region in Atlanta, GA, was added to 

the nursery research program in 1974 and nursery 

research again surged. In the early 1980s, John C. 

Brissette replaced Pawuk, and, in collaboration with 

the National Forest System and State and Private 

Forestry specialists, helped bring the bareroot nursery 

program back into a leadership role in the South. A 

collaborative Reforestation Improvement Program 

was established to improve the quality of seedlings 

produced in all of the Forest Service’s nurseries. The 

goal was to apply the best known seedling physiology 

technology to all Forest Service nurseries and quantify 

results (Owsten and others 1990a). The Palustris 

Experimental Forest was an outplanting site for many 

study evaluations. 

Longleaf pine continued to have the primary reforestation 

need. But difficulty in obtaining reforestation success 

on an operational scale resulted in expanded research 

that focused on optimizing seed and nursery practices 

for other southern pines. An example of this was the 

cooperative effort to improve establishment success of 

planted shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata). 

Silviculturists from the Ouachita and Ozark National 

Forests approached unit scientists to help improve 

establishment success of shortleaf pine in the 

mountains of Arkansas and Oklahoma. In the early 

1980s, first-year survival of planted shortleaf pine was 

less than 50 percent. As a result of these discussions, 

a Shortleaf Pine Artificial Regeneration task force 

was established to focus on the problems. It was led 

by Jim Barnett and John Brissette and involved other 

specialists from the Forest Service, Weyerhaeuser 

This small experimental forest nursery at the J.K. Johnson Tract headquarters site was used to evaluate effects of seed treatments.
13

Company, Arkansas Forestry Commission, and 

Louisiana and Oklahoma State Universities and 

University of Arkansas at Monticello. During a 5-year 

period beginning in 1985, about 15 studies were 

conducted, including evaluations of seed treatments 

(Barnett 1993), stock types (Barnett and Brissette 

2004), nursery studies to improve seedling quality 

(Brissette and Carlson 1987), use of fungicides to 

reduce seedling storage pathogens (Barnett and 

others 1988), use of root growth potential to identify 

optimum seedling lifting-date windows (Hallgren and 

Tauer 1989), studies to relate seedling physiology and 

morphology to performance under stressful conditions 

(Sword and others 2005), and evaluation of postplanting competition control on seedling survival and 

growth (Yeiser and Barnett 1991). 

When the results of these studies were implemented, 

operational planting survival of shortleaf pine in 

mountainous conditions increased to about 85 percent 

(Barnett and Brissette 2007, Brissette and Barnett 

1992). The 1989 decision to cease clearcutting on 

the Ouachita and Ozark National Forests greatly 

diminished the need for shortleaf pine reforestation 

technology. 

John Brissette transferred to a leadership position in 

the Northeastern Forest Experiment Station in the early 

1990s. Thus ended a 20-year relationship during which 

the Southern Region funded a reforestation position 

in the research unit. Another opportunity occurred, 

however, to maintain and enhance the unit’s nurseryrelated programs.

In the mid-1990s, in response to loss of technical 

expertise across Forest Service programs, several 

parties—State and Private Forestry’s Cooperative 

Forestry, National Forest System’s Forest and Range 

Management, and Research and Development’s 

Southern Research Station—joined in supporting a 

national specialist in nursery and reforestation issues. 

Internationally renowned Richard W. (Dick) Tinus was 

assigned to the Forest Management Research Work 

Unit in Pineville to carry out this responsibility.

Early into the effort, Tinus’ untimely death required 

the Southern Station to recruit a replacement. R. 

Kasten (Kas) Dumroese of the University of Idaho 

was subsequently attached to the Pineville unit (while 

stationed in Moscow, ID), and he soon was recognized for 

his technical ability, productivity, and leadership skills. 

This collaborative effort was formalized in 2003 with 

the signing of a Forest Service-wide Memorandum 

of Understanding to establish the National Center 

for Reforestation, Nursery, and Genetic Resources 

(RNGR). The informal RNGR program had gained 

national attention for its productivity and effectiveness, 

and became known for its work in providing nursery 

and restoration technology to Native American 

governments. 

RNGR staff understood that full appreciation of 

American Indian culture and beliefs regarding plants 

meant recruiting help from someone who understood 

tribal culture. RNGR brought in an American Indian 

from the Navajo tribe—Jeremiah R. (Jeremy) Pinto—to 

serve as a tribal nursery coordinator. Pinto brought an 

unusual capability to communicate well with tribal 

members, as well as with more traditional nursery 

managers.

Dumroese and Pinto expanded the customary nursery 

meeting with tribal workshops that addressed needs 

of tribal members, and, along with other researchers, 

published tribal nursery manuals on native plants of tribal 

interest (Dumroese and others 2009, Landis and others 

2005, Luna and others 2003). 

John C. Brissette was 

selected as a project 

leader in the Northern 

Research Station.

Kas Dumroese serves as 

national nursery specialist 

for the Reforestation, 

Nursery, and Genetic 

Resources program.

Jeremy Pinto, tribal 

nursery coordinator 

for the Reforestation, 

Nursery, and Genetic 

Resources program.
14

The RNGR program has been successful, boasting an 

exceptional record of relevant publications, including 

a number of publication series, e.g., Native Plants 

Journal (www.nativeplantnetwork.org) (information 

on a wide array of native plants with propagation 

guidelines); Container Tree Nursery Manual (seven 

volumes of detailed information about production of 

container tree seedlings); Forest Nursery Notes (updates 

on recent publications and meetings that support 

nursery specialists); National Proceedings, Forest 

and Conservation Nursery Associations (combined 

proceedings of regional nursery meetings); and 

Tree Planters’ Notes (updates on forest tree seedling 

production). These publications are available through 

the RNGR Web site: www.rngr.net. 

Other researchers provide nursery, reforestation, and 

genetics guidelines for both national and international 

managers, e.g., Dumroese and others 2005, Dumroese 

and others 2008, and Landis and others 2009.

After Barnett’s retirement as project leader of the Forest 

Management Research Unit in 2005, Dumroese and 

Pinto were eventually attached to the Rocky Mountain 

Research Station.

Container seedling production—In the early 1970s, 

growing container tree seedlings for reforestation 

began in Canada and the Pacific Northwest where 

establishment of many species of bareroot nursery 

stock was difficult and expensive. Most southern 

nursery specialists questioned the need to grow 

southern pine seedlings in containers for a couple of 

good reasons; for one, the costs would be considerably 

more than for bareroot stock; and for another, bareroot 

seedlings of most species could be established 

successfully. Most agreed, however, that container 

seedling production of southern pines should be 

evaluated. As a result, Barnett, of the Pineville Forest 

Management Research Unit, undertook development of 

container seedling protocols for southern pines.

When container research began, numerous types of 

containers were being considered and about 30 were 

evaluated in trials established on the Johnson Tract. 

Eventually, the plug-type container was found most 

effective because this type permitted rapid egress of 

roots into the soil (Barnett and McGilvray 1981, 1997). 

During a 25-year period, studies were installed to 

evaluate factors such as seedling density and age 

(Barnett 1980), mycorrhizal effects (Barnett 1983, Pawuk 

and Barnett 1981, Ruehle and others 1981), seedling 

physiology (Barnett 1984), seed quality and sowing rate 

(Barnett and McGilvray 2002a), and comparisons with 

bareroot stock (Barnett and McGilvray 1993, South 

and Barnett 1986, South and others 2005). Several 

publications compiling recommendations and workshop 

proceedings provided information to user groups (Barnett 

and Brissette 1986, Barnett and others 2002a, Barnett and 

McGilvray 1997, Brissette and others 1991, Guldin and 

Barnett 1982). 

Container nursery technology was slow to gain 

acceptance in the South. Costs were at least twice 

that of bareroot stock, and seedlings of most southern 

species survive well after planting. (The exception is 

longleaf pine, which generally has poor outplanting 

success.) Despite the poor outplanting performance of 

bareroot longleaf pine, few professionals considered 

using container longleaf pine seedlings. This changed 

dramatically in the late 1990s when interest in restoring 

longleaf pine increased significantly, particularly in the 

Southeast, where Federal incentive programs favored 

planting of longleaf pine.

Demand for container stock increased dramatically, and 

because resources to establish container nurseries were 

small compared to bareroot nurseries, hundreds of small 

“mom and pop” nurseries, sprung up across the South 

using published techniques (Barnett and McGilvray 

1997). With acceptance of container stock planting for 

John M. McGilvray, nursery research technician, inspecting a 

planted container seedling.
15

longleaf pine restoration, the need to establish seedling 

specifications for container nursery stock became 

critical. Interim seedling specifications were developed 

and published (Barnett and others 2002b, Dumroese and 

others 2009). 

Annual production of longleaf seedlings in containers 

increased from about 7 million in 1984 to about 75 

million in 2008. Almost all nursery production of 

longleaf pine is now in containers.

Control of undesired hardwoods

An immediate research need noted in the late 1940s 

(when the Alexandria Research Center was established) 

was development of chemical treatments for controlling 

low-grade hardwoods (Cassady and Mann 1954). Much 

of the forest land in the West Gulf Region not completely 

devoid of trees was covered with non-merchantable 

hardwoods, and removal of these hardwoods was critical 

for restoring productive pine forests.

Fred A. Peevy, the first employee of the Alexandria 

Research Center in 1946, was responsible for developing 

chemical control techniques for these low-quality 

upland hardwoods—primarily blackjack oak (Quercus 

marilandica), post oak (Q. stellata), red oak (Q. falcata), 

sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and hickory (Carya 

sp.). Ammate® was a known chemical that would kill 

trees if applied in notches cut around the tree. Peevy 

worked with this chemical and refined its application 

techniques (Peevy 1947). His early research established 

him as the expert in herbicide control of woody plants, 

and he began a process of evaluating the efficacy of new 

chemicals as they became available. 

Ammate® was soon replaced by agricultural weed 

killers 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Peevy’s research developed 

application rates and methodology for these chemicals 

that became the mainstay forestry treatment for a 

number of years (Peevy 1960, 1961). As environmental 

problems became evident with these chemicals, Peevy 

evaluated a number of newer and safer products and 

developed recommendations for using them to control a 

range of upland hardwood species. 

Jim Barnett led 

development of seed and 

container production.

Applying Ammate® by the “hack and squirt” technique. Fred A. Peevy applying chemical basal spray to a blackjack oak.
16

Peevy’s research established the Alexandria 

Research Center as leader in the effort to control 

undesired woody species that, if left unchecked, 

would limit reforestation of vast acreages of cutover 

pine timberland. Individual tree application by tree 

injectors and stand application by aerial spraying and 

mist blowing became accepted methodologies for 

controlling an array of woody-plant species. Peevy did 

pioneering research that led to the restoration of large 

areas of pine forests. His research on the control of 

hardwood species in pine plantations was recognized in 

1961 with the USDA Superior Service Award. 

Late in Peevy’s career, a decision was made to 

expand the nature of herbicide research by adding a 

plant physiologist—Homer A. Brady joined the staff 

in the late 1960s. His basic research examined the 

methodologies of chemical action and how they were 

affected by environmental conditions (Brady 1975, 

Brady and Hall 1976). Joining Brady in a professional 

support position was Oscar Hall, a graduate of 

Tuskegee Institute and likely the Southern Station’s 

earliest African American scientist (Hall 1973). Brady 

left the research group in the late 1970s and Thomas E. 

(Tucker) Campbell assumed responsibility for woodyplant herbicide research until the early 1980s, when 

the research program was transferred to the Southern 

Station’s Auburn, AL, research unit. Hall transferred 

to the Wind River Nursery in Washington as a nursery 

specialist. Thus, a long and productive line of research 

that had a major impact on reforestation of the South’s 

cutover forests ended. 

Although primary woody-plant herbicide research 

was transferred to the Auburn unit, application of 

chemicals to reduce grass and forb competition 

remained with the Pineville unit. Longleaf pine 

reforestation requires some control of competition, 

particularly while seedlings are in the grass stage. 

Dave Haywood has conducted silvicultural research 

on methodologies to limit competition during pine 

seedling establishment. This research is discussed in 

the Competition Control with Herbicides section under 

Stand Management Studies.

Tree improvement and genetics

Tree improvement and genetics research on the 

Palustris Experimental Forest began with one longleaf 

pine seedling; but it was a special seedling that was 

found healthy in an abandoned nursery bed overcome 

by brown-spot needle disease (Mycosphaerella 

dearneii) (syn. Scirrhia acicola). Brown-spot needle 

disease defoliates seedlings, delaying their emergence 

from the grass stage, and often resulting in seedling 

mortality.

Paul V. Siggers, the pathologist for the Southern Forest 

Experiment Station who described and named the 

disease (Siggers 1932), recognized the significance of 

the healthy seedling and transplanted it on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest in 1937. The seedling developed 

into a brown-spot resistant tree and became a source 

of genetic material in a program to develop a diseaseresistant strain of longleaf pine.

The uniqueness of the tree and its potential for reducing 

infection from brown-spot disease resulted it being 

named “Father Abraham” or “Abe” to reflect the 

potential for developing a long line of disease-resistant 

trees.

Once Abe began flowering, Harold J. Derr began 

studies to evaluate disease resistance by selfing and 

cross-pollinating, and demonstrated that resistance is 

heritable (Derr and Melder 1970). Derr began a process 

to evaluate more than 900 superior-tree selections from 

the southern national forest tree improvement program, 

working with the idea that disease resistance resulted in 

better seedling survival and superior growth. Through 

this process, the incorporation of Abe’s pollen in the 

pollination mix generally increased resistance and 

seedling performance (Derr and Melder 1970).

Evaluations of disease resistance were made on the 

Longleaf Tract, where there was a moderate to severe 

brown-spot hazard. Seedlings were planted in shallow 

furrows to ensure exposure to the disease’s fungal 

spores from rain splash. Because the Longleaf Tract 

was a cutover longleaf pine site, many seedlings 

had remained in the grass stage for years and spores 

from these seedlings became a source for continuing 

inoculation. Brown-spot needle disease is now less of 

a problem; sites where inoculum develops—sites with 

abundant seedlings remaining in the grass stage—now 

are seldom encountered.

Derr, in collaboration with E. Bayne Snyder of the 

Southern Institute of Forest Genetics at Gulfport, MS, 

published review papers on the genetics of longleaf pine 

and its resistance to brown-spot needle disease (Snyder 

and Derr 1972, Snyder and others 1977). 

Oscar Hall, one of 

the Southern Station’s 

earliest African 

American scientists.
17

Derr also evaluated characteristics of hybrids of longleaf 

and slash (Pinus elliottii) pines. At 7 years old, these 

hybrids planted on the experimental forest demonstrated 

desirable characteristics of both parent species, closely 

resembling longleaf pine in form and branching habit 

but also beginning their height growth immediately. The 

hybrids appeared less susceptible than their parents to 

brown-spot needle blight of longleaf and fusiform rust 

of slash pine (Derr 1966). 

With Harold Derr’s retirement in 1976, responsibility for 

tree improvement and genetics research was transferred 

to the Southern Institute of Forest Genetics. Abe, the 

brown-spot resistant longleaf tree, died in the early 

1980s from a southern pine beetle infestation, although 

a number of clones from Abe had been created and 

remain on the experimental forest. 

Soil-related programs

Soils and soil nutrient supply control the productivity 

of all our forests (Jokela and others 2010). Once an 

understanding of technology to reforest southern pines 

was developed, it became necessary to determine 

how varying soils and site conditions modified its 

application. Three major efforts were evaluated on 

the Palustris to determine the relation of soils types 

and their manipulation to pine plantation productivity: 

site preparation treatments, site-species studies, and a 

program to evaluate long-term soil productivity. 

Site preparation treatments—Early site preparation 

studies primarily compared burning and mechanical 

treatments to unburned controls. Installed in the 1960s, 

these studies initially indicated improved growth of 

loblolly and slash pine from disking and mounding or 

bedding treatments (Mann and Derr 1970). However, 

after 10 years this initial growth advantage was lost. 

Even on poorly drained sites, bedding had no longterm benefit (Derr and Mann 1977, Haywood 1983, 

Lohrey 1974). 

A tree named “Abe,” a brown-spot disease resistant longleaf 

pine about 35 years after planting on the experimental forest.

Harold J. Derr (left) with Philip A. Briegleb, director of the 

Southern Station during the late 1950s and early 1960s, 

observing an outplanting of longleaf pine on the Longleaf Tract.
18

These and other studies showed that response to site 

preparation varies by species and soil type. Generally, 

however, mechanical treatments seemed to improve 

early performance by reducing competition and by 

incorporating nutrients in bedded planting spots. To 

better understand these relationships, Eugene (Gene) 

Shoulders installed a large study to evaluate species-site 

interactions (Shoulders 1976).

Site-species relationships—From 1954 to 1958, Gene 

Shoulders, with help of both public and private forestry 

organizations, established pine species comparisons on 

113 uniform sites in Louisiana and Mississippi. Called 

the “choice of species study,” three plots each of loblolly, 

slash, and longleaf pine were planted in a randomized 

block design on each location (Shoulders and Walker 

1979). Shortleaf pine was included in about half of the 

installations where shortleaf pine was in its natural 

range. Early in the study, Shoulders classified the 

planting sites as wet, intermediate, or dry on the basis 

of soil classifications. Measurements were carried out 

during a 20-year period. 

This huge study generated a number of findings 

(Shoulders 1983). First, neither longleaf nor shortleaf 

pine emerged as clearly superior to loblolly or slash pine 

for planting in Louisiana and portion of Mississippi 

represented by the study. Second, differences in planting 

survival, fusiform rust infection, and fusiform induced 

mortality between loblolly and slash pine were seldom 

sufficient to cause one species to be favored over the 

other. Third, slash pine is a better choice than loblolly 

for planting on flat, wet sites having poorly drained 

soils. The two species performed equally well on 

intermediate and dry sites. Finally, chances for choosing 

the species best suited for planting on a particular site 

are improved if amount and seasonal distribution of 

rainfall, slope, and subsoil texture are considered in 

making the selection (Shoulders and Tiarks 1980b).

Longleaf pine compared poorly in this “choice of 

species” study due to poor planting technology for 

the species at the time of study installation. Shoulders 

(1985) built a case for longleaf by computing 20-year 

Disking and mounding upland sites, such as the site shown in the photograph, seldom results in 

a long-term improvement in growth regardless of species.

Gene Shoulders was 

an early advocate of 

applying soils knowledge 

to silviculture.
19

yields from current technology that allows longleaf to 

reach a height of 4 feet by the time it is 4 years old and 

that produces stocking equal to the other species. Based 

on these assumptions, potential yields of longleaf at 20 

years equaled or exceeded that of loblolly in 97 percent 

of the installations.

Long-term soil productivity—A study on the Palustris 

forest reported by J.D. Haywood and A.E. Tiarks 

(1995) suggests that declining productivity of the next 

rotation may be caused by treatments meant to increase 

productivity in the present rotation. The authors 

compared burning only; burning and disking; and 

burning, disking and bedding for planting loblolly and 

slash pine. The study plantation was harvested after 22 

years and replanted with the same species. The site was 

re-burned, but mechanical site preparation treatments 

were not repeated. After 10 years, standing volume in 

the second rotation was 55 and 38 percent below the first 

rotation for loblolly and slash pine, respectively. 

This and similar studies worldwide prompted 

concern about the long-term effects of intensive stand 

management. In the United States, the Forest Service 

is mandated by law to sustain the inherent capacity of 

forest land it manages. To meet these requirements, 

land managers need valid soil-quality monitoring 

standards, and a national effort known as the LongTerm Soil Production (LTSP) program was initiated 

to establish these standards and provide a better 

understanding of the effects of organic matter removal 

and soil compaction—two effects linked to losses in soil 

productivity (Powers and others 1990).

The first of the LTSP program studies was an 

installation on the Longleaf Tract. The installation was 

organized and led by Allan Tiarks, soil scientist for the 

forest management research project. Tiarks established 

and implemented protocols used in the LTSP program, 

which included 12 additional installations in the South: 

three each on National Forests in Louisiana, Texas, 

Mississippi, and North Carolina (Tiarks and others 

1990, 1992). 

