DOCSLIB.ORG

A Silvicultural Guide for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Conifer Forest in Ontario

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Silvicultural Guide for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Conifer Forest in Ontario A Silvicultural Guide for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Conifer Forest in Ontario Version 1.1 Cette publication technique nÕest disponible quÕen anglais. 1998, QueenÕs Printer for Ontario Printed in Ontario, Canada Single copies of this publication are available for $27.50 from the address noted below. Natural Resources Information Centre Room M1-73, Macdonald Block 900 Bay Street Toronto ON M7A 2C1 Current publications of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and price lists, are also available from this office. Telephone inquiries about ministry programs and services should be directed to the Natural Resources Information Centre: Toronto General Inquiry (416) 314-2000 Renseignements en fran•ais (416) 314-1665 FAX (416) 314-1593 Other government publications are available from Publications Ontario, Main Floor, 880 Bay St., Toronto. For mail orders write Publications Ontario, 50 Grosvenor St., Toronto, Ontario M7A 1N8. Cheques or money orders should be made payable to the Minister of Finance and payment must accompany order. This publication should be cited as: OMNR. 1998. A silvicultural guide for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence conifer forest in Ontario. Ont. Min. Nat. Resour. QueenÕs Printer for Ontario. Toronto. 424p. This paper contains recycled materials. A Silvicultural Guide for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Conifer Forest in Ontario CONTENTS List of Figures List of Tables Preface and Acknowledgments EBR Statement 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Importance of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Conifer Forest to People 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Ecological Importance 2.3 Aesthetic and Recreational Importance 2.4 Spiritual Importance 2.5 Cultural Importance 2.6 Economic Importance 3.0 Characteristics of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Conifer Forest 3.1 Site 3.2 Climate 3.3 Ecosites 3.3.1 Central Ontario ecosites (ES) 3.3.1.1 White pine and red pine 3.3.1.2 White spruce 3.3.1.3 Eastern hemlock 3.3.1.4 Eastern white cedar 3.3.2 Northwestern Ontario ecosites (ES) 3.3.2.1 White pine and red pine 3.3.2.2 White spruce 3.3.3 Northeastern Ontario site types (ST) 3.3.3.1 White pine and red pine 3.3.3.2 White spruce 3.3.3.3 Eastern white cedar 3.4 Silvics of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Conifers 3.4.1 White Pine 3.4.1.1 Growing conditions for white pine 3.4.1.2 Ecosites 3.4.1.3 White pine seed production 3.4.1.4 White pine seed germination and establishment 3.4.1.5 White pine development from seedling to mature tree iii 3.4.2 Red Pine 3.4.2.1 Growing conditions for red pine 3.4.2.2 Ecosites 3.4.2.3 Red pine seed production 3.4.2.4 Red pine seed germination and establishment 3.4.2.5 Red pine development from seedling to mature tree 3.4.3 White Spruce 3.4.3.1 Growing conditions for white spruce 3.4.3.2 Ecosites 3.4.3.3 White spruce seed production 3.4.3.4 White spruce seed germination and establishment 3.4.3.5 White spruce development from seedling to mature tree 3.4.4 Red Spruce 3.4.4.1 Growing conditions for red spruce 3.4.4.2 Ecosites 3.4.4.3 Red spruce seed production 3.4.4.4 Red spruce seed germination and establishment 3.4.4.5 Red spruce development from seedling to mature tree 3.4.5 Eastern Hemlock 3.4.5.1 Growing conditions for eastern hemlock 3.4.5.2 Ecosites 3.4.5.3 Eastern hemlock seed production 3.4.5.4 Eastern hemlock seed germination and establishment 3.4.5.5 Eastern hemlock development from seedling to mature tree 3.4.6 Eastern White Cedar 3.4.6.1 Growing conditions for white cedar 3.4.6.2 Ecosites 3.4.6.3 Eastern white cedar seed production 3.4.6.4 Eastern white cedar seed germination and establishment 3.4.6.5 Eastern white cedar