At each of the 13 sites, researchers applied three levels 

of compaction (none, moderate, severe) and three levels 

of organic matter removal (stem only, whole tree, and 

whole tree plus forest floor) in a factorial design. Half 

of each treatment plot was kept free from interspecies 

competition with herbicides (Scott and others 2004).

Soil compaction had no negative impacts on tree 

growth at 10 years; most sites responded positively to 

compaction due to the subsequent reduction of the shrub 

understory. Removing more organic matter than found 

in the stems reduced stand volume on eight of 10 sites 

by more than 15 percent. 

This study indicates long-term soil productivity is 

negatively affected by harvesting operations that remove 

tree branches and foliage, and by site preparation 

operations that remove the forest floor, such as severe 

site preparation burns (Scott and others 2007).

In addition to the 13 study installations in the South, 

the LTSP program has been extended to locations 

throughout the United States and Canada (Fleming and 

Intensive site preparation, such as this bedding treatment, has been determined to adversely affect stand productivity of some 

soils in the following rotation (Haywood and Tiarks 1995).
20

others 2006). The impetus for the LTSP study is the 

legal requirement that public lands are managed in ways 

that do not impair their long-term productivity. 

Private landowners also need data on mitigative 

treatments for overcoming detrimental soil impacts as 

well as data on ameliorative treatments for increasing 

soil productivity. 

To meet the need to complement and extend the LTSP 

program to industrial forests, a cooperative effort in 

1993 brought together forest industries, universities, 

and the Forest Service (Powers and others 1996). The 

collaboration extended the LTSP program’s reach 

to include industrial forests. Known as MPEQ for 

Monitoring Productivity and Environmental Quality 

in Southern Pine Plantations (MPEQ), the cooperative 

effort was organized and led by Allan Tiarks and Mason 

C. Carter, Professor at Louisiana State University, 

School of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries. 

Another program like LTSP and MPEQ is the Center for 

International Forestry Research (CIFOR) studies, which 

established standardized experiments to study plantation 

productivity and sustainability on degraded soils in 

the tropics. Tiarks, the Forest Service representative 

in CIFOR’s efforts, remained an active participant in 

CIFOR as an emeritus scientist after his retirement from 

Forest Service Research. The CIFOR studies tested 

management practices that not only prevent further 

degradation of the soil but also improve the long-term 

productivity of the site. Studies have been installed in 

seven tropical countries (Nambiar and others 2000). 

When Tiarks retired in the late 1990s, D. Andrew 

(Andy) Scott was recruited to fill the LTSP soil scientist 

position. Scott demonstrated professional and leadership 

skills in assuming responsibility for the unit’s program 

and became leader of the international LTSP program. 

Stand management studies

When Philip Wakeley established the Palustris 

Experimental Forest and began evaluating nursery 

practices in 1935, he had foresight to install studies on 

long-term management practices for southern pines. 

These studies focused on planting spacing for longleaf 

and slash pine, prescribed fire, thinning, pruning, and 

stand stocking. So forward thinking was Wakeley that 

he used metric measurements to install his spacing 

study, reasoning that surely the United States would 

soon convert to the metric system. 

The 1935 studies were adversely affected by wildfires 

in the 1940s, but the longleaf study survived to become 

one of the oldest research studies of the Southern 

Research Station, and today provides important 

information on the long-term management of longleaf 

pine.

Such studies led to another major area of research 

in the Research Center. This “growth and yield” 

research focused on how best to manage established 

pine plantations to maximize stand productivity. After 

World War II, many such studies were installed, both 

on the experimental forest and on lands of industrial 

cooperators in several States. In the 1980s, the “growth 

and yield” research involved more than 1,200 plots 

in dozens of studies, producing data sets that became 

a resource for developing computer-based stand 

projection models for land managers of southern pine 

plantation forests.

Allan E. Tiarks, early leader of Long-term Soil Productivity 

installations in the South, in the soils laboratory.

Aerial photo of the Longterm Soil Productivity 

installation on the Longleaf 

Tract. Note the 1-acre size 

of the treatment plots.

Andy Scott became leader of the international Long-term Soil 

Productivity program.
21

In 1955, the Louisiana Forestry Commission sponsored 

a German forester to come to the United States under 

a program that allowed entry of foreign citizens to 

provide technical expertise in areas where there were 

significant deficiencies in the United States. When Hans 

G. Enghardt and his wife arrived in Louisiana, he was 

assigned by State Forester James (Jim) Mixon to work at 

the Alexandria Research Center. Thus began a 30-year 

cooperative effort between the Research Center and the 

Louisiana Forestry Commission. 

Enghardt conducted stand management research. 

He served as a State employee (in Louisiana) and 

collaborative scientist for 17 years. During this time, he 

gained U.S. citizenship and obtained a master’s degree 

in forestry from Louisiana State University. He then 

returned to Germany to earn a Ph.D. and become a 

senior scientist for a German forestry organization. 

The Louisiana Forestry Commission replaced Enghardt 

with Donald P. (Don) Feduccia, who remained in the 

position until budgetary considerations ended the 

long-term cooperative relationship in 1985. Feduccia 

brought excellent skills for stand management research 

and produced numerous significant publications that 

documented southern pine stand growth and yield 

research. After his return to the Forestry Commission, 

he served as Forest Management Chief for the State 

organization until his retirement in 2003. 

The Southern Station hired a number of silviculturists 

and biometricians to supplement Louisiana’s 

scientists and conduct stand management research, 

including Richard L. Lohrey, V. Clark Baldwin, 

and Jeffery C.G. Goelz. Studies in plantation pine 

management earned the Alexandria Research Center 

a reputation as a leading research organization on 

managing southern pine forests. Results of some of 

these efforts are discussed in the following sections.

Planting spacing—Planting spacing recommendations 

vary depending on the characteristics of the species 

and the management goals of the landowner. Early tree 

planting recommendations for the United States were, 

however, influenced by European foresters (South 2003) 

who planted at a close spacing, 6- by 6-feet or closer, 

due to the slow growth of their species and the intensive 

left: Hans G. Enghardt, as a State of Louisiana 

employee, made significant contributions to stand 

management research.

right: Don Feduccia became forest management chief 

for the Louisiana Office of Forestry

This photo was taken on the J.K. Johnson Tract of the Palustris Experimental Forest in April 1940. At the left rear is a longleaf 

plantation spacing study planted in 1934-35 that was controlled burned in January 1938. This study still provides significant 

information on the growth and yield of managed longleaf pine plantations. On the right rear is a slash pine spacing study planted at the 

same time that was destroyed when resources were lacking to protect the area from fire and animal damage.

from left to right: Station scientists T.R. Truax, George W. Tayer, Clarence L. Forsling, H.H. Muntz, John Curry, P.C. Wakeley, and 

C.L Bickford. The photo is by Station Director E.L. Demmon.
22

management of their stands. F.O. (Red) Bateman, ranger 

of the Great Southern Lumber Company, without much 

understanding of European practices, established the 

essentials of southern planting principles and techniques 

by 1922-23—dibble planting of bareroot nursery stock at 

a 6- by 8-foot spacing (Wakeley and Barnett 2011). The 

6- by 8-foot spacing was economically and ecologically 

suitable for southern pines at that time and quickly 

became the standard spacing for planting southern pines. 

However, Wakeley and other early researchers saw 

the need to evaluate a range of planting spacings. The 

experimental forest became the site of many of these 

studies. Wakeley’s 1934-35 longleaf and slash pine 

plantations were the first spacing studies established 

on the forest. Both were adversely affected by neglect 

during World War II (Wakeley and Barnett 2011). 

However, when the study stands were at age 14, the 

survival of the slash pine study was sufficient for 

researchers to evaluate the spacings (Mann 1971). The 

number of trees per acre planted ranged from 4- by 

4-feet, 6- by 6-feet, and 8- by 8-feet, to 10- by 10-feet 

spacing (about 2,700, 1,200, 680, and 435 seedlings per 

acre). A similar study with loblolly pine was installed 

in 1951-52. Planting spacings in this study were 6- by 

6-feet, 8- by 8-feet, 9- by 9-feet, 10- by 10-feet, and 12- 

by 12-feet (Mann and Dell 1971). 

The Louisiana Forestry Commission collaborated with 

the Southern Station in 1927-28 on a similar study 

of loblolly pine on another site nearby. The study 

investigated a range in spacing from 4- by 4-feet to 10- 

by 10-feet and provided needed information on effects 

of initial spacing on stand development (Feduccia and 

Mosier 1977).

In a more recent study in slash pine, seven spacing 

treatments between 4- by 4-feet to 14- by 14-feet 

showed that at age 15 tree heights in close spacings (4- 

by 4-feet to 6- by 6-feet) were shorter than in the three 

wider spacings (Ferguson and Baldwin 1995).

Selecting a spacing of 6- by 6-feet or less is normally 

impractical because of planting costs and dense stocking 

that retards diameter growth. For sawlog production, the 

10- by 10-feet spacing may be best. It excels in diameter 

growth, but will have lower stem quality due to poor 

self-pruning. When markets for products from thinning 

are available, spacings of 6- by 6-feet or 8- by 8-feet, 

produce many trees of pole quality and thereby higher 

profits. These spacings also provide good cordwood 

volume growth.

Planting spacing recommendations vary greatly by 

landowner objectives and timber markets. Availability 

of valuable, fast-growing genetically improved planting 

stock favors a wide spacing to maximize returns. Many 

such stands are now commercially pruned. Within 

typical planting spacings, however, thinning regimes 

may affect the nature of timber quality more than does 

initial spacing (Baldwin and others 2000).

Precommerical thinning—Maintaining low stand 

densities can accelerate diameter growth, reduce 

rotations, shorten time to first thinning, and lessen 

potential fire mortality. High levels of stocking may 

negate these positive effects and result in overabundant 

seed trees in natural regeneration and less than ideal 

environmental conditions when direct seeding. 

Several thousand seedlings per acre can result and 

present a problem for the land manager. Studies on 

the experimental forest were installed to address this 

situation.

Slash and loblolly stands were established by direct 

seeding with the intent of obtaining high stocking levels 

(Lohrey 1972, 1973). Both studies resulted in over 5,000 

seedlings per acre. When the stands were 3 years old, 

pre-commercial thinning—consisting of both selective 

hand and mechanical treatments—were installed. When 

the stands were 11 years old, results from the treatments 

were evaluated.

Results from these and other studies indicate that all 

stands with 5,000 or more stems per acre should be precommercially thinned. Stands should be thinned when 

the stands are about 3 years old to minimize costs and 

prevent reduction in live crowns. Reducing stocking to 

Close spacing at planting is best justified when there is a market 

for small stems, such as for fence posts or pulpwood.
23

500 to 750 stems per acre will obtain optimum diameter 

growth without reducing volume production. Thinning 

by cutting swaths mechanically is as effective as 

selecting individual stems to be cut. Removing swaths 

about 10-12 feet wide will provide access for protection 

and stand management. Rotary mowers or rolling drum 

choppers are suited for the work (Lohrey 1977, Mann 

and Lohrey 1974).

Thinning: Initiation, Level, and Frequency—

Thinning as a stand management treatment has been 

studied intensively on the Palustris Experimental Forest 

with dozens of studies installed specifically to evaluate 

short- and long-term growth responses. These studies 

have been established with major southern pine species, 

on varying site qualities, and with a wide array of stand 

ages. They have been measured repeatedly, and the 

resulting data bases have become excellent resources for 

developing stand growth projection models for loblolly, 

slash, and longleaf pine.

Timing—As a general rule, thinning of pine stands 

should begin when their basal areas exceed 110 square 

feet per acre and when average tree diameter at breast 

height (d.b.h.) ranges from 5 to 9 inches (Feduccia 1983). 

How many years this takes will depend on species, 

initial spacing, survival, and site quality.

Methods—There are two broad alternative thinning 

methods for pine plantations: selective and mechanical. 

Selective thinning encompasses numerous methods 

in which trees are selected for removal on the basis of 

individual characteristics, including their relation to 

neighboring trees (Feduccia 1983). Typically, about two 

thinnings are needed to get a plantation in condition for 

sawtimber production. In these thinnings, suppressed, 

damaged, diseased, and rough stems are removed, and 

trees are taken to give the residuals adequate growing 

space. Any additional thinnings will remove some 

quality trees and improve economic returns.

In mechanical thinning, trees to be cut or retained 

are chosen on the basis of a predetermined spacing 

without regard to their position in the crown canopy. 

Row thinning is most commonly used in closely spaced 

plantations and leaves a higher percentage of smaller 

diameters, less vigorous trees in the lower crown classes 

(Baldwin and others 1989, Feduccia 1983). A modified 

row thinning treatment that incorporates some aspects 

of selective thinning can be accomplished by using 

equipment to do selective thinning in stands adjacent to 

the harvested row. 

Intensity and frequency—The level or intensity of 

thinning refers to the amount of tree basal area left after 

a thinning and may be classified as heavy, medium, 

or light. Generally, heavy thinnings leave less than 

75 square feet of basal area per acre, while moderate 

thinnings leave 75 to 90 square feet, and light thinnings 

left more than 90 square feet of basal area per acre 

(Feduccia 1983). 

Regardless of thinning intensity, enough volume 

of wood products must be removed to make an 

economically operable cut. This varies by initial 

planting spacing, market conditions, geographical area, 

and considerations as a landowner. Close planting 

spacings require early thinning and a market for 

small sized products, such as pulpwood, and frequent 

subsequent thinnings. Wider planting spacings require 

fewer and lighter levels of thinning.

left: An unthinned 11-year-old slash pine with initial stocking 

of over 5,000 stems per acre.

right: An 11-year-old slash pine thinned by hand to 750 stems 

per acre at age 3 years

This chart developed in the mid-1970s documents the scope 

of growth and yield studies established on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest and in the surrounding region.
24

Heavy levels of thinning stimulate rapid diameter 

growth, but result in poorer stem form that lowers 

quality of potential wood products (Leduc and Zeide 

1986, Lohrey 1983, 1985). Such thinning results in more 

and larger branches, crown length, and width; hence, 

weight and volume increase (Baldwin 1987, Baldwin 

and Feduccia 1987, Baldwin and others 2000). 

Early growth and yield research had as a focus 

maximizing volume production from managed 

plantations. Planting spacings and thinning regimes 

to optimize early and frequent financial returns were 

used, and markets for products supported that approach. 

In more recent years, mechanization, shifts in market 

conditions, and labor availability have resulted in 

management practices that favor wider planting spacings 

and less need for frequent thinning.

Ideally, a thinning should be made each time the canopy 

closes, but this varies with the severity of the previous 

thinning and site productivity. However, the interval 

may also be governed by economic conditions. It could 

be as short as 3 years, but more likely at 5 to 10 years, 

the length increasing with age due to a reduction of 

diameter and basal area growth as the stand matures 

(Feduccia 1983).

Development of growth and yield computer simulation 

models (discussed in the following section) provides 

for a more sophisticated approach to establish thinning 

schedules. This approach allows the land manager to 

develop alternative thinning schedules and compare these 

alternatives using economic criteria (Dean and Baldwin 

1993).

Stand yields and projections—Preparation of stand 

tables for the major southern pine species was an 

early and continuing research emphasis. These tables 

provided land managers with data to calculate product 

volumes, and they play an important role in growth 

and yield modeling (Cao and Baldwin 1999, Cao and 

others 1999, Leduc 2006). Such stand tables have been 

developed for unthinned slash pine plantations (Dell and 

others 1979, Lohrey 1987, Zarnoch and others 1991), 

loblolly pine (Baldwin 1987, Baldwin and Feduccia 

1987, 1991, Feduccia and others 1979, Newbold and 

others 2001), shortleaf pine (Dell and others 1989), and 

longleaf pine (Baldwin and Polmer 1981, Leduc and 

Goelz 2009, Thomas and others 1995).

Stand table projection models provide for prediction 

of a future stand table based on the current stand 

table. Simple stand table projection models apply tree 

mortality information and diameter growth rates in 

adjusting stand tables (Cao and Baldwin 1999), and 

thus provide managers with predictions of product 

volumes and values to draft management decisions. 

Feduccia and others (1979) developed a computer 

program (USLYCOWP) for loblolly pine that would 

provide information on whether or not to thin, and if the 

Loblolly pine plantation before initial thinning (age 25) planted 

at a 10- by 10-foot spacing. Note the poor self-pruning and the 

rough nature of the stems, but the good diameter growth.

An example of row thinning. With modern equipment, such 

thinning will extend into the adjacent stands and the width of the 

removed material may need to be greater.
25

decision is to thin, how much and how often. Baldwin 

and Feduccia’s (1987) COMPUTE_P-LOB model 

improved this earlier version to include unthinned 

stands older than 30 years old, as well as thinned stands 

with data through 45 years old. Ferguson and Baldwin 

(1987) provided a user’s guide for COMPUTE_P-LOB 

that made it more user friendly.

Zarnoch and others (1991) developed a similar 

prediction system for slash pine that became known 

as COMPUTE_P-SLASH. The capability to predict 

fusiform rust infections was incorporated into this 

system (Nance and others 1985). An addition to the 

COMPUTE_P-LOB program was COMPUTE_

MERCHLOB which is a growth and yield prediction 

system with a merchandising optimizer that allows a 

manager to incorporate product values into the system 

(Busby and others 1990). 

Development of growth and yield prediction systems 

for longleaf pine has been difficult due to the uncertain 

age at which height growth begins. Most of the longleaf 

pine data bases represent a lengthy period when the 

seedlings were in the grass stage. Recent improvements 

in longleaf pine establishment present an opportunity 

to establish a realistic 1- to 3-year period for height 

initiation, and this provides an opportunity to develop 

height-diameter curves for longleaf pine plantations 

(Leduc and Goelz 2009).

In recent years, researchers have started using biological 

process models to predict forest productivity and to 

better understand growth process (Baldwin and Cao 

1999). One approach to moving in this direction is 

to modify growth and yield prediction systems to 

incorporate biological processes. Clark Baldwin began 

a collaborative effort to link biological process to more 

traditional growth and yield models (Baldwin and 

others 1993, Baldwin and others 1998, Baldwin and 

others 2001).

Competition control with herbicides—Control 

of competing vegetation is an essential component 

of forest regeneration and afforestation. Vegetation 

adversely affecting pine establishment and growth 

can take several forms, including overstory of 

unmerchantable hardwoods, competing aborescent 

plants, and herbaceous plant development. Control of 

unmerchantable, low-quality hardwood overstories was 

a focus of early pine restoration efforts in the South, and 

herbicide technology developed (described in this book 

in the Control of Undesired Hardwoods section). 

Fire for reducing competing vegetation has been a longused silvicultural practice and is particularly important 

in longleaf pine restoration and management (see the 

Fire Research and Management section). However, 

development of some competing plant species cannot be 

easily controlled by fire, and in other instances, fire is 

not available as a management tool. 

Use of herbicides to control aggressive grasses and 

forbs is a good option for releasing species like longleaf 

pine whose management depends on control of this 

type of vegetation. Use of herbicides is costly, and, 

if applied improperly, can injure desirable plants, 

animals (domestic and wildlife), and people, and can 

contaminate soil and water resources. Still, risks from 

Developing prediction systems for longleaf pine is difficult due 

to the uncertain delay in height growth initiation.

Longleaf pine seedlings in early height growth following 

herbicidal site preparation treatment to control herbaceous 

vegetation.
26

using herbicides are frequently acceptable to obtain 

desired conditions in pine stands managed for multiple 

uses (Haywood 2009).

Selection of herbicides for appropriate species and 

sites varies by chemical availability, effectiveness, and 

desired method of application. Dave Haywood provides 

results of many studies where chemicals were used 

both for site preparation and post-planting competition 

control. For site preparation in advance of planting 

loblolly pine, these chemical applications included 

picloram pellets, liquid hexazinone, and a slurry of 

tebuthiuron powder (Haywood 1993). After planting, 

directed sprays of glyphosate, sulfometuron methyl, 

and hexazinone were applied to established loblolly 

pine seedlings (Haywood 1995, Haywood and Tiarks 

1990, Haywood and others 2003). Reduced rates of 

glyphosate, oxyfluorfen and simazine were sprayed 

over the top of seedlings with little adverse effect 

(Haywood and Melder 1991).

Herbicides alone or in combination with fire or 

mechanical treatments to reduce herbaceous competition 

decrease how long longleaf pine seedlings remain in 

the grass stage, and promote sapling growth. Herbicides 

become a viable option for controlling competing 

vegetation in longleaf pine establishment when the use 

of fire is not available. Herbaceous vegetation can be 

controlled by spraying a low rate of hexazinone over 

the top of seedlings (Haywood 2000, 2005, 2007). 

Competing hardwoods can be controlled by chemical 

tricloplyr in directed sprays (Haywood 2009).

As a substitute for chemicals, commercial mulch mats 

and native pine needle litter are helpful in reducing 

vegetative competition, but neither is as effective as 

appropriate chemical applications (Haywood 2000). 

wood quality—Manipulating stands can change 

wood characteristics in plantation settings. Phil 

Wakeley planned stand treatments that would 

evaluate improving wood quality when he established 

his plantation studies in 1935. Other studies were 

installed many years later when the application of such 

treatments was more economically justifiable.

Pruning—A pruning treatment was planned in 

Wakeley’s 1935 longleaf pine plantation study, and 

treatments were applied in 1950. Well-spaced trees 

were selected for testing pruning treatments: (1) 

pruning all trees per acre to a height of 17 feet; (2) 

pruning about 100 of the best trees per acre to 17 feet; 

and (3) pruning 100 of the best trees per acre to twothirds of total height of the tree (Derr and Mann 1953).

Size of trees significantly influenced pruning costs. The 

cost for pruning a 4-inch tree at breast height was less 

than half than that for an 8-inch tree. Pruning above the 

first log—17 feet—was expensive. 

Pruning of longleaf pine appears most practical when 

trees average from 4 to 6 inches in d.b.h. Trees of 

this size will exceed 30 feet in total height. They can 

therefore be pruned to one log in a single operation, 

and they will retain over 40 percent of their live crown, 

which is enough for continued rapid diameter growth. 

Trees of this size will have a small core with knots 

and thus greater amounts of high grade lumber will be 

obtained.

At the time of this study, pruning was not an established 

practice. However, the study provided guidelines for 

establishing the commercial pruning operations now 

used by forest industry.

Harold J. Derr pruning longleaf pine in the plantation study 

established in 1934-35.
27

Sudden sawlog production—Derr’s pruning results 

and data from other stand management studies 

indicated that quality sawlog trees could be grown in 

a much shorter time with intensive management. To 

demonstrate the effectiveness of stand treatments on 

improving lumber quality, James D. Burton installed 

what became known as the “sudden sawlog” study. At 

the time of installation, Burton was a staff member 

of the Crossett Research Center. When the Crossett 

Research Center closed in 1969, Burton was transferred 

to Gene Shoulders’ newly created Intensive Culture 

Research Project in Pineville, LA. In 1982, the Intensive 

Culture Research Project was closed and integrated into 

the Forest Management Research Project. 

Burton evaluated four thinning regimes for loblolly 

pine plantations: (1) sawtimber only—stands thinned 

to 100 crop trees per acre at age 9, 76 stems per acre at 

age 19, and 64 at age 24; (2) sawtimber-pulpwood—

stands thinned at ages 9, 12, and 15, leaving 100 trees 

per acre at age 15; and stands thinned to 80 trees per 

acre at age 19; (3) delayed sawtimber—stands thinned 

to 100 trees per acre at age 12, and 80 trees per acre at 

age 24; (4) control—stands thinned from below to 85 

square feet basal area per acre at age 12 and every 3 

years thereafter.

Crop trees were pruned to 50 percent of total height 

when thinning commenced and every 3 years thereafter 

until clear length of the stem averaged 33 feet when 

the stands were 24 years old. When the stands were 19 

years old and thereafter, the understory was mowed 

every 2 years. Heavy thinning, pruning, and mowing 

gave the intensively managed stands an open park-like 

appearance. 

Clearly, pine stands on good sites can be deliberately 

tailored for early harvests of sawlogs if the landowner 

so desires (Burton and Shoulders 1974). But, if 

landowners want maximum fiber yields at any age, 

greater returns from intermediate harvests, and 

narrow-ringed wood, they should choose conventional 

thinning. This treatment yielded 35 to 66 percent more 

merchantable cubic volume through 27 years than the 

intensive treatments. In 45-year-old stands, sawtimber 

volumes among the treatments were not significantly 

different (Baldwin and others 1998).

Landowners who want to grow sawtimber quickly 

should try one of the more intensive treatments tested 

in this study. Loblolly pine sawtimber with a mean 

d.b.h. of 15 inches was produced in 27 years through 

heavy thinning, understory control, and green pruning 

of limbs (Burton 1982).

Wood specific gravity of harvested 27-year-old trees 

was unaffected by treatment and was approximately 

equal to the local average for loblolly pine. These 

results demonstrate that high quality wood products 

can be produced when attention focuses on intensive 

stand management.

woodpecker utility pole problems—Not just a wood 

quality issue, woodpecker use of wooden utility poles 

for nesting and roosting has long been a problem 

for utility companies. The problem is particularly 

significant when power lines run through swamps, 

river bottoms, and pecan groves, where red-headed 

(Melanerpes erythrocephalus) and pileated (Dryocopus 

pileatus) woodpeckers—the most destructive species in 

the South—are numerous. 

Jim Burton was an 

advocate of using 

intensive management 

practices to improve 

wood quality.

Jim Burton standing in a 26-year-old sawtimber-pulpwood 

plot with a conventionally managed portion of the study in the 

background.
28

For some companies, damage from woodpeckers is 

as costly as lightning, wind, and ice. The traditional 

method for protecting poles placed in these locations 

is to wrap the utility pole in heavy-gage wire mesh. In 

the mid-1960s, five utility companies—Arkansas Power 

and Light, Central Louisiana Electric, Gulf States 

Utilities, Louisiana Power and Light, and Southwestern 

Electric Power—joined with Weyerhaeuser Company 

to fund a 5-year research project at the Alexandria 

Research Center to find a more effective and 

economical means of pole protection. Robert L. (Bob) 

Rumsey, a wildlife biologist, was hired by the Forest 

Management Project to conduct the research. 

Woodpeckers evacuate holes of many sizes. The 

largest holes—cavities extending from 8 to 24 inches 

downward from an oval entrance that is 3 to 4 inches 

in diameter—are made by pileateds for nesting and 

roosting (Rumsey 1968). Ordinarily, a thin shell 

of wood is left around the cavity. The red-headed 

woodpecker makes the same shape nest but usually 

smaller. Other woodpecker species make smaller, less 

destructive holes. 

Poles afford woodpeckers a broad, open view helpful in 

establishing and protecting territories. Birds are prone 

to excavate in the vicinity of burst checks in the pole. 

The most severe damage consists of nest and roost 

cavities; probe holes are much more numerous but are 

smaller and less weakening (Rumsey 1970).

Whether cavities are important entry points for decay is 

uncertain. Pileated and red-headed woodpeckers were 

attracted to white pine (Pinus strobus) tree sections 

attached to poles, but damage to poles with decoy 

sections still exceeded an acceptable level. Chemical 

repellents were unsuccessful, and a review of the 

morphology and physiology of woodpeckers fails to 

reveal a notable target in their sensory mechanisms.

There is no cheap, easy way to prevent woodpecker 

damage to wooden poles. Coatings or wraps offer some 

promise of protecting poles by making the surface too 

hard for the birds’ talons to penetrate or too smooth 

to afford a perch. Such treatments, however, also 

make the poles difficult to climb by utility workers. 

Hardware cloth, although expensive, will continue to 

be used because its long-term effectiveness has been 

demonstrated.

Physiological Research

Although tree and seed physiology have been 

components of research in the experimental forest 

for decades, an emphasis on the physiological 

basis of seedling culture and silvicultural practices 

was initiated in the 1980s. The research sought an 

understanding of how seedlings, trees, and stands 

respond to manipulation, silvicultural practices, and 

environmental conditions. Information was developed 

on how to manage forest stands to compensate for 

shifting climatic patterns resulting from global 

warming. In addition, researchers focused on 

physiological effects of prescribed burning on longterm stand growth.

Seedling studies—Many nursery studies might fall 

under the category of physiological research, but two 

significant efforts associated with the experimental 

forest are based on physiology: The Reforestation 

Improvement Program and root zone studies.

Reforestation improvement program—The 

Reforestation Improvement Program was an effort to 

improve the quality of bareroot seedlings grown in 

Forest Service nurseries and to improve, and make 

more consistent, reforestation success (Owston and 

Pileated woodpeckers cause significant damage to creosotetreated utility poles.

Bob Rumsey became 

a professor of wildlife 

biology at McNeese State 

University after leaving 

the Southern Research 

Station.
29

others 1990b). In 1986, the program teamed Forest 

Service research scientists with managers of all 10 

current Forest Service nurseries. The researchers hoped 

to make reforestation more predictable and successful 

by (1) standardizing data collection and analyses, (2) 

improving knowledge of seedling biology through 

testing and observation, (3) reducing production costs 

and increasing the consistency of producing highquality stock, and (4) enhancing knowledge of nursery 

environments and seedling physiology. 

The researchers used two seed sources of major 

regional species, sown for 3 consecutive years. They 

applied an array of cultural treatments in the nursery, 

and monitored environmental conditions via automated 

weather stations in the nurseries and at field sites where 

outplantings were made. The weather stations recorded 

above-and belowground conditions on a continuing 

basis. The Palustris Experimental Forest was used 

for the field trials of loblolly, shortleaf, and slash pine 

seedlings were grown at the W.W. Ashe Nursery in 

Mississippi.

In addition to standard seed and seedling measurements, 

researchers in the nursery made detailed observations 

of seedling color and bud activity. As lifting time 

approached, researchers periodically measured root 

activity and plant moisture stress, and at lifting time, 

they assessed seedling size, color, mineral nutrient 

status, carbohydrate reserves, root-growth capacity, cold 

hardiness, and resistance to moisture stress.

John Brissette and Jim Barnett led the effort 

in the South with W.W. Ashe nursery manager, 

Charles (Chuck) Gramling. The mensurational and 

physiological measurements of seedlings were related 

to environmental conditions in the nursery and field. 

Of the physiological evaluations, root growth capacity 

was found the best comprehensive measure of seedling 

quality. Seedbed density, lifting date, and storage 

duration were found to affect root growth capacity and 

field survival of longleaf and shortleaf pine seedlings 

(Barnett 1991, Brissette and Barnett 1993).

Reforestation Improvement Program researchers also 

investigated the minimum temperature tolerated by 

container-grown longleaf pine roots and how to protect 

the roots from damaging cold. Roots of container 

seedlings held in outdoor nurseries in the fall and 

winter can be severely damaged by low temperatures. 

The freeze-induced electrolyte test was used to evaluate 

the cold hardiness of container longleaf pine seedlings. 

Results indicated that seedling roots should not be 

exposed to temperatures below 25 oF. A few degrees 

lower were lethal to roots (Sword and others 1999, 

Tinus and others 1999).

Results of the physiological studies with southern pine 

seedlings indicate that species and sources within 

species may differ dramatically in optimum lifting 

date. Ability to produce new roots is responsive to 

chilling hours, as is the ability of seedlings to maintain 

physiological vigor while in cold storage (Brissette 

Weather stations were installed at all nurseries and field sites. Root growth capacity misting chambers were developed to 

determine speed and length of new root development.
30

and others 1988). The Reforestation Improvement 

Program resulted in a better understanding of seedling 

physiology and how to improve seedling quality 

(Owsten and others 1990b).

Root zone studies—The second physiological effort 

evaluates root system growth and water transport 

of southern pine species after planting in different 

root-zone environments. This information is needed 

to guide decisions regarding when to plant and what 

species to plant. Researchers evaluated seedling root 

growth and water transport of three sources each of 

shortleaf, loblolly, and longleaf pine seedlings over 

28 days in a seedling growth system that simulated 

planting environments (Brissette and others 1994). 

Researchers developed the seedling growth system in 

a greenhouse where soil temperatures in the system 

could be kept at 55 oF, 65 oF, and 75 oF using water 

baths. Water availability was controlled by the distance 

root systems were suspended above water in a column; 

there was a well-watered control and two levels of 

water stress. After 28 days, plant moisture stress and 

root growth capacity were determined (Brissette and 

Chambers 1992).

Across species, an increase in root-zone temperature 

alleviated limitations to root growth caused by water 

stress. At the coldest temperature, longleaf pine 

maintained water transport greater than for shortleaf 

and loblolly pine. Without water limitation, root growth 

and water movement in longleaf pine was poorer than 

in the other species. As stress developed, longleaf pine 

responded more positively than shortleaf or loblolly 

pine. Therefore, there are significant differences among 

species in ability to function in stressful environments 

(Sword Sayer and others 2005).

In related research, scientists imposed water stress in 

sand beds developed in a greenhouse environment. 

Such stress beds provide excellent conditions for 

inducing water stress (Chambers and others 1988). 

With these beds, Reforestation Improvement Program 

scientists could evaluate the effects of J- or L-root 

deformity resulting from planting techniques on 

seedling survival. From their results, the researchers 

determined that depth of the root system upon planting 

was more important than curvature of the root system 

(Brissette and Barnett 1989).

Silvicultural practices—In 1988, research was 

undertaken in a 7-year-old loblolly pine plantation 

where unusual uniformity of tree growth had resulted 

from an earlier failed study (Barnett and Krugman 

1989). The new researchers established 12 treatment 

plots with 13 rows of 13 trees each. In these plots, 

researchers imposed replicated fertilization and 

thinning treatments (Haywood 1994), evaluated 

treatments of throughfall exclusion of rainfall (Tang 

and others 2004b), and monitored environmental 

conditions both in the crown and soil. 

top: A plant moisture stress chamber for evaluating levels of 

stress in pine seedlings.

bottom: Seedling growth system where control of different levels 

of root temperatures and moisture stress can be maintained. Dan Andries and Mary Anne Sword Sayer at the tower site.
31

A tower system was developed to provide walkway 

access to two levels in crowns within the plots. 

Rhizotrons (soil pits with a Plexiglass® covered face) 

were used to measure root function. Sensors were 

installed at various levels to monitor physiological 

and environmental conditions in both crown and root 

systems using automated equipment (Sword and others 

1998). One of the few studies where physiological data 

have been obtained from replicated stand measurements 

(most were done with only a few trees), the study 

became the basis for evaluating effects of treatment on 

both crown and root growth and development and their 

relationship to tree and stand physiology.

Mary Ann Sword was recruited to lead this research 

for the forest management staff. Collaborative research 

efforts were established with Jim L. Chambers of 

Louisiana State University’s School of Forestry, 

Wildlife, and Fisheries, commencing a long-term 

cooperative research program that involved several 

graduate students, including doctoral research of Dennis 

A. Gravatt, Shufang Yu, and Zehenmin (Jamie) Tang.

The work of these collaborating scientists produced 

much published research on interactions among 

silvicultural manipulation, environmental conditions, 

and resulting physiological processes. 

The published work offered a number of fi ndings. 

Researchers reported that physiological and 

morphological characteristics of pine foliage were 

associated with differences in stand growth infl uenced 

by environmental changes and cultural treatments. 

Silvicultural manipulation causes microclimate changes 

within the crowns of large trees, but needle physiology 

adjusts to these within-crown environmental conditions 

(Tang and others 1999a). As light levels and crown 

exposure increase from thinning, photosynthesis 

activity increases in the lower portion of the crown 

(Tang and others 2003, 2004a). Thinning, fertilization, 

and crown position regulates annual leaf area 

production of current-year shoots largely by expanding 

the fi rst fl ush shoots early in the growing season (Tang 

and others 1999b). Fertilization has little effect on 

foliage physiology, but it stimulates foliage production 

and thus improves growth (Tang and others 2003, Yu 

and others 2003). However, extended moisture stress 

reduces the potential of fertilization to stimulate growth 

(Sword-Sayer and Tang 2004, Tang 2004b). 

Researchers also reported that root systems have 

limited ability to adjust to changing environmental 

conditions, but that the function of root systems is 

closely related to physiological processes in the crown 

(Sword Sayer and others 2004). For example, elevated 

root growth resulting from stand thinning is likely 

caused by an increase in the amount of photosynthate 

translocated from the crown (Sword and others 1998). 

In addition, silvicultural treatments such as thinning 

and fertilization are effective through their infl uence 

on stand environment and resource variables and may 

be used to buffer possible negative effects, or enhance 

potential positive effects, of global climate change on 

southern pine forests (Sword and others 1998). 

Jamie Tang conducting physiological evaluations of foliage on 

tower-supported walkways in tree crowns.

Mary Anne Sword Sayer determining root growth by using a 

mini-rhizotron system.
32

Fire effects—Land managers have limited their use 

of prescribed burning in managing most southern pine 

ecosystems, but fire remains an important silvicultural 

tool in the management of longleaf pine. Data have 

shown that repeated use of intense fire may adversely 

affect stand growth and development (Boyer 1987, 

Haywood 2009). To understand this phenomenon, 

studies were imposed in longleaf pine stands to 

determine effects of prescribed burning at various fire 

intensities and stand ages.

Scientists working in this research area found that 

severe crown scorch reduced longleaf pine diameter 

growth by 22 percent during five growing seasons after 

prescribed burning, and reduced root sucrose and starch 

concentrations, total and live fine root-mass density, and 

initiation of secondary root development (Haywood and 

others 2004). They also found that, even in moderate 

fires, root growth is less in plots burned in July than 

in those burned in March or May (Sword Sayer and 

Haywood 2006). These studies and others indicate that 

prescribed burning influences root growth by affecting 

mineral nutrition and root carbohydrate metabolism 

(Kuehler and others 2004).

In a study evaluating seasonal responses, a May 

treatment resulted in lower root starch concentrations 

but higher root glucose and potassium levels than in 

non-burned plots. Annual groundline diameter growth 

of saplings was increased, suggesting that fire shifts 

root carbohydrate and foliar potassium concentration 

in longleaf saplings to restore leaf area (Kuehler and 

others 2006). Starch reserves are high in May, and 

therefore May is a time to burn with little loss of tree 

growth. Starch reserves are lower in March and July 

and relate to poorer response from burning.

Range management and Agroforestry

After the era of great lumbering ended, grazing 

livestock on forest range became a logical occupation 

for many residents of the piney woods. The upland soils 

were too poor for row-crop farming, but native forage 

was abundant and free (Cassady and Shepherd 1949). 

This situation existed across several million acres where 

forests had not recovered adequately after their harvest. 

In 1944-45, Robert S. Campbell of the Southern 

Station in New Orleans conducted surveys of the 

grazing situation in Louisiana forest ranges and 

identified severe problems that needed study and 

correction.

Researchers found that meat production per animal was 

extremely low, as result of a combination of factors: 

deficiencies in native forage during fall and winter that 

were not compensated for by adequate supplemental 

feeding; poor-quality livestock; inadequate control 

of diseases and insects; and general lack of good 

management that went with free, unfenced forest range 

(Cassady and Mann 1954).

Grazing of livestock on forest ranges frequently 

prevented successful pine reproduction and growth. In 

addition to damage from animals, pine seedlings were 

destroyed by fires set by livestock owners to eliminate 

old grass and otherwise improve early grazing in 

spring. Livestock destroy pine reproduction directly by 

rooting, browsing, and trampling. Hogs, for example, 

relish longleaf pine seed and root up small pines to eat 

the fleshy part of the roots, which are nutritious. 

With the establishment of the Alexandria Research 

Center in 1946, early surveys were used to initiate forest 

range grazing research in three closely related projects: 

management of livestock, management of forage, and 

improvement of forage (Cassady and Mann 1954).

During the 40 years of range-related research on 

the Longleaf Tract, emphases evolved from fairly 

straightforward tree/cattle relationships to multiresource oriented research dealing with livestock, 

Robert S. Campbell, 

an early range 

scientist, was a leader 

in establishing the 

American Society of 

Range Management.

Free-ranging hogs were a major cause of longleaf pine 

regeneration failures. Longleaf root systems are a choice source 

of nutrients in winter months.
33

wildlife, timber, fire, and watershed interrelationships. 

These changes resulted from improvements in 

range management practices, decline in traditional 

forest range programs, and development of more 

environmental programs with an agroforestry focus.