development from seedling to mature tree 3.4.7 Autecology of Associated Plants 3.4.7.1 Summary 3.4.8 Damaging Agents 3.4.8.1 White pine weevil 3.4.8.2 Red-headed pine sawfly and European pine sawfly 3.4.8.3 Hemlock looper 3.4.8.4 Cedar leaf miner 3.4.8.5 White pine blister rust 3.4.8.6 Scleroderris canker 3.4.8.7 Fomes root rot 3.4.8.8 Red ring rot 3.4.8.9 White-tailed deer 3.4.8.10 Mice and voles 3.4.8.11 Rabbits and hares 3.4.8.12 Porcupines iv 4.0 Quality Development in Trees 4.1 Assessing Individual Tree Vigour Potential 4.2 Assessing Individual Tree Risk Potential 4.3 Assessing Individual Tree Quality Potential 4.4 Growing Stock Classification Systems 5.0 Stand Growth and Yield 5.1 Site Quality Assessment 5.2 Individual Tree Estimation 5.3 Forest Level Estimation and Forecasting 6.0 Genetics 6.1 The Importance of Genetics to Sustainable Forest Management 6.2 How to Maintain and Conserve Genetic Diversity 6.2.1 White Pine 6.2.1.1 Progeny tests and population differences 6.2.1.2 Races, varieties and hybrids 6.2.2 Red Pine 6.2.2.1 Progeny tests and population differences 6.2.2.2 Races, varieties and hybrids 6.2.3 Red Spruce 6.2.3.1 Progeny tests and population differences 6.2.3.2 Races, varieties and hybrids 6.2.4 Eastern White Cedar 6.2.4.1 Progeny tests and population differences 6.2.4.2 Races, varieties and hybrids 6.2.5 White Spruce 6.2.5.1 Progeny tests and population differences 6.2.5.2 Races, varieties and hybrids 7.0 Ecological Foundations for Silviculture 7.1 Prescription Development 7.1.1 Silvicultural Ground Rules 7.1.2 Forest Operations Prescriptions 7.1.2.1 Evaluation of existing data and plans 7.1.2.2 Field inspection 7.1.2.3 Development of site-specific targets 7.1.2.4 Prescription formulation and implementation 7.1.2.5 Monitoring and evaluation 7.2 Silvicultural Systems 7.2.1 Clearcut System 7.2.1.1 Conventional clearcut 7.2.1.2 Clearcut with standards 7.2.1.3 Seed tree (clearcut with seed trees) 7.2.1.4 Patch clearcut 7.2.1.5 Progressive strip clearcut v 7.2.2 Shelterwood System 7.2.2.1 Uniform shelterwood 7.2.2.2 Strip shelterwood 7.2.2.3 Group shelterwood 7.2.3 Selection System 7.2.3.1 Uniform, or single-tree, selection 7.2.3.2 Group selection 7.2.4 Modifications to the Conventional Application of Silvicultural Systems 7.2.4.1 Site and stand protection 7.2.4.2 Maintenance of wildlife habitat 7.2.4.3 Maintenance of structural legacy of the initial forest 7.2.4.4 Maintenance of genetic diversity 7.2.5 Recommendations for the selection and implementation of silvicultural systems based on ecosites and target species 7.2.5.1 Desired tree species - white pine 7.2.5.2 Desired tree species - red pine 7.2.5.3 Desired tree species - hemlock 7.2.5.4 Desired tree species - white spruce 7.2.5.5 Desired tree species - red spruce 7.2.5.6 Desired tree species - white cedar 7.3 Site Preparation 7.3.1 Mechanical Site Preparation 7.3.1.1 Effects of mechanical site preparation on forest productivity... 7.3.1.2 Setting the objectives 7.3.1.3 Selecting the site 7.3.1.4 Selecting the equipment 7.3.1.5 Assessing the effects of treatment 7.3.1.6 Ecosite specific considerations 7.3.2 Chemical Site Preparation 7.3.2.1 Herbicides available for chemical site preparation 7.3.2.2 Methods for herbicide application 7.3.2.3 Effects of herbicides on forest productivity, health and condition 7.3.2.4 Planning a chemical site preparation operation 7.3.2.5 Objectives of chemical site preparation 7.3.2.6 Selecting the site 7.3.2.7 Selecting the herbicide, application method and timing 7.3.2.8 Assessing the effects of treatment 7.3.2.9 Ecosite specific considerations 7.3.3 Prescribed Fire 7.3.3.1 Effects of prescribed burning on forest productivity, health... 