Livestock damage to plantations

Wild, free-ranging hogs can destroy longleaf pine 

plantations that are not fenced or otherwise protected 

for the first few years. In the 1940s, hogs were a source 

of meat for home use or ready cash. When there were 

no restrictions on free-ranging hogs, hogs were a major 

cause of longleaf pine reforestation failures. An adult 

hog can root up and kill seedlings at the rate of 5 or 6 

per minute, and can destroy a whole acre of seedlings in 

a day or two (Cassady and Mann 1954). Longleaf pine 

seedlings are especially vulnerable because they have 

a large succulent root system and may remain in the 

grass stage for several years. “Hogs or logs” became a 

dilemma facing foresters, and was the title of a number 

of popular publications aimed at educating the public on 

the seriousness of the hog problem (Hopkins 1948). 

Hogs will root up slash and loblolly seedlings, but their 

preference is longleaf pine (Peevy and Mann 1952). 

Over time, “hog laws” were passed curtailing open 

grazing of forest range. Although feral hogs are not 

now generally raised by locals as a source of food or 

income, they are released on public lands to provide 

for sport hunting. Thus, feral hogs continue to be a 

problem in forest management. Cattle can also damage 

plantation establishment and development—mostly by 

trampling seedlings, although they sometimes browse 

on pine shoots. Other damage may result from rubbing 

on young saplings to obtain relief from insect pests.

Stock laws now generally prevent livestock damage 

in plantations, but some may occur from cattle that 

graze under forest-range situations. This damage can 

be limited by appropriate forage management (Cassady 

and others 1955).

Forage nutrient/supplemental feeding relationships

An early focus in the range program was to improve 

livestock nutrient on forest land, especially during 

the winter months when forage is limited. Cattle 

not provided with supplemental feed were in poor 

condition and brought little financial return to the 

owner. To overcome this problem, an understanding of 

plants available for grazing and their nutritional value 

was needed. 

Although a plant collection and identification program 

had been ongoing at the Stuart Nursery since the mid1930s, chiefly to help nursery staff develop more effective 

weed management options, range scientists expanded this 

effort beyond nursery boundaries. The recruitment of 

botanist Harold E. Grelen in 1962 began an emphasis on 

plant collection, identification, and specimen protection. 

Grelen established a herbarium to house and protect the 

plant collections. The herbarium became a resource for 

both range and forest research work units, and is now a 

valuable collection to support Kisatchie National Forest’s 

botanical programs. Grelen led this effort and trained 

other scientific and technical staff on identifying plants 

and protecting collected material.

With information on types of plants available for 

cattle grazing (Grelen and Duvall 1966), cooperative 

efforts began with Louisiana State University to 

analyze plants to determine their nutritional value. This 

research identified nutritional deficiencies in forage 

available to range stock, and led to recommendations 

for supplemental feeding that significantly improved 

livestock quality (Pearson and others 1982). 

Providing supplemental feed became a widely accepted 

practice for cattlemen interested in improving the 

Cattle sometimes push saplings over to browse on fresh shoots. Poor quality range cattle were gathered for auction. Called 

scrub cattle, these cattle had limited commercial value.
34

economic returns from their cattle operations on 

southern pine-bluestem land (Grelen and Pearson 1977, 

Pearson and Rollins 1987, Pearson and Whitaker 1972).

Soil and water effects

Concentrations of cattle in areas such as paddocks 

result in soil compaction and impaired water 

infiltration. Grazing studies on the Longleaf Tract 

provided an opportunity to evaluate effects on soil 

compaction and water infiltration under forest-range 

conditions. After 10 years of varying grazing intensities 

(none, moderate, and heavy) and three prescribed 

burning treatments (no burn, controlled burn, and 

wildfire), evaluations indicated that heavy grazing 

compacted soils sufficiently to restrict water movement 

into and through the profile especially during intense 

rainstorms (Linnartz and others 1966). In addition 

to impaired infiltration, the heavy grazing treatment 

markedly reduced native grasses and increased a higher 

proportion of less desirable carpet grass (Axonopus 

fissifolius) (Duvall and Linnartz 1967). In this study, 

fire had little long-term effect. 

In another study of grazing and silvicultural practices, 

surface cover and bulk density were influenced mostly 

by silvicultural treatments. Grazing treatments affected 

grass cover and biomass. However, under the prevailing 

climatic, soil, and vegetative conditions of the study 

area, the impacts of applied silvicultural and grazing 

practices on infiltration and runoff water quality did not 

present a problem to site management or productivity 

(Wood and others 1989).

Prescribed burning

Prescribed fire plays an integral role in forest-range 

management. Burning areas on a 3-year rotation 

controls the development of understory hardwood 

competition, reduces pine needle litter build up, 

increases herbage yield and nutrient composition, and 

favors regeneration of longleaf pine by either natural or 

artificial techniques. 

Early in the range research program, effects of frequent 

use of prescribed burns were evaluated as a way to 

improve forage production and quality. Duvall and 

top: Range cattle are provided supplemental feed during the 

winter months to maintain weight and health.

bottom: An aggressive burning program controls hardwood 

understory vegetation and provides good forage for grazing of 

livestock.

Harold E. Grelen led the 

range unit’s botanical 

program until his 

retirement in 1986.

Captive deer were used to determine diets on prescribed burned 

and grazed forest ranges. Alton Martin, Jr., range technician 

in the background, records species of plants browsed. Martin 

received the U.S. Department of Agriculture Distinguished 

Service Award in 1990 for his work in plant identification.
35

Whitaker (1964) and Grelen and Epps (1967) found that 

burning different portions of a range in winter, spring, 

or summer provided quality protein in herbage for a 

much longer period than winter burning alone. They 

also found that removal of pine needle litter was a major 

factor in the positive response from frequent burning.

Grelen’s (1975, 1983) research also established that 

prescribed burning in May not only was more effective 

in controlling woody vegetation than in dormant 

winter months, but also increased survival and growth 

of longleaf pine seedlings. This research led many 

organizations to begin conducting spring burns, which 

have proven more effective in reducing hardwood 

competition and stimulating early height growth of 

longleaf pine seedlings. Spring burning is not only 

good for improving forage for livestock, but it also 

has become an important component of longleaf pine 

management (see Fire Research and Management, 

Long-term Fire Studies section).

Cattle/deer diet interactions

Aggressive prescribed burning to enhance forage 

availability and quality are part of southern range 

management, but wildlife specialists began looking 

at how these practices might reduce deer habitat. 

Ronald E. (Ron) Thill, of the range research work unit, 

began studying the effects of prescribed burning and 

grazing programs on the extent of seasonal diet overlap 

between deer and cattle on areas subjected to moderate 

yearlong cattle grazing.

To carry out this research, young captive deer were 

tamed and harnessed and then allowed to feed in the 

treatment areas. Food preferences of deer, while on leash, 

were documented. Studies showed that wild deer and 

tame deer both preferred the same plants (Thill 1984).

Researchers found that deer diets were dominated 

yearlong by a mixture of browse and herbage, and 

that cattle consumed mostly grasses in the spring and 

summer and 69 and 40 percent browse and herbage, 

respectively, during the fall and winter (Thill 1989). 

Diets of both animals were diverse and generally resulted 

from sharing small amounts of many plant taxa. Types of 

plants eaten by deer were more affected by burning than 

grazing, but deer selected more herbage and less browse 

on grazed than on ungrazed sites (Thill 1986). 

Researchers also learned that late-spring through 

early-fall grazing should have little negative impact on 

deer forage availability. During this period, cattle diets 

consisted primarily of grasses, while deer consumed 

mostly browse and herbage. Diet overlap was highest 

from fall through early spring as both types of animals 

sought diets from a limited supply of evergreen browse 

and herbaceous winter forbs. Consequently, even 

moderate cattle stocking during this period could 

reduce available deer forage significantly (Thill 1989). 

On more open sites, however, forage is sufficiently 

abundant enough to meet needs of both cattle and deer 

(Thill and others 1987). 

Tree/forage/cattle management

Grazing of forest land in the South began soon after 

harvest of old-growth forests. The use of forest land for 

open-range livestock production was characterized by 

complete lack of management. As reforestation efforts 

began, landowners realized that if a combination forest 

and range management was to be successful, modifying 

practices that optimized each would be needed.

Researchers found that intensity and duration of grazing 

have significant effects on availability and quality of 

herbage and browse. Total herbage yields were not 

appreciably changed by light yearlong cattle grazing 

which removed 30 to 60 percent of the annual growth 

(Pearson and Whitaker 1973). However, moderate and 

heavy grazing reduced desirable bluestem frequency 

and increased undesirable carpet grass understory. They 

also learned that, although heavy grazing adversely 

affected planted and seeded slash pine, neither light 

nor moderate grazing by cattle affected establishment 

and survival of trees younger than 5 years old (Pearson 

and others 1971). When the trees were measured at 18 

years old, researchers found that heavy grazing reduced 

survival of trees, but that light to moderate grazing 

was compatible with establishment and growth of slash 

pine (Grelen and others 1985). From these results, the 

researchers concluded that some regulation of levels 

of grazing was necessary to accommodate successful 

plantation establishment.

Researchers found that, as plantations continued to age 

and basal area increased, herbage production declined. 

Crown closure reached levels sufficient to reduce forage 

at age 10 years for slash pine and 17 years for longleaf 

left: Ron Thill transferred to Nacogdoches, TX, and 

became project leader of a wildlife research work unit.

right: Gale L. Wolters, forest-range ecologist, 

researched overstory-understory plant relationships 

on the Longleaf Tract until he was transferred to the 

Pacific Southwest Research Station.
36

pine (Wolters 1982). Not only was amount of herbage 

reduced, but also the composition was affected as pine 

basal area increased. Amounts of bluestem grasses 

decreased, and forbs increased as light levels to the 

ground floor declined (Byrd and others 1984). Loblollyshortleaf pine-hardwood stands had similar effects, 

except that shrubs and hardwood crown cover affected 

herbage production of quality (Wolters and others 1982). 

Uniola grasses were the principal forage species under 

high density stands while bluestems were the major 

forage component in clearings. 

Early use of prescribed burning in slash pine plantations 

did not prevent herbage yields from dropping sharply as 

the overstory developed (Grelen 1976). Early burning 

prevented most hardwoods and shrubs from reaching 

size uncontrollable by fire, kept browse accessible 

to cattle and deer, and prevented pine litter from 

eliminating herbaceous plants from the understory. It 

had no effect on pine survival and growth.

As pine stands reach a size for initial thinning, forage 

production declines significantly. Thinning levels 

needed to maintain adequate forage production for cattle 

grazing are considerably lower than for operational 

forestry practices. Lundgren and others (1983) base 

their range economic assessments on maintaining a 

pine stand residual basal area of about 70 square feet—

compared with about 85 square feet per acre for forestry 

operations. Under these range conditions, light levels are 

adequate to allow a forage understory that can support a 

moderate number of cattle.

A multi-resource program in livestock, trees, and 

wildlife must bring together information and specialists 

who have the capability to combine a number of 

interacting resources. This requires ingenuity, 

commitment, and dedication. To be effective, a broad 

ecological approach must be maintained.

Forest survey

The Forest Service has responsibility for conducting 

nationwide forest surveys for the collection and 

analysis of information from forest and forest-related 

lands. The surveys are traditionally conducted to 

provide data on timber and wood products. In 1973, 

inventory and analysis of range resources was added to 

the survey process in the South (Sternitzke and Pearson 

1974). Methodologies and training procedures were 

developed and tested, and survey crews were trained 

on the Longleaf Tract prior to field application (Pearson 

and Sternitzke 1974).

Economics

Pearson (1982) and his colleagues (Lundgren and 

others 1983, 1984) conducted thorough analyses of the 

economics of forest-range grazing when timber and 

livestock prices were stable. To evaluate efficiency in 

forest grazing, they analyzed annual economic return 

assuming a 40-year timber rotation that included two 

thinnings (years 15 and 27) with one of three levels of 

cattle stocking allowed to graze pastures for varying 

lengths of time. They found that rotating cattle through 

the timberland was more economical than continuous 

grazing, which yielded the lowest rate of return (4.5 

percent). The highest cattle stocking combined with the 

shortest grazing duration yielded the greatest rate of 

return (8.2 percent).

The range management research unit closed 10 years 

after these analyses because of shifts in research 

priorities and budgetary limitations. However, a basic 

A productive forest range requires low stand densities that 

allow light to the forest floor and light to medium levels of cattle 

stocking that maintain plant quality and quantity.

Developing training procedures for adding range information 

into the forest survey. 
37

problem was the decline in numbers of livestock 

managers interested in forest range grazing due to 

curtailment of prescribed burning and conversion of 

range lands to other uses (Grelen 1978). Permits for 

grazing on Federal land also became more expensive 

and difficult to obtain. Also, second-generation families 

lost interest in forest-range grazing, and higher levels 

of ecological understanding were needed to profitably 

graze in forested situations.

In the 1980s, Pearson began broadening the perspective 

of the traditional forest-range grazing research program 

to encompass agroforestry. To evaluate alternatives 

that enhance farm flexibility by use of multiple 

commodities, researchers from the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture and the New Zealand Forest Research 

Institute joined forces in developing the United States 

Agroforestry Estate Model (USAEM). USAEM was 

adapted from the New Zealand Agroforestry Estate 

Model that incorporates tree growth and yield models, 

farm crop data, and livestock forage production 

(Pearson and others 1995).

In developing the USAEM model, researchers 

demonstrated that agroforestry could be profitable and 

appropriate for family farms using land in the midSouth. Shifts in research priorities and funding curtailed 

full development and application of the model.

Agroforestry

Agroforestry integrates the interactive benefits of 

trees, crops, and livestock. It combines forestry and 

agricultural technologies to create more diverse, 

productive, profitable, and sustainable land-use 

systems. Under this definition, grazing forested land 

could be considered a form of agroforestry. 

In the 1980s, Project Leader Henry A. Pearson led

an effort to enhance the Palustris Experimental 

Forest’s range program by seeding forest range with 

subterranean clover. This clover can reseed naturally 

and will tolerate prescribed fire and heavy grazing. 

When combining pines and cattle on pasture, grazing 

is often delayed for several years until trees are 

large enough to resist browse damage. Subterranean 

clover treatments were imposed to provide additional 

forage during this early pine seedling development 

stage (Pearson and others 1990a). Results indicated 

that clover improved forage, but that electric fencing 

placed directly over the planted rows of trees was 

necessary to avoid serious seedling injury from 

trampling. 

Two other agroforestry approaches were evaluated: 

combining Christmas tree production with grazing 

(Pearson and others 1990b); and combining timber 

production, grazing, and pine straw harvest for the 

landscape industry (Haywood and others 1995). 

Longleaf is the preferred species for harvesting 

because its long needle length facilitates baling 

and handling. 

A challenge in creating and maintaining agroforestry programs is finding an economical 

and biological balance in managing multiple resources.

Henry A. Pearson receiving the W.R. 

Chapline Research Award from the 

Society of Range Management.

Whit Whitaker, range 

technician, lived and 

worked on the Longleaf 

Tract for many years. For 

his excellent technical 

support, he received 

the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Superior 

Service Award.
38

Of agroforestry practices evaluated on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest, pine straw harvesting has shown 

the greatest potential for supplementing income to 

land owners. Pine straw is a renewable resource that is 

harvested primarily for landscaping mulch. Recently, 

its use in landscaping dramatically increased. Adding 

straw to timber and forage as products of management 

can increase profits substantially, and the income from 

straw may actually exceed that from timber itself 

(Haywood and others 1996). 

In spite of immediate economic opportunities, 

scientists were concerned that repeated removal of 

the forest floor could adversely affect pine growth 

and yield. Therefore, a large study was installed on 

the Palustris Experimental Forest to determine how 

pine straw harvesting practices influenced longleaf 

pine productivity. Results showed that harvesting pine 

straw can increase soil bulk density, soil movement, 

potassium concentrations in the mineral soil, and water 

turbidity. Harvesting can also reduce water infiltration, 

pine tree growth, and fire hazard. Some of these 

problems can be reduced by proper management.

Researchers developed a recommended formula for 

compensating for nutrient losses from straw removal: 

periodic fertilization with 150-200 pounds of nitrogen 

per acre (Morris and others 1992) and 50 pounds of 

phosphorus per acre. They also recommended that 

landowners should avoid harvesting on soils with more 

than 10 percent slopes and stream-bottom areas, and 

rake straw carefully to prevent loss of mineral soil. The 

researchers concluded that, although negative effects 

may not be entirely reversed with several years of 

rest from harvesting, the economic value of carefully 

collected straw may outweigh the cost of damage.

Intensive Culture Research

Elements of intensive culture research had long been a 

part of Forest Management Research. But to enhance 

this phase of research, a separate research work unit 

was created in 1969 at the Alexandria Research Center. 

Eugene (Gene) Shoulders was named project leader 

of the Intensive Culture Research Work Unit and 

charged with maximizing productivity of southern pine 

plantations. The work included reassigning parts of the 

Crossett Research Center program (in Crossett, AR)—

such as forest genetics, soils, and stand management—

to the new unit. As well, components of the Pineville 

Forest Management Research Work Unit—such as 

site preparation, post-planting competition control, 

and irrigation—were assigned to Shoulder’s unit. 

Although the research assignment was broad, soils and 

fertilization were the primary themes. 

The Intensive Culture Research Work Project 

functioned independently from 1969 until 1982, when 

it returned to the fold of Forest Management Research. 

The following are significant research efforts from the 

work undertaken in this project related to the Palustris 

Experimental Forest.

Soils

In the West Gulf Coastal Plain, wet pine-growing soils 

are saturated for prolonged periods in winter but dry 

out in summer and may intermittently develop serious 

moisture deficits (Shoulders and McKee 1973). This 

situation is much different than for sites further east, 

where water may be over abundant for long periods in 

all seasons. 

For 8-year-old slash pine, beds that raised the water 

table 18 inches or more above the water table during 

January and February were effective in promoting tree 

growth, whereas beds that raised the soil less than 18 

inches resulted in one-third less aboveground biomass 

(5.4 tons oven-dried weight).

Bedding became the most popular and perhaps the 

only practical method of removing excess water from 

the rooting zone and improving soil aeration. Growth 

response to bedding varies significantly (Derr and 

Mann 1977, Mann and Derr 1970), largely because of 

differences in the amount of well-aerated soil bedding 

provides during the wet winter period (McKee and 

Shoulders 1970, 1974).

On the poorly drained silt-loam soils of west central 

Louisiana, effective beds are difficult to construct, and if 

not properly constructed, may reduce rather than enhance 

pine growth. The continuous nature of beds sometimes 

aggravates the situation by impeding drainage of water. 

Discontinuous beds were proposed to improve water 

flow, but they were difficult to build and resulted in 

site conditions that restricted logging and management 

operations (Haywood 1981). Numerous studies indicate 

that bedding on many sites yielded no long-term benefits 

and may actually result in lower productivity in the 

following rotation. 

Gene Shoulders, longterm Forest Management 

Work Unit scientist, was 

reassigned to lead the 

new intensive culture 

project.
39

Other site preparation treatments, such as disking, 

improve pine plantation success and early growth 

primarily by reducing competition from herbaceous 

vegetation (Tiarks and Haywood 1981). 

Fertilization

Soils of the West Gulf Coastal Plain differ from those 

of the Southeast by having lower levels of phosphorus 

(Shoulders and McKee 1973). The soils are also 

low in nitrogen and potassium, and on many sites, 

waterlogging affects response to fertilizers (McKee and 

Shoulders 1974). A challenge for Gene Shoulders and 

his colleagues was to determine not only the nutrient 

needs of the soils but also how these are modified by 

waterlogged conditions, and when and how best to apply 

fertilizers under operational conditions. 

Application of phosphorus and nitrogen to forest soils of 

the West Gulf Coastal Plain provides the most positive 

gains in growth. Studies have shown that application 

rates of 100 pounds of each per acre are effective 

(McKee 1973, Shoulders and McKee 1973, Shoulders 

and Tiarks 1980a). 

Although fertilizer applications to newly planted pines 

can increase early growth, field observations indicate 

the effect of fertilizer is often negated by herbaceous 

plant competition because these plants respond faster 

than pines to added nutrients (Tiarks and Haywood 

1981). Based on these observations, the researchers 

concluded that fertilization at planting or during early 

plantation establishment should be accompanied by 

competition control, and that once young stands achieve 

closed canopies, understory plant development is limited 

and effective fertilization can be obtained through 

broadcast applications by plane or ground equipment. 

The method has become a common practice for 

increasing tree growth and improving plantation profits.

Post-planting competition control

The need for post-planting competition control was 

demonstrated by a unique study (Tiarks and Haywood 

1981). To determine the amount of control needed, 

fertilized and unfertilized rows of planted slash pine 

were hand-hoed in a wedge-shaped pattern. By using 

this technique, the amount of cultivation varied from 

none to complete. 

After 4 years, fertilization or complete competition 

control were about equally effective in improving 

biomass production. When these treatments were 

combined, they interacted to increase biomass by 347 

percent (Tiarks and Haywood 1981). Although complete 

control is necessary near seedlings to maximize early 

growth of the pines, some ground cover should remain 

to limit soil erosion.

Discontinuous beds were proposed to allow better drainage of water, but building them was difficult and they resulted in site 

conditions that limited management operations.

Applying fertilizers in bands with ground equipment is effective 

once tree crowns begin to close.
40

Other studies installed in operational plantings confirm 

that a combination of weed control and fertilization 

is needed to maximize pine growth and development 

(Moehring 1966). 

Irrigation

Research in the West Gulf Region indicated that 

early growth of pine plantations may be boosted if 

summer water deficits are alleviated by irrigation 

(Moehring 1964). Although irrigation was a treatment 

considered for use in maximizing growth of pine 

stands, researchers determined early that practical 

application of irrigation treatments was not feasible 

in most plantation environments. In a study on the 

Experimental Forest where the capability for irrigation 

was installed, seldom was the moisture deficit criteria 

met that required its application.

Insect and Disease Research

Research on insect and disease problems was a part 

of the timber management program of the Alexandria 

Research Center before Forest Service Research 

reorganized in 1964. Most problems related to insects 

and diseases were assigned to other research work 

units, but research on some pests continued as needed 

to conduct forest management research. 

Early in planting studies, Texas leaf-cutting ants (Atta 

texana), also known as town ants, brown-spot needle 

blight, and fusiform rust (Cronartium quercuum f.sp. 

fusiforme) were pests that often limited plantation 

success. These pests became the focus of some research 

carried out on the Palustris Experimental Forest and 

surrounding forests.

Town ant biology and control 

Town ants were a major hazard to pine seedlings in 

the uplands of central Louisiana and east Texas. The 

ants destroy young pines by stripping off needles and 

terminal buds or by cutting the radicle and cotyledon 

tissue from germinating seeds. They carry green plant 

material into underground chambers, where the plant 

material forms the fungal substrate that each colony 

cultures for food. 

Ant colonies are identifiable by mounds of excavated 

soil clustered above the general region of the fungus 

chambers. A single mound usually signifies a new 

colony; old colonies may have 300 or more mounds 

distributed over one-quarter of an acre (Echols 1966). 

One colony is capable of destroying several acres 

of planted seedlings, and the economic impact in 

Louisiana was recognized as early as 1934, when largescale planting projects were started.

Beginning in the early 1940s, destroying colonies 

by fumigating them with methyl bromide became 

the standard control treatment (Johnson 1944), and 

continued as such for 25 years. Due to significant 

Town ants range from 1⁄4 to 3⁄4 inch long and are very efficient in 

cutting pine needles, terminal buds, and germinating seed tissue 

to supply their fungus gardens.

John C. Moser examines a town ant fungus garden chamber 

during the evacuation of a large ant colony.
41

damage to pine plantations from town ants and 

problems with the use of methyl bromide, entomologist 

John C. Moser was added to the staff of the Alexandria 

Research Center in 1959 to conduct additional research. 

Moser’s approach was to understand the biology of 

the town ant. He reviewed the literature on similar 

species in South America and, with help from the forest 

industry, excavated a large colony for study. Three 

years later, he published a comprehensive article on the 

biology of town ants (Moser 1963).

With the reorganization of Forest Service Research in 

1964, Moser was transferred to a newly created forest 

insect research unit in Pineville, LA. However, his 

passion for understanding the biology of town ants did 

not end. He continued to study the ants and their related 

insect species, even when the research was outside the 

unit’s mission, and he became the international expert 

on leaf-cutting ants as well as the mites and other 

insects that coexist with the ants.

Forest Management Research recruited Hamp W. (Bill) 

Echols to develop a control treatment for this species 

that limits pine reforestation success (Shoulders 1960). 

Fortunately for Echols, Mirex® was being developed to 

control fire ants (Solenopsis invicta), which had become 

a serious pest across the South. Echols found that a 

formulation of Mirex® controlled town ants as well 

(Echols 1965, 1966).

As registration efforts for the town ant formulation of 

Mirex® continued, the U.S. Congress approved the 

aerial spraying of the fire ant formulation. Most rural 

areas in the South where fire ants were a problem 

were sprayed several times. Not only did the chemical 

greatly reduce populations of fire ants, but it also 

significantly reduced the number of town ant colonies. 

However, aerial spraying of the pesticide ended in 1977 

due to environmental concerns. Not as aggressive as 

fire ants, which quickly recovered from the pesticide, 

town ants are only now recovering and filling their 

earlier niche in the forest landscape. 

Brown-spot needle blight

Early in the initiation of a reforestation program for 

longleaf pine, brown-spot needle blight was a major 

problem. Described by Siggers (1932), it is a disease 

that affects seedlings both in the nursery and in the 

field. Lesions may develop on secondary needles at any 

time, but they most commonly appear in late summer. 

Typically they appear as straw-yellow bands that turn 

light brown with chestnut-brown margins on needles. 

Ascospores, disseminated by wind and rain splash, 

spread infections. Spore forms overwinter in dead 

and infected needle tissue. Thus, seedlings that are in 

the grass stage are subject to repeated infections that 

increase the seriousness of the disease.

Infected seedlings in the nursery are seldom killed, 

but severe defoliation reduces vigor, which may result 

in poor survival and growth following outplanting. 

For decades, the common treatment in nurseries 

was spraying beds of longleaf pine seedlings with a 

Bordeaux® mixture (Wakeley 1954). More recently, it 

has been found that almost any fungicide will control 

the disease, and several are registered for use on 

brown-spot infections (Kais 1989). 

Brown-spot infections have been a major factor 

delaying height growth of planted longleaf pine 

seedlings. Seedlings may remain in the grass stage up 

to 10 years when infections are severe. In this stage of 

low vigor, seedling mortality may occur. The simplest 

method of reducing the level of brown-spot infections 

in the field is to use prescribed fire. Prescribed burning 

every 2 or 3 years destroys the infected needles and 

thus kills the spores. Reinfestations will occur, but the 

seedlings have an opportunity for enough development 

to initiate height growth.

Researchers suggested that another control treatment is 

application of a root dip of 5-percent active ingredient 

benomyl-kaolin clay or similar fungicidal-clay mixture 

at lifting of seedlings in the nursery (Barnett and Kais 

1987). Studies found that such treatment not only 

reduces brown-spot infestations in the field but also 

improves seedling survival by reducing pathogens that 

reduce seedling vigor during cold storage.

Brown-spot blight is much less a problem in longleaf 

pine reforestation today than a number of decades 

ago. The limited numbers of longleaf pine seedlings 

remaining in the grass stage has reduced the source 

of disease inoculum. With improved success in 

seedling establishment and faster height initiation 

resulting from better nursery and site preparation 

methods, opportunities for spore populations to build to 

damaging levels are limited.

Station scientist H.H. Muntz sprays longleaf pine seedlings in 

the Stuart Nursery with a Bordeaux® mixture to control brownspot needle blight. Civilian Conservation Corps employees are 

providing technical support.
42

Seed, seedling, and root storage pathogens

Longleaf pine seeds are large, have fibrous seed coats,

and generally carry a host of microorganisms. On 

low vigor seeds, the fungi may be pathogenic and 

significantly reduce seed germination and infect newly 

germinated seedlings. Early studies showed that 

eliminating the fungi by hydrogen-peroxide sterilization 

significantly improved seed performance (Barnett 1976c). 

Research also showed that fungicide benomyl 

(Benlate®)—applied to bareroot nursery stock by 

dipping root systems in fungicidal-clay slurries—

controlled brown-spot needle disease and improved 

longleaf pine seedling survival (Barnett and Kais 

1987). Based on the finding, further study found 

that benomyl and related fungicidal treatments were 

effective in improving both seed germination and 

seedling development (Barnett and others 1999). 

Advances in container nursery technology led to 

evidence that seedlings were frequently infected from 

fungi on seed coats (released from germinating seeds) 

that fall into containers after germination. Without 

fungicidal treatment of seed coats, mortality of longleaf 

seedlings may occur frequently in the container 

nurseries (Barnett and McGilvray 2002b). 

Fungicidal root dips for controlling brown-spot 

needle blight were so effective in improving bareroot 

seedling survival that researchers hypothesized those 

microorganisms were reducing seedling vigor during 

cold storage of longleaf pine seedlings. Longleaf 

pine seedlings are difficult to store, a factor making 

reforestation of this species problematic. A number of 

field studies were installed to evaluate benomyl-clay 

slurry dips with varying periods of cold storage of 

longleaf, loblolly, and shortleaf pine seedlings. Results 

of these tests indicated that fungicide applications were 

positive when applied in many nurseries producing 

bareroot longleaf pine seedlings (Barnett and others 

1988, Brissette and others 1996).

John P. Jones of Louisiana State University’s 

Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology 

began cooperative research to identify the pathogens 

associated with mortality of seeds and seedlings and 

determine if causes for the loss of vigor during seedling 

storage were disease related. He and his researchers 

learned that the benomyl-clay slurry root treatment 

was controlling fungi that were reducing performance 

of longleaf pine bareroot stock during cold storage. 

Jones and graduate student Xiaoan Sun then conducted 

a number of tests to identify causal microorganisms 

(Jones and others 1992, 1997). 

Results indicated that both Fusarium and Pythium

fungi were involved in the seed and root disease 

problems. One specific fungus (Fusarium circinatum) 

A seed coat dropped from the seedling following germination 

may carry fungi that cause seedling mortality.

Pine seedlings with roots sprayed with a benomyl-clay slurry 

prior to being placed in cold storage.
43

was identified in the root disease problem (Jones 

and others 1999), but other species of Fusarium and 

Pythium was also involved in seed, seedling, and root 

problems. Sun and others (1993) identified a species of 

Trichoderma that might be developed as a biological 

control of the root storage pathogens. Fungicides that 

effectively controlled these diseases were identified, 

and Jones and others (2002) investigated nursery 

cultural practices that may limit the seriousness of 

these disease problems in the nursery.

Fusiform rust

Fusiform rust is the most damaging disease of southern 

pine plantations. It occurs in a broad band across 

the Southern States and is most prevalent in highly 

productive loblolly and slash pine plantations. Rust 

incidence has increased dramatically in the last 30 

to 40 years, especially in intensively cultured stands. 

Fusiform rust galls have been tallied routinely along 

with other stand measurements in studies on the 

Palustris Experimental Forest, but in the early 1980s, 

infestations became severe enough to cause significant 

losses in stand productivity and even mortality. 

Early attempts to control fusiform rust infections 

focused on culling seedlings with visible rust cankers 

during lifting at the nursery. Unfortunately, a study 

showed that many seedlings may have rust infections 

that only appear after outplanting (Czabator and 

Enghardt 1959). A follow-up study demonstrated that 

pruning infected limbs of young slash pines in the field 

to reduce fusiform rust damage was neither effective 

nor economical (Enghardt and others 1969). Clearly, 

a chemical treatment was needed to protect seedlings 

from rust infections.

In the early 1980s, the systemic chemical triadimefon 

(Bayleton®) was found effective in controlling 

fusiform rust in pine seedling nurseries (Snow and 

others 1979) and was tested as a treatment to protect 

young outplanted stock. It showed good potential as a 

treatment for young slash pine plantings (Burton and 

Snow 1983).

A large study was installed on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest to evaluate the effect of fungicidal 

spraying on fusiform rust infections on slash pine 

subjected to a wide range of cultural regimes (Burton 

and others 1985). The eight treatments were (1) no 

fungicide, weed control, or fertilizer; (2) weeded; 

(3) weeded, applied inorganic fertilizer, and bedded 

before treatment; (4) weeded, bedded, and applied 

inorganic fertilizer in the sixth growing season (delayed 

fertilization); (5) applied fungicide but no weed control 

or fertilizer; (6) applied fungicide and weeded; (7) 

applied fungicide plus treatment 3; and (8) applied 

fungicide plus treatment 4. 

Slash pine seedlings with stem swellings that indicate fusiform 

rust infections.

Scientist Harold J. Derr pointing to fusiform rust galls in sapling 

stems in a slash pine plantation.
44

Fungicides were applied five times annually. For the 

first 4 years, herbicides were used to obtain complete 

control of understory vegetation. Treatments were 

assessed 10 years after planting. Fungicide treatments 

resulted in higher survival, fewer trees with stem 

galls, fewer galls encircling the stem, and greater 

total volume per acre (Haywood and others 1994). 

Fertilization and weed control generally increased 

tree height, diameter, and corresponding volume 

production, but were associated with a greater 

incidence of fusiform rust, which normally occurs 

when unimproved slash pines are outplanted and 

intensively cultured. 

The documentation of fusiform rust galls in 

Shoulder’s “choice of species” study (see Site-species 

Relationships section), which had 113 installations 

across Louisiana and southern Mississippi, provided 

data to model relationships of fusiform rust incidence 

to survival and yield of unthinned slash and loblolly 

pine plantations (Nance and others 1985; Shoulders 

and Nance 1987). Shoulders and Nance’s (1987) work 

indicated that loblolly pine was more resistant to 

fusiform rust infections than slash pine. The results 

were later verified by Walkinshaw and Barnett (1995). 

The research of Shoulders and his colleagues has 

provided the most complete understanding to date of 

the relationship of fusiform rust to species, cultural, 

and edaphic variables.

Fire Research and management 

Fire effects in southern pine forests have been 

studied since forestry research was initiated in the 

early 1920s. Prescribed burning was a component 

in plantation studies that Wakeley installed on the 

Palustris Experimental Forest in the winter of 1934 to 

1935. Although wildfire was considered devastating to 

most young pine plantations, longleaf pine seedlings 

and saplings had capability to recover from hot and 

damaging fires. Evaluations of fire on pine plantations 

became a common treatment of many research studies.

Fire and longleaf pine management

Fire research began on the experimental forest in the 

mid-1930s. This work demonstrated that prescribed 

fire was needed to keep forest rangeland free of woody 

growth and maintain quality forage for livestock 

production (Grelen 1976). These fires were also found 

to benefit longleaf pine regeneration due to the species’ 

tolerance to fire, particularly while in their grass stage 

period when there is little stem growth. Grass-stage 

seedlings are susceptible to encroachment by brush 

and other pine species, smothering by grass and needle 

litter, and brown-spot needle infection (Wahlenberg 

1946). Prescribed burning relieves longleaf seedlings 

from these stresses by removing seedling competition 

and controlling the disease, thereby improving seeding 

survival (Grelen 1983).

Once longleaf seedlings emerge from the grass stage, 

they are more susceptible to heat injury. Nevertheless, 

most longleaf seedlings survive while other woody 

species are top killed by fire. Based on research on 

the Palustris Experimental Forest, Grelen (1975) 

reported that prescribed fire applied biennially in May 

resulted in larger longleaf pine saplings than such 

fires in either March or July. He attributed the better 

growth following May fires to the morphological 

characteristics of the new shoots.

top: These 10-year-old slash pines were completely defoliated by 

wildfire. According to Mann and Gunter (1960), heavy mortality 

will result from this fire.

bottom: Dark brown areas extending upward at the base of this 

tree are dead cambium tissues.
45

More recently, Sword Sayer and Haywood (2009) 

determined that longleaf pine mobilizes starch stored 

in the roots to support new growth and build foliage. 

Starch reserves are high in May thereby favoring May 

as a time to burn with little loss of tree growth. Starch 

reserves are lower in March and July and relate to 

poorer response from burning. Intense fires can reduce 

the growth of longleaf pine saplings and trees although 

most survive (Haywood 2002). 

Predicting mortality of fire-damaged pines

Foresters were uncertain on whether to salvage or 

replant pines that had much or all their crowns burned 

during hot fires. Bill Mann of the Southern Station and 

Erin R. Gunter of the Louisiana Forestry Commission 

installed studies in the early 1950s to establish 

guidelines for predicting tree mortality from severe fire 

damage (Mann and Gunter 1960). 

They addressed cambium condition and needle scorch 

in slash, loblolly, and slash pine stands. Dead cambium 

was sampled by making small chisel cuts through 

the bark at four equally spaced locations around the 

tree. Brown cambium material was determined to be 

dead. Cambium kill was often in uneven or in fingered 

streaks.

Needle scorch damage was more closely related 

to death of trees than was extent of cambium kill. 

However, mortality was not heavy unless more than 

90 percent of the crown was damaged. Trees with less 

than 50 percent of live crown scorched usually survived 

even though all four quadrants showed cambium kill 

at the ground line (Mann and Gunter 1960). They 

concluded that the proportion of live crown with needle 

scorch and the extent of cambium kill at the ground line 

appeared to be better indicators of mortality than height 

of bark charring, length of live crown with needles 

consumed, pitch bleeding, or presence of bark beetles.

No longleaf trees were included in this study and 

young longleaf saplings are known to be more resistant 

to fire damage than other southern pines. However, 

knowledge of the resistance of large longleaf trees to 

fire is not clear. Many organizations now limit the use 

of prescribed fire due to the damage and mortality that 

results from hot fires and to the potential negative effect 

on long-term soil productivity.

Establishment of a fire research work unit

Although research on fire and its effects had been 

studied by Southern Station scientists for many years, 

a fire research work unit was established in Pineville 

when the new facilities were developed in 1964. George 

R. Fahnestock was named head of the unit—he had 

been assigned to the Southern Forest Experiment 

Station since 1957. 

top: Repeated use of fire is needed to control undesirable species 

and develop a herbaceous understory in longleaf pine forests.

bottom: Fire burned this longleaf pine plantation still in the 

grass stage. These seedlings will survive the fire and soon 

initiate height growth.
46

Fahnestock gained experience in fire behavior during 

earlier assignments to the Intermountain and Rocky 

Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Stations. 

While in the South, he worked primarily with fire 

issues related to longleaf and loblolly pine.

Shortly after creation of the Fire Research Work 

Unit, Forest Service Research consolidated its fire 

research into two major installations: Macon, GA, and 

Missoula, MT. Fahnestock was reassigned to the Pacific 

Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station where 

he had a long and productive career in fire research. 

The formal fire research program in Pineville was 

closed and needed fire research was carried out 

by scientists in the Forest and Range Management 

Research Work Units as part of their ongoing programs. 

Incorporating fire into ongoing 

forest and range research 

Although no formal forest fire research program 

remained, fire effects continued to be integral 

aspects of forest and range research. The Palustris 

Experimental Forest was an ideal site for such research 

because both the Johnson and Longleaf tracts were 

initially open, cutover land. Use of fire was essential 

to conduct studies and apply treatments. Much of 

the enlightenment of fire effects in longleaf forests 

happened because of the interaction between forest and 

range research efforts on the forest.

For example, seasonal burning studies installed by 

range ecologists for evaluating effects of fire on forage 

development showed that spring burns improved control 

of undesirable hardwoods and initiation of height growth 

of longleaf pine. These studies also demonstrated the 

need for frequent burning to obtain and maintain a 

desirable longleaf pine ecosystem. Maintaining such 

joint efforts over time has been productive.

Long-term fire studies

Prescribed burning of southern pine forests helps 

control hardwoods and increases herbaceous plant 

production. Effects of a single burn are transitory, so a 

program of burning is needed to restore longleaf pine 

ecosystems and maintain a herbaceous understory. 

From 1962 through 1998, 20 prescribed burns were 

applied in a natural stand of longleaf pine to determine 

the long-term effects of fire regimes on the forest plant 

community (Haywood and others 2001). 

Early in these long-term fire studies, Grelen (1975) 

reported that biennial burning in May resulted in 

larger longleaf pine saplings than similar burning 

in either March or July. The positive aspects of this 

relationship between May burning and greater longleaf 

pine development has continued through age 37 years 

(Haywood and others 2001). The major influence of 

burning was not, however, on improving long-term pine 

yield, but on its influence on overall stand structure and 

species composition. 

Another long-term study, evaluating effects of various 

fire regimes on vegetation in a direct-seeded stand of 

longleaf pine, was reported after 20 years of treatment 

(Haywood and Grelen 2000). The 12 prescribed burns 

conducted during the study increased stocking of longleaf 

pine over that in the unburned plots. On the burned 

treatments, longleaf pines were significantly smaller than 

the unburned trees. Fire effectively kept natural loblolly 

pine seedlings from reaching sapling size, but loblolly 

saplings and poles dominated the unburned plots. 

The research suggested that land managers face a 

quandary. To grow longleaf pine and maintain the 

longleaf ecosystem, rapidly growing and competitive 

natural loblolly pine must be controlled. Prescribed 

burning is an effective technique to accomplish this. 

Frequent and repeated use of fire, however, may deplete 

nutrients and slow growth of longleaf stands. If land 

managers want to maintain understory herbaceous and 

woody vegetation for wildlife habitat and to protect rare 

or endangered species, reducing the growth to obtain 

the desired forest cover may be an acceptable outcome 

(Haywood and Grelen 2000).

Summary of the Research Programs

The scope and nature of research conducted on the 

Palustris Experimental Forest during the last 75 years 

is remarkable. The forest was established in 1935 to 

provide a site for evaluating bareroot nursery practices. 

Phillip Wakeley’s research program moved to the 

Stuart Nursery in 1934, and nearly 750,000 seedlings 

were planted in research studies in the next few years. 

A product of this effort was Wakeley’s “Planting the 

Southern Pines” (1954), which helped guide land 

managers in regenerating southern pines.

With resumption of research after World War II, 

artificial regeneration of southern pines continued as a 

focus of the research program. Using bird and rodent 

George R. Fahnestock 

led the fire research 

program in Pineville 

until fire research was 

consolidated nationally 

in 1965.
47

repellents, direct seeding technology was developed to 

allow rapid reforestation of large areas of open, cutover 

land. Key to successful reforestation efforts was seed 

research that provided knowledge to collect, process, 

treat, and store large quantities of high quality seeds. 

This technology has been applied not only across the 

South, but internationally as well.

Efforts to improve bareroot nursery production 

continued, but successful establishment of longleaf 

pine remained a significant problem even though 

physiological studies have clarified the processes. 

Technology to grow seedlings in small containers was 

developed and found to greatly improve success of 

longleaf pine reforestation efforts. Container nursery 

technology is now used almost exclusively to artificially 

regenerate longleaf pine. 

As old-growth forests were harvested, millions of 

acres of cutover land became open range for livestock 

production. As reforestation technology began to be 

applied, grazing livestock on the land limited success 

of these efforts. The Longleaf Tract of the Palustris 

Experimental forest was established in 1950 to provide 

a resource for conducting range studies that would 

minimize these conflicting interests. Range research 

continued for over 40 years and provided guidelines 

to successfully accommodate use of forest land for 

livestock production.

As use of forest land for livestock production 

declined due to economic conditions, range programs 

transitioned into agroforestry programs that provided 

land managers with scientific information to support 

multiple uses of forest land, such as pine straw 

harvesting.

As plantation establishment succeeded, research 

related to stand management was needed. These 

studies involved planting spacing; initiation, level, and 

frequency of thinning; competition control; prescribed 

burning; and modeling of stand projections. Stand 

manipulations to optimize growth and yield have 

been a major effort throughout the existence of the 

experimental forest and these long-term studies have 

been measured repeatedly. Hundreds of publications 

have resulted from these efforts and the results have 

shaped silvicultural practices applied to southern pine 

plantations. The databases from these studies have been 

used to develop models for projecting growth and yield 

of plantations. Guidelines developed from these studies 

have been applied across the region. 

A key to developing productive plantations was 

controlling competing scrub hardwood species that 

grew on much of the cutover land. These species had no 

economic value and required herbicides to kill them, thus 

releasing sites for pine growth. Fred Peevy’s pioneering 

research on developing effective chemicals and application 

techniques was critical in establishing plantations on 

hundreds of thousands of acres across the South. 

Soil-related studies represent long-term research 

that has regional and national significance. Early in 

the reforestation era, questions remained related to 

which species were best suited for planting particular 

sites. Numerous studies were installed to address 

this site-species issue, including a wide array of 

site modification treatments. The largest was Gene 

Shoulders’ “choice of species” study, planted on 

113 sites across Louisiana and southern Mississippi. 

Results of these studies continue to guide planting 

recommendations across the South. 

Another major soil-related study is the long-term 

soil productivity (LTSP) effort to evaluate the effects 

of current management practices on growth and 

productivity of succeeding stand rotations. Initiated 

on the Experimental Forest, this program has become 

of national and international significance with study 

installations across the United States and Canada. 

Forest industry has installed studies to complement the 

LTSP effort and develop mitigating measures when 

operational practices tend to degrade the soil. The goal 

of this effort is to ensure that forest soil productivity is 

maintained over time.

Fire-related research continues to be an integral part 

of programs conducted on the experimental forest. Of 

particular importance have been studies that document 

Aerial seeding by plane and helicopter was used to quickly 

regenerate hundreds of thousands of acres of cutover land.
48

the long-term effects of prescribed fire on restoration and 

management of longleaf pine ecosystems. These results 

have become incorporated into longleaf pine management 

systems that have been adopted across the South.

Numerous research studies and programs have been 

installed on the experimental forest with the goal of 

improving plantation establishment success and on 

increasing stand growth and yield. These have taken 

many forms from site preparation, prescribed fire, 

fertilization, stand manipulation, and competition 

control to tree improvement, genetics, insect studies, 

and disease control. For decades, these research efforts 

have succeeded in providing management tools to 

establish stands and to maintain and enhance southern 

forest productivity.

Tree injectors, developed to insert herbicides into low-quality 

hardwoods, became a major tool in killing these scrub trees.
49

For 75 years, the Palustris Experimental Forest has 

been used as a site for studies in forest management, 

range research, and intensive silviculture research. The 

scope of the research has been extraordinary, and its 

focus on interacting resource values was in place long 

before there were emphases to do so. Studies on the 

Palustris Experimental Forest have provided a vital link 

to multiple-use management of natural resources across 

the South, providing much of the ecological basis for 

managing Federal, State, and private lands. 

Nearly 2,000 publications of research associated 

with the Palustris Experimental Forest document the 

extent to which this research provides the basis for 

establishment and management of pine plantations 

across the South and around the world where southern 

pines have been introduced. One reason for the scope 

and productivity of the research programs was colocation and collaboration, not only among scientists 

of numerous disciplines but also among specialists 

from the forest industry, universities, State and private 

forests, and the National Forest System. 

In a broader perspective, these research programs have 

had an enormous effect on the economy of the South. 

Seventy-five years ago, forestry in the South was in its 

infancy, with much of the South’s forests in a decimated 

condition and with little information available on 

how to restore this cutover land to a productive state. 

Carter and Foster (2006) document that in 1950, pine 

plantations accounted for less than 1 percent of the area 

of southern forests, but by 1999, plantations covered 30 

million acres or 15 percent of the South’s timberland 

and nearly 50 percent of all pine forests. Much of the 

research that provided the technology for reforestation 

and stand productivity was developed from programs 

conducted on the Palustris Experimental Forest. 

Related technologies from a number of disciplines 

have supplemented this effort and provided compatible 

ecological and environmental management systems. 

Application of this research led the effort to make the 

South’s forests the most productive in the world and the 

practice of forestry now drives the economy of most 

Southern States.

Technology to restore cutover land into productive forests has 

resulted from the research programs that have been conducted 

on the Palustris Experimental Forest.

Conclusions
50

Baldwin, V.C., Jr. 1987. Green and dry-weight equations for 

aboveground components of planted loblolly pine trees in the West 

Gulf Region. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 11: 212-218.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Burkhart, H.E.; Dougherty, P.m.; Teskey, R.o.

1993. Using a growth and yield model (PTAEDA2) as a driver for 

a biological process model (MAESTRO). Res. Pap. SO-276. New 

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

Forest Experiment Station. 9 p.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Burkhart, H.E.; westfall, J.A.; Peterson, K.D.

2001. Linking growth and yield and process models to estimate 

impact of environmental changes on growth of loblolly pine. Forest 

Science. 47: 77-82.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Cao, Q.V. 1999. Modeling forest timber productivity 

in the south: Where are we today? In: Haywood, J.D., ed. Proceedings 

of the 10th biennial southern silvicultural research conference. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. SRS-30. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 487-496.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Dougherty, P.m.; Burkhart, H.E. 1998. A linked 

model for stimulating stand development and growth processes 

of loblolly pine. In: Mickler, R.A.; Fox, S. The productivity 

and sustainability of southern forest ecosystems in a changing 

environment. New York: Springer-Verlag: 305-325. 

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Feduccia, D.P. 1987. Loblolly pine growth and yield 

prediction of managed West Gulf plantations. Res. Pap. SO-236. New 

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

Forest Experiment Station. 27 p.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Feduccia, D.P. 1991. Compatible tree-volume and 

upper-stem diameter equations for plantation loblolly pine in the West 

Gulf Region. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 16: 92-97.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Feduccia, D.P.; Haywood, J.D. 1989. Postthinning 

growth and yield of row-thinned and selectively thinned loblolly and 

slash pine plantations. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 

19: 247-256.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Leduc, D.J.; Ferguson, R.B. [and others]. 1998. 

The not-so-sudden results of the sudden saw log study—growth 

and yield through age 45. In: Waldrop, T.A., ed. Proceedings of the 

9th biennial southern silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. SRS-20. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, Southern Research Station: 574-578.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Peterson, K.D.; Clark, A., III. [and others]. 2000. 

The effects of thinning on stand and tree characteristics of 38-yearold loblolly pine. Forest Ecology and Management. 137: 91-102.

Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Polmer, B.H. 1981. Taper functions for unthinned 

longleaf pine plantations on cutover sites. In: Barnett, J.P., ed. 

Proceedings of the 1st biennial southern silvicultural research 

conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-34. New Orleans: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station: 

156-163.

Barnett, J.P.. 1969. Long-term storage of longleaf pine seeds. Tree 

Planters’ Notes. 20(2): 22-25.

Barnett, J.P. 1970. Storage of sand pine seeds. Tree Planters’ Notes.

21(4): 11-12.

Barnett, J.P. 1971. Aerated water soaks stimulate germination of 

southern pine seeds. Res. Pap. S0-67. New Orleans: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 

9 p.

Barnett, J.P. 1972. Seedcoat influences dormancy of loblolly pine seeds. 

Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 2: 7-10.

Barnett, J.P. 1976a. Cone and seed maturation of southern pine. Res. 

Pap. SO-122. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 11 p.

Barnett, J.P. 1976b. Delayed germination of southern pine seeds related 

to seed coat constraint. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 

6: 504-510.

Barnett, J.P.. 1976c. Sterilizing southern pine seeds with hydrogen 

peroxide. Tree Planters’ Notes. 27(3): 17-19, 24.

Barnett, J.P. 1980. Density and age affect performance of containerized 

loblolly pine seedlings. Res. Note SO-256. New Orleans: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest 

Experiment Station. 5 p.

Barnett, J.P. 1983. Relating field performance of containerized longleaf 

and shortleaf pine seedlings to mycorrhizal inoculation and initial 

size. In: Proceedings, 7th North American Forest Biology Workshop. 

Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky: 358-367.

Barnett, J.P. 1984. Relating seedling physiology to survival and growth 

in container grown southern pines. In: M.L. Duryea; Brown, G.N., 

eds. Seedling Physiology and Reforestation Success. Dordrecht, 

Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff/Dr. W. Junk Publishers: 157-176

Barnett, J.P. 1988. Eastern white pine cone and seed maturity in the 

Southern Appalachians. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 

5: 172-176.

Barnett, J.P. 1991. Seedbed densities and sowing and lifting dates affect 

nursery development and field survival of longleaf pine seedlings. 

Tree Planters’ Notes. 42(3): 28- 29.

Barnett, J.P. 1993. Presowing treatments affect shortleaf pine seed 

germination and seedling development. Tree Planters’ Notes. 

44(2): 58-62.

Barnett, J.P.; Bergman, P.w.; Ferguson, w.L. [and others]. 1980. 

The biologic and economic assessment of endrin. Cooperative 

Impact Assessment Report. Tech. Bulletin 1623. Washington: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. 47 p.

Barnett, J.P.; Brissette, J.C. 1986. Producing southern pine seedlings 

in containers. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-59. New Orleans: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 

71 p.

Barnett, J.P.; Brissette, J.C. 2004. Stock type affects performance 

of shortleaf pine planted in the Ouachita Mountains through 10 

years. In: Connor, K., ed. Proceedings of the 12th biennial southern 

silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-71. Asheville, 

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

Research Station: 420-422.

Literature Cited
51

Barnett, J.P.; Brissette, J.C. 2007. Regenerating shortleaf pine: results

of a 5-year cooperative research initiative. In: Kabrick, J.M.; Dey, 

D.C.; Gwaze, E., eds. Shortleaf pine restoration and ecology in the 

Ozarks: Proceedings of a symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-P-15. 

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

Service, Northern Research Station: 105-111.

Barnett, J.P.; Brissette, J.C.; Kais, A.g. [and others]. 1988. 

Improving field performance of southern pine seedlings by treating 

with fungicides before storage. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 

12: 281-285.

Barnett, J.P.; Dumroese, R.K.; moorhead, D.J. 2002a. Proceedings 

of workshops on growing longleaf pine in containers—1999 and 

2001. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-56. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 63 p.

Barnett, J.P.; Hainds, m.J.; Hernandez, g.A. 2002b. Interim 

guidelines for growing longleaf pine seedlings in containers. 

[Brochure]. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-60. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 

Barnett, J.P.; Kais, A.g. 1987. Longleaf pine storability and resistance 

to brown-spot disease improved by adding benomyl to the packing 

medium. In: Phillips, D.R., comp. Proceedings of the 4th biennial 

southern silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-42. 

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

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 222-224.

Barnett, J.P.; Krugman, S.L. 1989. Electromagnetic treatment of 

loblolly pine seeds. Res. Note SO-356. New Orleans: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 7 p.

Barnett, J.P.; mcgilvray, J.m. 1981. Container planting systems 

for the South. Res. Pap. SO-167. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 18 p.

Barnett, J.P.; mcgilvray, J.m. 1993. Performance of container and 

bareroot loblolly pine seedlings on bottomlands in South Carolina. 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 17: 80-83.

Barnett, J.P.; mcgilvray, J.m. 1997. Practical guidelines for producing 

longleaf pine seedlings in containers. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-14. 

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

Southern Research Station. 28 p.

Barnett, J.P.; mcgilvray, J.m. 2002a. Guidelines for producing 

quality longleaf pine seeds. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-52. Asheville, NC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station. 21 p.

Barnett, J.P.; mcgilvray, J.m. 2002b. Improving longleaf pine 

seedling production by controlling seed and seedling pathogens. 

In: Outcalt, K.W., ed. Proceedings of the 11th biennial southern 

silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-48. Asheville, 

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

Research Station: 45-46.

Barnett, J.P.; mcLemore, B.F. 1970. Storing southern pine seeds. 

Journal of Forestry. 68: 24-27.

Barnett, J.P.; mcLemore, B.F. 1984. Germination speed as a predictor 

of seedling performance. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 

8: 157-162.

Barnett, J.; Pickens, B.; Karrfalt, R. 1999. Longleaf pine seed 

presowing treatments: effects on germination and nursery 

establishment. In: Landis, T.D.; Barnett, J.P., tech. coords. National 

Proceedings: Forest and Conservation Nursery Association—1998. 

Gen. Tech Rep. SRS-25. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 43-46.

Barnett, J.P.; Vozzo, J.A. 1985. Viability and vigor of slash and

shortleaf pine seeds after 50 years of storage. Forest Science. 

31: 316-320.

Boyer, w.D. 1987. Volume growth loss: A hidden cost of periodic 

prescribed burning in longleaf pine? Southern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 11: 154-157.

Brady, H.A. 1975. Aspects of dicamba behavior in woody plants. 

Southern Weed Science Society. 28: 236-243.

Brady, H.A.; Hall, o. 1976. Relation of sugar changes and herbicides 

susceptibility in woody plants. Southern Weed Science Society. 

29: 276-283.

Brissette, J.C.; Barnett, J.P. 1989. Depth of planting and J-rooting 

affect loblolly pine seedlings under stress. In: Miller, J.H., ed. 

Proceedings 5th biennial southern silvicultural research conference. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-74. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station: 169-175.

Brissette, J.C.; Barnett, J.P. 1992. Proceedings of the shortleaf pine 

regeneration workshop. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-90. New Orleans: 

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

Experiment Station. 236 p.

Brissette, J.C.; Barnett, J.P. 1993. Lifting date and storage duration 

affect root growth potential and field survival of shortleaf pine 

seedlings from three geographic sources and two nurseries. 

In: Brissette, J.C., ed. Proceedings of the 7th biennial southern 

silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-93. New 

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

Forest Experiment Station: 263-268.

Brissette, J.C.: Barnett, J.P.; Flagler, R.B. 1994. Root zone 

environment affects new root growth of shortleaf pine seedlings from 

East Texas. In: Forest biodiversity in a changing environment. North 

American forest biology workshop. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana 

State University, Agricultural Center: 31. 

Brissette, J.C.; Barnett, J.P.; gramling, C.L. 1988. Root growth 

potential of southern pine seedlings grown at the W.W. Ashe nursery. 

In: Proceedings, Southern Forest Nursery Association Meeting. 

Columbia, SC: Southern Forest Nursery Association: 173-183.

Brissette, J.C.; Barnett, J.P.; Jones, J.P. 1996. Fungicides improve 

field performance of stored loblolly and longleaf pine seedlings. 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 20: 5-9.

Brissette, J.C.; Barnett, J.P.; Landis, T.D. 1991. Container seedlings. 

Chapter 7 in Duryea, M.L.; Dougherty, P.M., eds. Forest regeneration 

manual. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 

117-141.

Brissette, J.C.; Carlson, w.C. 1987. Effects of nursery bed density 

and fertilization on the morphology, nutrient status, and root 

growth potential of shortleaf pine seedlings. In: Phillips, D.R., 

comp. Proceedings 4th biennial southern silvicultural research 

conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-42. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Research Station: 

198-205.

Brissette, J.C.; Chambers, J.L. 1992. Leaf water status and root 

system water flux of shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata Mill.) seedlings in 

relation to new root growth after transplanting. Tree Physiology. 

11: 289-303.

Burton, J.D. 1982. Sawtimber by prescription—the sudden sawlog story 

through age 33. Res. Pap. SO-179. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 9 p. 

Burton, J.D.; Shoulders, E. 1974. Fast-grown, dense loblolly pine 

sawlogs. Journal of Forestry. 72(10): 637-641.
52

Burton, J.D.; Shoulders, E.; Snow, g.A. 1985. Incidence and impact of

fusiform rust vary with silviculture in slash pine plantations. Forest 

Science. 31: 671-680.

Burton, J.D.; Snow, g.A. 1983. Triadimefon controls fusiform rust in 

young pine outplantings. Plant Disease. 67: 853-854.

Busby, R.L.; ward, K.B.; Baldwin, V.C., Jr. 1990. COMPUTE_

MERCHLOB: a growth and yield prediction system with a 

merchandizing optimizer for planted loblolly pine in the West 

Gulf Region. Res. Note SO-255. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 22 p.

Byrd, N.A.; Lewis, C.E.; Pearson, H.A. 1984. Management of 

southern pine forests for cattle production. Gen. Rep. R8-GR-4. 

Atlanta: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Southern Region. 22 p.

Campbell, T.E. 1976. The Nation’s oldest industrial direct seeding. 

Forests & People. 26(3): 22-24.

Cao, Q.V.; Baldwin, V.C., Jr. 1999. A new algorithm for stand 

projection models. Forest Science. 45: 406-511.

Cao, Q.V.; Dean, T.J.; Baldwin, V.C., Jr. 1999. Modeling the sizedensity relationship in direct-seeded slash pine stands. Forest Science. 

46: 317-321.

Carter, m.C.; Foster, C.D. 2006. Milestones and millstones: A 

retrospective on 50 years of research to improve productivity in 

loblolly pine plantations. Forest Ecology and Management. 

227: 137-144.

Cassady, J.T.; Hopkins, w.; whitaker, L.B. 1955. Cattle grazing 

damage to pine seedlings. Occasional Paper 141. New Orleans: 

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

Experiment Station. 14 p.

Cassady, J.T.; mann, w.F., Jr. 1954. The Alexandria Research Center. 

Misc. Pub. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 26 p.

Cassady, J.T.; Shepherd, w.o. 1949. Grazing on forested lands. 

In: 1948 Yearbook of Agriculture. Washington: U.S. Government 

Printing Office: 468-472.

Chambers, J.L.; Clifton, R.g.P.; Barnett, J.P. 1988. Sand culture 

and raised beds for inducement of water stress in seedling 

physiology studies. In: Worrall, J.; Loo-Dinkins, J.; D. Lester, T., 

eds. Proceedings, 10th North American Forest Biology Workshop. 

Vancouver, BC: British Columbia Forest Service: 164-168.

Czabator, F.J.; Enghardt, H. 1959. Nursery-infected seedlings develop 

rust cankers after outplanting. Tree Planter’s Notes. Washington: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Forest Service 37: 23-25.

Dean, T.J.; Baldwin, V.C., Jr. 1993. Using a density-management 

diagram to develop thinning schedules for loblolly pine plantations. 

Res. Pap. SO-275. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 7 p.

Dell, T.R.; Feduccia, D.P.; Campbell, T.E. [and others]. 1979. Yields 

of unthinned slash pine plantation on cutover sites in the West 

Gulf Region. Res. Pap. SO-147. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 84 p.

Dell, T.; Koretz, J.; Shoulders, E. 1989. Progress on shortleaf 

plantation, data pool and growth predictions. In: Miller, J.H., ed. 

Proceeding of the 5th biennial southern silvicultural conference. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. SO-74. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station: 441-445.

Derr, H.J. 1964. New repellent formulation for direct seeding. Journal 

of Forestry. 62: 265.

Derr, H.J. 1966. Longleaf x slash hybrids at age 7: Survival, growth, 

and disease susceptibility. Journal of Forestry. 64: 236-239.

Derr, H.J.; mann, w.F., Jr. 1953. Cost of pruning longleaf pine.

Journal of Forestry. 51(8): 579.

Derr, H.J.; mann, w.F., Jr. 1971. Direct-seeding pines in the South. 

Agric. Handb. 391. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service. 67 p.

Derr, H.J.; mann, w.F., Jr. 1977. Bedding poorly drained sites for 

planting loblolly and slash pines. Res. Pap. SO-134. New Orleans: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Southern Forest Experiment Station. 4 p.

Derr, H.J.; melder T.w. 1970. Brown-spot resistance in longleaf pine. 

Forest Science. 16: 204-209.

Dumroese, R.K.; Barnett, J.P.; Jackson, D.P.; Hainds, m. 2009. 2008 

interim guidelines for growing longleaf pine seedlings in container 

nurseries. In: Dumroese, R.K.; Riley, L.E., tech. coord. National 

proceedings: forest and conservation nursery associations—2008. 

Proceedings RMRS-P-58. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 101-107.

Dumroese, R.K; Landis, T.D.; Barnett, J.P.; Burch, F. 2005. Forest 

Service nurseries: 100 years of ecosystem restoration. Journal of 

Forestry. 103(5): 241-247.

Dumroese, R.K.; Landis, T.D.; Luna, T.; Hernandez, g. 2008. 

Simple methods for raising tree and shrub seedlings in Afghanistan. 

Washington: U.S. Agency for International Development and U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agriculture Service, Office of 

Capacity Building and Development. 63 p.

Dumroese, R.K.; Luna, T.; Landis, T. 2009. Nursery manual for native 

plants: A guide for tribal nurseries—Volume 1: Nursery management. 

Agric. Handb. 730. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service. 302 p.

Duvall, V.L.; Linnartz, N.E. 1967. Influences of grazing and fire on 

vegetation and soil of longleaf pine-bluestem range. Journal of Range 

Management. 20(4): 241-247.

Duvall, V.L.; whitaker, L.B. 1964. Rotation burning: A forage 

management system for longleaf pine-bluestem ranges. Journal of 

Range Management. 17(6): 322-326.

Echols, H.w. 1965. Town ants controlled with Mirex baits. Res. Note 

SO-18. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 2 p.

Echols, H.w. 1966. Texas leaf-cutting ants controlled with pelleted 

Mirex bait. Journal of Economic Entomology. 19: 628-631.

Enghardt, H.g.; Smith, L.F.; wells, o.o. 1969. Pruning to reduce 

fusiform-rust damage not justified on young slash pines. Res. Note 

SO-87. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 3 p.

Feduccia, D.P. 1983. Thinning pine plantations. Forest Farmer. 

XLII(10): 10-11.

Feduccia, D.P.; Dell, T.R.; mann, w.F., Jr. [and others]. 1979. Yields 

of unthinned loblolly pine plantations on cutover sites in the West 

Gulf Region. Res. Pap. SO-148. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 88 p.

Feduccia, D.; mosier, J. 1977. The Woodworth spacing and thinning 

study: An obituary. Forests & People. 27(1): 18-21.

Ferguson, R.B.; Baldwin, V.C., Jr. 1987. Comprehensive outlook 

for managed pines using simulated treatment experiments-planted 

loblolly pine (COMPUTE_P-LOB): A user’s guide. Res. Pap. SO241. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 64 p.
53

Ferguson, R.B.; Baldwin, V.C., Jr. 1995. Spacing effects on unthinned 

slash pine in the West Gulf. In: Edwards, M.B., comp. Proceedings of 

the 8th biennial southern silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. SRS-1. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, Southern Research Station: 473-478.

Fleming, R.L.; Powers, R.F.; Foster, N.w. [and others]. 2006. Effects 

of organic removal, soil compaction, and vegetation control on 5-year 

seedling performance: A regional comparison of long-term soil 

productivity sites. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 36: 529-550.

Fox, T.R.; Jokela, E.J.; Allen, H.L. 2007. The development of pine 

plantation silviculture in the Southern United States. Journal of 

Forestry. 105: 337-347.

grelen, H.E. 1975. Vegetative response to twelve years of seasonal 

burning on a Louisiana longleaf pine site. Res. Note SO-192. New 

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

Forest Experiment Station. 4 p.

grelen, H.E. 1976. Responses of herbage, pines, and hardwoods to early 

and delayed burning in a young pine slash pine plantation. Journal of 

Range Management. 29(4): 301-303.

grelen, H.E. 1978. Forest grazing in the South. Journal of Range 

Management. 31(4): 244-250

grelen, H.E. 1983. May burning favors survival and early height 

growth of longleaf pine seedlings. Southern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 7: 16-19.

grelen, H.E.; Duvall, V.L. 1966. Common plants of longleaf pinebluestem range. Res. Pap. SO-23. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 100 p.

grelen, H.E.; Epps, E.A., Jr. 1967. Season of burning affects 

herbage quality and yield on pine-bluestem range. Journal of Range 

Management. 20(1): 31-33.

grelen, H.E.; Pearson, H.A. 1977. Liquid supplements for cattle on 

southern forest range. Journal of Range Management. 30: 94-96.

grelen, H.E.; Pearson, H.A.; Thill, R.E. 1985. Establishment and 

growth of slash pine on grazed cutover range in central Louisiana. 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 9(4): 232-236.

guldin, R.w.; Barnett, J.P. 1982. Proceedings of the southern 

containerized forest tree seedling conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO37. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 156 p.

Hall, o. 1973. Limitations of surfactant and pH effects on herbicide 

behavior in woody plants. Weed Science. 21(3): 221-223.

Hallgren, S.w.; Tauer, C.g. 1989. Root growth potential, first-year 

survival, and growth of shortleaf pine seedlings show efforts of lift 

date, storage, and family. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 13: 

163-169.

Haywood, J.D. 1981. Discontinuous mounding as a site treatment on 

a flatwoods site. In: Barnett, J.P., ed. Proceedings of the 1st biennial 

southern silivicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO34. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station: 50-53.

Haywood, J.D. 1983. Response of planted pines to site preparation on 

a Beauregard-Caddo soil. In: Jones, E.P., Jr., ed. Proceedings 2nd 

biennial southern silviculture conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-24. 

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

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 14-17.

Haywood, J.D. 1993. Stripping of soil-applied hexazinone, picloram, 

and tibuthiuron for loblolly pine site preparation. Res. Note SO-372. 

New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 6 p.

Haywood, J.D. 1994. Seasonal and cumulative loblolly pine 

development under two stand density and fertility levels through four 

growing seasons. Res. Pap. SO-283. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 5 p.

Haywood, J.D. 1995. Controlling herbaceous competition in pasture 

planted with loblolly pine seedlings. Res. Note SO-381. New Orleans: 

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

Experiment Station. 8 p.

Haywood, J.D. 2000. Mulch and hexazinone herbicide shorten the time 

longleaf pine seedlings are in the grass stage and increase height 

growth. New Forests. 19: 279-290.

Haywood, J.D. 2002. Delayed prescribed burning in a seedling and 

sapling longleaf pine plantation in Louisiana. In: Outcalt, K.W., ed. 

Proceedings of the 11th biennial silvicultural research conference. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-48. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 103-108.

Haywood, J.D. 2005. Effects of herbaceous and woody plant control 

on Pinus palustris growth and foliar nutrients through six growing 

seasons. Forest Ecology and Management. 214: 384-397.

Haywood, J.D. 2007. Influence of herbicides and felling, fertilization, 

and prescribed fire on longleaf pine establishment and growth 

through six growing seasons. New Forests. 33: 257-279.

Haywood, J.D. 2009. Eight years of seasonal burning and herbicidal 

brush control influence sapling longleaf pine growth, understory 

vegetation, and the outcome of an ensuing wildfire. Forest Ecology 

and Management. 258: 296-305.

Haywood, J.D.; Elliott-Smith, m.; Knight, R. [and others]. 1996. 

Harvesting longleaf pine straw on the Kisatchie National Forest. In: 

Kush, J.S., comp. Longleaf pine: a regional perspective of challenges 

and opportunities. Proceeding 1st Longleaf Alliance Conference. 

Mobile, AL: University of Alabama, The Longleaf Alliance: 90-92.

Haywood, J.D.; goelz, J.C.; Sword Sayer, m.A.; Tiarks, A.E. 2003. 

Influence of fertilization, weed control, and pine litter on loblolly pine 

growth and productivity and understory plant development through 

12 growing seasons. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 

33: 1974-1982.

Haywood, J.D.; grelen, H.E. 2000. Twenty years of prescribed burning 

influence the development of direct-seeded longleaf pine on a wet 

pine site in Louisiana. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 

24(2): 86-92.

Haywood, J.D.; Harris, F.L.; grelen, H.E; Pearson, H.A. 2001. 

Vegetative response to 37 years of seasonal burning on a Louisiana 

longleaf pine site. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 25: 122-130.

Haywood, J.D.; Knight, R.A.; Tiarks, A.E.; Pearson, H.A. 1995. 

Effects of pine straw harvesting on longleaf pine productivity, 

nutrition, and forest soil properties. In: Ehrenreich, J.H.; Ehrenreich, 

D.L.; Lee, H.W., eds. Growing a sustainable future. Proceedings 

of the fourth North American agroforestry conference; Boise, ID. 

Moscow, ID: University of Idaho: 51-53.

Haywood, J.D.; melder, T.w. 1991. Effectiveness of glyphosate mixed 

with soil-active herbicides. Res. Note SO-365. New Orleans: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station. 5 p.

Haywood, J.D.; Sword, m.A.; Harris, F.L. 2004. Fire monitoring: 

effects of scorch in Louisiana’s pine forests. In: Connor, K.F., ed. 

Proceedings of the 12th biennial silvicultural research conference. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-71. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 65-67.

Haywood, J.D.; Tiarks, A.E. 1990. Eleventh-year results of 

fertilization, herbaceous, and woody plant control in a loblolly pine 

plantation. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 14: 173-177.
54

Haywood, J.D.; Tiarks, A.E. 1995. Growth reductions in short-rotation

loblolly and slash pines in central Louisiana—10th year results. In: 

Edwards, M.B., comp. Proceedings of the 8th biennial silvicultural 

research conference. Gen. Tech. Report SRS-1. Asheville, NC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station: 268-274.

Haywood, J.D.; Tiarks, A.E.; Snow, g.A. 1994. Combinations of 

fungicide and cultural practices influence the incidence and impact of 

fusiform rust in slash pine plantations. Southern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 18: 53-59.

Hopkins, w.S. 1948. Hogs or logs! Naval Stores Review. 57(3): 12-13.

Johnston, H.R. 1944. Control of the Texas leaf-cutting ant with methyl 

bromide. Journal of Forestry. 42: 130-132.

Jokela, E.J.; martin, T.A.; Vogel, J.g. 2010. Twenty-five years of 

intensive forest management with southern pines: Important lessons 

learned. Journal of Forestry. 108(7): 338-347.

Jones, J.P.; Barnett, J.P.; mcgilvray, J. 1999. Root rot of container 

grown longleaf pine seedlings caused by Fusarium circinatum. 

[Abstract]. Louisiana Plant Protection Association Proceedings. 

Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University, AgCenter Research 

and Development: 4.

Jones, J.P.; Pantone, D.J.; Barnett, J.P.; Brissette, J.C. 1992. The 

relationship between fungal population development and root damage 

of cold-stored longleaf pine seedlings. Louisiana State University 

Agricultural Center Bulletin No. 832. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana 

Agricultural Experiment Station. 23 p.

Jones, J.P.; Sun, x.; Barnett, J.P. 1997. Biological control of 

Pythiaceous fungi causing death to longleaf pine seedlings in cold 

storage. In: Proceedings, 1997 Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions. Washington, DC: Office of Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

Outreach: 26-1–26-4.

Jones, J.P.; Sun, x.; Eckhardt, L. [and others]. 2002. Longleaf 

seedling production: Some problems and their solutions. Louisiana 

Agriculture. 45(3): 4-6.

Kais, A.g. 1989. Brown spot needle blight. In: Cordell, C.E.; Anderson, 

R.L.; Hoffard, W.H.; [and others], tech. coords. Forest nursery pests. 

Agric. Handb. 680. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service: 26-28.

Kuehler, E.A.; Sword Sayer, m.A.; Andries, C.D. 2006. How does 

fire affect longleaf pine root carbohydrates, foliar nutrients, and 

sapling growth? In: Connor, K.F., ed. Proceedings of the 13th biennial 

southern silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-92. 

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

Southern Research Station: 98-101. 

Kuehler, E.A.; Sword-Sayer, m.A.; Haywood, J.D.; Andries, C.D.

2004. Long-term effects of season of prescribed burn on the fine-root 

growth, root carbohydrates, and foliar dynamics of mature longleaf 

pine. In: Connor, K.F., ed. Proceedings of the 12th biennial southern 

silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-71. Asheville, 

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

Research Station: 68-70.

Landis, T.D.; Dreesen, D.R.; Pinto, J.R.; Dumroese, R.K. 2005. 

Propagating native plants for the Hopi Nation. Combined Proceedings 

International Plant Propagators’ Society. 55: 520-623.

Landis, T.D.; Dumroese, R.K.; Haase, D.L. 2009. The container 

tree nursery manual: Volume 7, Seedling processing, storage, and 

outplanting. Agric. Handb. 674. Washington: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service. 199 p.

Leduc, D.J. 2006. PINVOL: A user’s guide to a volume calculator

for southern pines. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-95. Asheville, NC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station. 12 p.

Leduc, D.J.; goelz, J. 2009. A height-diameter curve for longleaf pine 

plantations in the Gulf Coastal Plain. Southern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 33: 164-170. 

Leduc, D.J.; Zeide, B. 1986. The effect of thinning and pruning on 

the growth of planted loblolly pine stands. In: Phillips, D.R., ed. 

Proceedings of the 4th biennial southern silvicultural research 

conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-42. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station: 473-482.

Linnartz, N.D.; Hse, C.Y.; Duvall, V.L. 1966. Grazing impairs 

physical properties of a forest soil in central Louisiana. Journal of 

Forestry. 64: 239-243.

Lohrey, R.E. 1972. Precommerical thinning of direct-seeded 

loblolly pine. Res. Note SO-139. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 4 p.

Lohrey, R.E. 1973. Precommerical thinning increases diameter 

and height growth of slash pine. Res. Note SO-152. New Orleans: 

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

Experiment Station. 4 p.

Lohrey, R.E. 1974. Site preparation improves survival and growth 

of direct-seeded pines. Res. Note SO-185. New Orleans: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Southern Forest Experiment Station. 4 p.

Lohrey, R.E. 1977. Growth responses of loblolly pine to commercial 

thinning. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 1: 19-22.

Lohrey, R.E. 1983. Stem volume prediction and crown characteristics of 

thinned longleaf pine plantations. In: Jones, E.P., Jr., ed. Proceedings 

of the 2nd biennial silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

SE-24. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 338-343.

Lohrey, R.E. 1985. Stem volume, volume ratio, and taper equations for 

slash pine in the West Gulf Region. In: Shoulders, E., ed. Proceedings 

of the 3rd biennial silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

SO-54. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station: 451-459.

Lohrey, R.E. 1987. Site index curves for direct-seeded slash pines in 

Louisiana. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 11: 15-17.

Luna, T.; Landis, T.D.; Pinto, J. 2003. Intertribal nursery council 

tribal needs assessment. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 85 p.

Lundgren, g.K.; Conner, J.R.; Pearson, H.A. 1983. An economic 

analysis of forest grazing on four timber management situations. 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 7(3): 119-124.

Lundgren, g.K.; Conner, J.R.; Pearson, H.A. 1984. Five forestgrazing management systems in the Southeastern United States. 

MP-1551. College Station, TX: Texas Agricultural Experimental 

Station. 8 p.

macCleery, D.w. 2002. American Forests: A history of resiliency and 

recovery. Durham, NC: Forest History Society. 58 p.

mcKee, w.H., Jr. 1973. Slash pine response to nitrogen and phosphorus 

on imperfectly drained soil of the West Gulf Coastal Plain. Soil 

Science Society America Proceedings. 37: 784-788.

mcKee, w.H., Jr.; Shoulders, E. 1970. Depth of water table and redox 

potential of soil affect slash pine growth. Forest Science. 16: 399-401.
55

mcKee, w.H., Jr.; Shoulders, E. 1974. Slash pine biomass response to

site preparation and soil properties. Soil Science Society of America 

Proceedings. 38(1): 144-148.

mcLemore, B.F. 1959. Cone maturity affects germination of longleaf 

pine seed. Journal of Forestry. 57: 648-650.

mcLemore, B.F. 1971. Light requirements for germination of loblolly 

pine seeds. Forest Science. 17(3): 285-286.

mcLemore, B.F.; Barnett, J.P. 1966. Storing repellent-coated southern 

pine seed. Journal of Forestry. 64: 619-621.

mcLemore, B.F.; Czabator, F.J. 1961. Length of stratification and 

germination of loblolly pine. Journal of Forestry. 59: 267-269.

mann, w.F., Jr. 1971. Early yields of slash pine planted on a cutover site 

at various spacings. Res. Pap. SO-69. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 16 p.

mann, w.F., Jr.; Dell, T.R. 1971. Yields of 17-year-old loblolly pine 

planted on a cutover site at various spacings. Res. Pap. SO-70. New 

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

Forest Experiment Station. 10 p. 

mann, w.F., Jr.; Derr, H.J. 1970. Response of planted loblolly and 

slash pine to disking on a poorly drained site. Res. Note SO-110. New 

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

Forest Experiment Station. 3 p.

mann, w.F, Jr.; Derr, H.J.; meanley, B. 1956. A bird repellent for 

direct seeding of longleaf pine. Journal of Forestry. 54: 190-191.

mann, w.F., Jr.; gunter, E.R. 1960. Predicting the fate of firedamaged pines. Forests & People. 10(1): 26-27, 43.

mann, w.F., Jr.; Lohrey, R.E. 1974. Precommerical thinning of 

southern pines. Journal of Forestry. 72: 557-560.

moehring, D.m. 1964. Speeding up growth of the loblolly. Forest 

Farmer. 23(6): 9, 13-14.

moehring, D.m. 1966. Diameter growth and foliar nitrogen in fertilized 

loblolly pine. Res. Note SO-43. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 3 p.

morris, L.A.; Jokela, E.J.; o’Conner, J.B., Jr. 1992. Silvicultural 

guidelines for pinestraw management in the Southeastern United 

States. Georgia Forest Res. Pap. 88. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Forest 

Commission, Research Division. 11 p.

moser, J.C. 1963. Probing the secrets of the town ant. Forests & People. 

12(4): 12-13, 40-41.

Nance, w.L.; Shoulders, E.; Dell, T.R. 1985. Predicting survival 

and yield of unthinned slash and loblolly pine plantations with 

different levels of fusiform rust. In: Branham, S.J.; Thatcher, 

R.C., ed. Proceeding of the Integrated pest management research 

symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-56. New Orleans: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Southern Forest Experiment Station: 62-72.

Nambiar, E.K.S.; Tiarks, A.; Cossalter, C.; Ranger, J. 2000. Site 

management and productivity in tropical plantation forests: A 

progress report. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry 

Research. 112 p.

Newbold, R.A.; Baldwin, C.V., Jr.; Hill, g. 2001. Weight and volume 

determination for planted loblolly pine in North Louisiana. Res. 

Pap. SRS-26. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, Southern Research Station. 19 p.

Nolte, D.L.; Barnett, J.P. 2000. A repellent to reduce mice predation of 

longleaf pine seed. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation. 

45(3/4): 169-174.

owston, P.w.; miller, R.g.; Rietveld, w.J.; mcDonald, S.E. 1990a.

A quality-control system for improving conifer nursery stock. Tree 

Planters’ Notes. 41(1): 3-7.

owston, P.w.; Rietveld, w.J.; Barnett, J.P. [and others]. 1990b. 

A quality control system for improving reforestation success. In: 

Proceedings, Society of American Foresters National Convention. 

Washington: Society of American Foresters: 583-584.

Pawuk, w.H.; Barnett, J.P. 1979. Seed handling practices for southern 

pines grown in containers. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 

3: 19-22.

Pawuk, w.H.; Barnett, J.P. 1981. Benomyl stimulates ectomycorrhizal 

development by Pisolithus tinctorius on shortleaf pine grown in 

containers. Res. Note SO-267. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 3 p.

Pearson, H.A. 1982. Economic analysis of forest grazing. The 

Stockman. 39(10): 26, 28, 30, 32.

Pearson, H.A.; Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Barnett, J.P. 1990a. Cattle 

grazing and pine survival and growth in subterranean clover pasture. 

Agroforestry systems. 10: 161-168.

Pearson, H.A.; grelen, H.E.; Epps, E.A. [and others]. 1982. Botanical 

composition and nutritive value of cattle diets on southern pine range. 

Res. Pap. SO-178. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 24 p.

Pearson, H.A.; Knowles, R.L.; middlemiss, P.g. [and others]. 1995. 

United States agroforestry estate model. Compiler. 13: 27–37.

Pearson, H.A.; Prince, T.E., Jr.; Todd, C.m., Jr. 1990b. Virginia pines 

and cattle grazing—An agroforestry opportunity. Southern Journal of 

Applied Forestry. 14: 55-59.

Pearson, H.A.; Rollins, D.A. 1987. Ryegrass pasture for supplementing 

southern pine native range. Rangelands. 9(1): 19-20.

Pearson, H.A.; Smeins, F.E.; Thill, R.E. 1987. Ecological, physical, 

and socioeconomic relationships within southern National Forests: 

Proceedings of the southern evaluation workshop. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

SO-68. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 293 p.

Pearson, H.A.; Sternitzke, H.S. 1974. Forest-range inventory: A 

multiple-use survey. Journal of Range Management. 27(5): 404-407.

Pearson, H.A.; whitaker. L.B. 1972. Thrice-weekly supplementation 

adequate for cows on pine-bluestem range. Journal of Range 

Management. 25(4): 315-316.

Pearson, H.A.; whitaker, L.B. 1973. Yearlong grazing of slash 

pine ranges: Effects on herbage and browse. Journal of Range 

Management. 27(3): 195-197.

Pearson, H.A.; whitaker, L.B.; Duvall, V.L. 1971. Slash pine 

regeneration under regulated grazing. Journal of Forestry. 

69: 744-746.

Peevy, F.A. 1947. Killing undesirable hardwoods. Southern 

Lumberman. 175(2201): 123-125.

Peevy, F.A. 1960. Controlling southern weed trees with herbicides. 

Journal of Forestry. 58(9): 708-710.

Peevy, F.A. 1961. Control of backjack oak by basal spraying with 2,4,5-

T. Weeds. 9(1): 50-53.

Peevy, F.A.; mann, w.F., Jr. 1952. Slash and loblolly pine plantation 

destroyed by hogs. Forests & People. 2(4): 20, 37.
56

Powers, R.F.; Alban, D.H.; Ruark, g.A.; Tiarks, A.E. 1990. A soils

research approach to evaluating management impacts on long-term 

productivity. In: Dyck, W.J.; Mees, C.A., eds. Impact of intensive 

harvesting on forest site productivity. IEA/BE T6/A6 Report No. 

2. Rotorua, New Zealand: Ministry of Forestry, Forestry Research 

Institute: FRI Bulletin No. 159: 127-145. 

Powers, R.F.; Tiarks, A.E.; Burger, J.A.; Carter, m.C. 1996. 

Sustaining the productivity of planted forests. In: Carter, M.C., ed. 

Growing trees in a greener world: Industrial forestry in the 21st 

century: 35th LSU forestry symposium. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana 

State University, School of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries: 97-134.

Ruehle, J.L.; marx, D.H.; Barnett, J.P.; Pawuk, w.H. 1981. Survival 

and growth of container-grown and bare-root shortleaf pine seedlings 

with Pisolithus and Thelephora ectomycorrhizae. Southern Journal of 

Applied Forestry. 5: 20-24.

Rumsey, R.L. 1968. A pole’s eye view of woodpeckers. Forests & 

People. 18(2): 20-21, 38-40.

Rumsey, R.L. 1970. Woodpecker attack on utility poles—A review. 

Forest Products Journal. 29(12): 54-59.

Scott, D.A.; Novosad, J.; goldsmith, g. 2007. Ten-year results from 

the North American long-term soil productivity study in the Western 

Gulf Coastal Plain. In: Furniss, M.; Clifton, C.; Ronnenberg, K. 

eds., Advancing the fundamental sciences: Proceedings of the Forest 

Service national sciences conference. Gen. Tech. Report PNW-689. 

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

Northwest Research Station: 331-340.

Scott, D.A.; Tiarks, A.E.; Sanchez, F.g. [and others]. 2004. Forest 

soil productivity on the southern long-term soil productivity sites at 

age 5. In: Connor, K.F., ed. Proceedings of the 12th biennial southern 

silvicultural conference. Gen. Tech. Report SRS-71. Asheville, NC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station: 371-377.

Shoulders, E. 1960. Town ants damage slash pine plantations. Southern 

Forestry Notes 123. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station: 2.

Shoulders, E. 1976. Site characteristics influence relative performance 

of loblolly and slash pine. Res. Pap. SO-115. New Orleans: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest 

Experiment Station. 16 p.

Shoulders, E. 1983. Comparison of growth and yield of four southern 

pines on uniform sites in the Gulf Coastal Plain. In: Hotvelt, E.; 

Jackson, B.D., eds. Predicting growth and yield in the Mid-South. 

Proceedings 31st annual forestry symposium. Baton Rouge, LA: 

Louisiana State University: 23-37.

Shoulders, E. 1985. The case for planting longleaf pine. In: Shoulders, 

E., ed. Proceedings of the 3rd biennial southern silviculture 

conference. Gen. Tech. Report SO-54. New Orleans: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station: 

255-260.

Shoulders, E.; mcKee, w.H., Jr. 1973. Pine nutrition in the West Gulf 

Coastal Plain: A status report. Gen. Tech. Report SO-2. New Orleans: 

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

Experiment Station. 26 p.

Shoulders, E.; Nance, w.L. 1987. Effects of fusiform rust on survival 

and structure of Mississippi and Louisiana loblolly pine plantations. 

Res. Pap. SO-232. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 11 p.

Shoulders, E.; Tiarks, A.E. 1980a. Fertilizer fate in a 13-year-old slash 

pine plantation. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 

44(5): 1085-1089.

Shoulders, E.; Tiarks, A.E. 1980b. Predicting height and relative

performance of major southern pines from rainfall, slope, and 

available soil moisture. Forest Science. 26: 437-447.

Shoulders, E.; walker, F.V. 1979. Soil, slope, and rainfall affect height 

and yield in 15-year-old southern pine plantations. Res. Pap. SO153. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 52 p.

Siggers, P.V. 1932. The brown-spot needle blight of longleaf pine 

seedlings. Journal of Forestry. 30(5): 579-593.

Snow, g.A.; Rowan, S.J.; Jones, J.P. [and others]. 1979. Using 

Bayleton® (triadimefon) to control fusiform rust in pine tree 

nurseries. Res. Note SO-253. New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 5 p.

Snyder, E.B.; Derr, H.J. 1972. Breeding longleaf pines for resistance to 

brown-spot needle blight. Phytopathology. 62: 325-329.

Snyder, E.B.; Dinus, R.J.; Derr, H.J. 1977. Genetics of longleaf pine. 

Res. Pap. WO-33. Washington: New Orleans: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service. 24 p.

South, D.B. 2003. “Correct” planting density for loblolly pine depends 

upon your objectives and who you ask. Forest Landowner Manual. 

34: 46-51.

South, D.B.; Barnett, J.P. 1986. Herbicides and planting date affect 

early performance of container-grown and bare-root loblolly pine 

seedlings in Alabama. New Forests. 1: 17-27.

South, D.B.; Harris, S.w.; Barnett, J.P. [and others]. 2005. Effect 

of stock type and stock size on survival and early height growth of 

Pinus palustris seedlings in Alabama, U.S.A. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 204: 385-398.

Sternitzke, H.S.; Pearson, H.A. 1974. Forest-range resource statistics 

for southwest Louisiana Parishes. RB-SO-050. New Orleans: 

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

Experiment Station. 22 p.

Sun, x.; Jones, J.P.; Barnett, J.P. 1993. Trichoderma hamatum and 

T. harzianum vs. Pythium spp. in stored longleaf pine seedling root 

systems. [Abstract]. Phytopathology. 83: 1352.

Sword, m.A.; Chambers, J.L.; gravett, D.A. [and others]. 1998. 

Ecophysiological response of managed loblolly pine to changes in 

stand environment. In: Mickler, R.A.; Fox, S., eds. The productivity 

and sustainability of southern forest ecosystems in a changing 

environment. New York: Springer-Verlag: 185-206.

Sword, m.A.; Tinus, R.w.; Barnett, J.P. 1999. Evaluating the 

cold hardiness of container longleaf pine seedlings. In: Landis, 

T.D.; Barnett, J.P., tech. coords. National Proceedings: Forest and 

Conservation Nursery Association—1998. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-25. 

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

Southern Research Station: 50-52.

Sword Sayer, m.A.; Brissette, J.C.; Barnett, J.P. 2005. New root 

growth and hydraulic conductivity of southern pine seedlings in 

response to soil temperature and water availability after planting. 

New Forests. 30: 253-272.

Sword Sayer, m.A.; goelz, J.C.g.; Chambers, J.L. [and others].

2004. Long-term trends in pine productivity and stand characteristics 

in response to thinning and fertilization in the West Gulf region. 

Forest Ecology and Management. 192: 71-96.

Sword Sayer, m.A.; Haywood, J.D. 2006. Fine root production and 

carbohydrate concentrations of mature longleaf pine (Pinus palustris 

P. Mill.) as affected by season of prescribed fire and drought. Trees. 

20: 165-175.
57

Sword Sayer, m.A.; Haywood, J.D. 2009. Fire and longleaf pine

physiology—does timing affect response? In: Proceedings of the 

2009 Society of American Foresters convention. Bethesda, MD: 

Society of American Foresters. 11 p.

Sword-Sayer, m.A.; Tang, Z. 2004. Long-term root growth response 

to thinning, fertilization, and water deficit in plantation loblolly 

pine. In: Connor, K.F., ed. Proceeding of the 12th biennial southern 

silviculture conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-71. Asheville, NC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station: 458-464.

Tang, Z.; Chambers, J.L.; guddanti, S.; Barnett, J.P. 1999a. 

Thinning, fertilization, and crown position interact to control 

physiological responses of loblolly pine. Tree Physiology. 19: 87-94.

Tang, Z.; Chambers, J.L.; guddanti, S. [and others]. 1999b. Seasonal 

shoot and needle growth of loblolly pine responds to thinning, 

fertilization, and crown position. Forest Ecology and Management. 

120: 117-130.

Tang, Z.; Chambers, J.L.; Shufang, Yu; Barnett, James P. 2003. 

Seasonal photosynthesis and water relations of juvenile loblolly pine 

relative to stand density and canopy position. Trees. 17: 424-430.

Tang, Z.; Chambers, J.L.; Yu, S. [and others]. 2004a. Reapplication 

of silvicultural treatments impacts shoot growth and physiology of 

plantation loblolly pine. In: Connor, K.F., ed. Proceedings of the 

12th biennial southern silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. SRS-71. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, Southern Research Station: 450-457.

Tang, Z.; Sword Sayer, m.A.; Chambers, J.L.; Barnett, J.P. 2004b. 

Interactive effects of fertilization and throughfall exclusion on the 

physiological responses and whole-tree carbon uptake of mature 

loblolly pine. Canadian Journal of Botany. 82: 850-861.

Thill, R.E. 1984. Cattle and deer diets on Louisiana pine-bluestem 

range. Proceedings Southeastern Association Fish and Wildlife 

Agencies. 36: 410-419.

Thill, R.E. 1986. Deer and cattle diet overlap on Louisiana pinebluestem range. Journal of Wildlife Management. 50(4): 707-713.

Thill, R.w. 1989. Deer and cattle diets on heavily grazed pine-bluestem 

range. Journal of Wildlife Management. 53(3): 540-548.

Thill, R.w.; martin, A., Jr.; morris, H.F., Jr.; mcClure, E.D. 1987. 

Grazing and burning impacts on deer diets on Louisiana pinebluestem range. Journal of Wildlife Management. 51(4): 873-880.

Thomas, C.E.; Parresol, B.R.; Kim, H.N. [and others]. 1995. Biomass 

and taper for trees in thinned and unthinned longleaf pine plantations. 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 19: 29-35.

Tiarks, A.E.; Haywood, J.D. 1981. Response of newly established slash 

pine to cultivation and fertilization. Res. Note SO-272. New Orleans: 

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

Experiment Station. 4 p.

Tiarks, A.E.; Kimble, m.S.; Elliott-Smith, m.L. 1990. The first 

location of a national long-term forest soil productivity study: 

methods of compaction and residue removal. In: Coleman, S.S.; 

Neary, D.G., comps. Proceedings of the 6th biennial southern 

silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-70. Asheville, 

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

Forest Experiment Station: 431-441. Vol. 1.

Tiarks, A.E.; Powers, R.F.; Alban, D.H. [and others]. 1992. USFS

long-term soil productivity national research program. In: Kimble, 

J.M., ed. Utilization of soil survey information for sustainable land 

use: Proceedings of the 8th international soil management workshop. 

Lincoln, NE: U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation 

Service, National Soil Survey Center: 236-241.

Tinus, R.w.; Sword, m.A.; Barnett, J.P. 1999. Prevention of cold 

damage to container grown longleaf pine roots. In: Haywood, 

J.D., ed. Proceedings, 10th Biennial Southern Silvicultural 

Research Conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-30. Asheville, NC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station: 331-333.

wahlenberg, w.g. 1946. Longleaf pine: its use, ecology, regeneration, 

protection, growth, and management. Washington: Charles Lathrop 

Pack Forestry Foundation and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service. 429 p.

wahlenberg, w.g. 1960. Loblolly pine. Its use, ecology, regeneration, 

protection, growth and management. Durham, NC: Duke University. 

603 p. 

wakeley, P.C. 1935. Artificial reforestation in the southern pine region. 

Tech. Bull. 492. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service. 115 p.

wakeley, P.C. 1954. Planting the southern pines. Agric. Monograph 18. 

Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 233 p.

wakeley, P.C.; Barnett, J.P. 2011. Early forestry research in the South: 

A personal history. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-137. Asheville, NC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research 

Station. 90 p.

walkinshaw, C.H.; Barnett, J.P. 1995. Tolerance of loblolly pines to 

fusiform rust. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 19: 60-64.

wolters, g.L. 1982. Longleaf and slash pine decreases herbage 

production and alters herbage composition. Journal of Range 

Management. 35(8): 761-763.

wolters, g.L.; martin, A.; Pearson, H.A. 1982. Forage response to 

overstory reduction on loblolly-shortleaf pine-hardwood forest range. 

Journal of Range Management. 35(4): 443-446.

wood, J.C.; Blackburn, w.H.; Pearson, H.A.; Hunter, T.K. 1989. 

Infiltration and runoff water quality responses to silvicultural and 

grazing treatments on a longleaf pine forest. Journal of Range 

Management. 42(5): 378-381.

Yeiser, J.L.; Barnett, J.P. 1991. Growth and physiological response 

of four shortleaf pine families to herbicidal control of herbaceous 

competition. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 15: 199-204.

Yu, S.; Chambers, J.L.; Tang, Z.; Barnett, J.P. 2003. Crown 

characteristics of juvenile loblolly pine 6 years after application of 

thinning and fertilization. Forest Ecology and Management. 

180: 345-352.

Zarnoch, S.J.; Feduccia, D.P.; Baldwin, V.C., Jr.; Dell, T.R. 1991. 

Growth and yield predictions for thinned and unthinned slash pine 

plantations on cutover sites in the West Gulf Region. Res. Pap. SO264. New Orleans: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Southern Forest Experiment Station. 32 p.
58

Acknowledgments

We thank those who provided constructive comments on early drafts: John 

Brissette, Anna Burns, Paul Burns, Mason Carter, Helen Derr, Kas Dumroese, 

Don Feduccia, Bob McLemore, John Moser, and Ron Thill.

We had the privilege of knowing most individuals who worked on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest and made significant contributions to forestry in the South. 

We hold them in high esteem and dedicate this publication to them and those 

technical employees who spent their careers supporting programs conducted on 

the Experimental Forest.


Barnett, James P.; Haywood, James D.; Pearson, Henry A. 2011. Louisiana’s

Palustris Experimental Forest: 75 years of research that transformed the 

South. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-148. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 64 p.

The Palustris Experimental Forest, located on Kisatchie National Forest, 

has been in existence for 75 years. Research at Palustris has focused on 

southern pine reforestation technology, including seed production, bareroot 

nursery production, direct seeding, and planting container seedlings. After 

establishing pine plantations, researchers developed stand management 

guidelines for thinning, fertilizing, use of fire, stocking levels, and modeling 

of growth projections. Researchers elucidated knowledge of soil influences 

and plant competition, factors key to optimizing and maintaining plantation 

stand productivity. Researchers also emphasized range management that 

established guidelines for livestock utilization on forest ranges across the 

South. Today’s forest industry across the South maximizes productivity 

with the management practices developed by researchers on the Palustris 

Experimental Forest. 

Keywords: Agroforestry, history of southern forestry, pine plantation 

management, reforestation of southern pines, seed and seedling physiology
The Forest Service, United States Department 

of Agriculture (USDA), is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of 

wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through 

forestry research, cooperation with the States and 

private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and National Grasslands, it strives—as 

directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater 

service to a growing Nation.

The 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 fi le a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, 

Director, Offi ce of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 

795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 ( TDD). USDA is an 

equal opportunity provider and employer.