7.3.3.2 Objectives of prescribed burning 7.3.3.3 Planning a prescribed burn 7.3.3.4 The Canadian Fire Weather Index System 7.3.3.5 Pre-harvest understorey burning 7.3.3.6 Post-harvest burns 7.3.3.7 Ecosite specific considerations vi 7.4 Renewal 7.4.1 Natural Regeneration 7.4.1.1 Factors to consider for successful natural regeneration 7.4.2 Planting 7.4.2.1 Stock selection and timing of planting operations 7.4.2.2 Stand and site conditions 7.4.2.3 Seedling quality 7.4.3 Determining seeding rates 7.4.3.1 Predicting seed germination 7.4.3.2 Seed germinability and stratification 7.4.3.3 General germination model 7.4.3.4 Effect of shade on seed germination 7.4.3.5 Correction of seeding prescription for shading effect 7.4.3.6 Correction for seeding methods 7.4.3.7 Correction for seedling attrition 7.4.3.8 Correction for size of area to be treated 7.5 Stand Maintenance 7.5.1 Tending 7.5.1.1 Cleaning 7.5.1.2 Pruning 7.5.1.3 Thinning 7.5.1.4 Stand improvement 8.0 Integrating Timber and Wildlife Habitat Management 8.1 The Coarse Filter 8.1.1 Landscape scale 8.1.2 Stand scale 8.1.3 Site scale 8.2 The Fine Filter 8.2.1 White-tailed deer 8.2.2 Moose 8.2.3 Pileated woodpecker 8.2.4 American marten 8.2.5 Eagles, ospreys, herons and forest-nesting raptors 9.0 Harvesting Considerations 9.1 Introduction 9.2 Management Implications 9.2.1 Bole wounds caused by bark scraping or peeling 9.2.2 Root breakage 9.2.3 Crown damage resulting from branch breakage 9.2.4 Stem breakage/bending or tilting of trees 9.2.5 Soil/site damage vii 9.2.5.1 Compaction 9.2.5.2 Rutting 9.2.5.3 Erosion 9.2.5.4 Nutrient loss 9.3 Careful Logging Practices 10.0 Management Standards 10.1 Standards Required for the Application of Silviculture Systems 10.2 Determining Free-to-Grow Standards 10.3 Maintenance of Biodiversity 10.4 Maintenance of Productivity APPENDIX A - FEC Field Guide Listing APPENDIX B - Conifer Growth & Yield Fact Sheets APPENDIX C - Ecosite Local Volume Tables APPENDIX D - Ecosite Yield Tables APPENDIX E - Silvicultural Option Tables APPENDIX F - Sample Pre-harvest Prescription Forms APPENDIX G - How to Use a Density Management Diagram GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS GLOSSARY OF SCIENTIFIC NAMES GLOSSARY OF SPECIES ABBREVIATIONS viii List of Figures Figure Title Section Page 3.0.1 HillÕs Site Regions of Ontario
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Identification and Management of Heart-Rot Fungi
    https://doi.org/10.3126/banko.v30i2.33482 Banko Janakari, Vol 30 No. 2, 2020 Pp 71‒77 Short Note Identification and management of heart-rot fungi S. K. Jha1 eart-rot fungi are key players in trees moist, soft, spongy, or stringy and appear white health, diversity and nutrient dynamic or yellow. Mycelia of fungi colonize much of Hin forest as pathogens and decomposers the woody tissues. White rots usually form in along with a number of invertebrates are flowering trees (angiosperms) and less often in associated with Wood-decay fungi serve as conifers (gymnosperms). Fungi that cause white vectors for fungal pathogens, or are fungivorous rots also cause the production of zone lines in and influence rates of Wood-decay and nutrient wood, sometimes called "spalted wood". This mineralization. partially rotted wood is sometimes desirable for woodworking. The examples of white rot fungi A number of fungi, viz. Polyporus spp., Serpulala are Armillariell amellea, Pleurotus ostreatus, crymans, Fusarium negundi, Coniophora Coriolus versicolor, Cyathus stercoreus, cerebella, Lentinus lapidens and Penicillium Ceriporiopsissu bvermispora, Trametes divaricatum cause destruction of valuable versicolor, Hetero basidionannosum, and so on. timbers by reducing the mechanical strength of wood. Molds cause rotting of the heartwood in Brown rots the middle of tree-branches and trunks. Wood- decay fungi can be classified according to the Brown rots primarily decay the cellulose and type of decay that they cause. The best-known hemicellulose (carbohydrates) in wood, leaving types are brown rot, soft rot, and white rot. Each behind the brownish lignin. Wood affected by type produces different enzymes, can degrade brown rot usually is dry, fragile, and readily different plant materials, and can colonize crumbles into cubes because of longitudinal different environmental niches (Bednarz et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Decay in Balsam Fir in New England and New York12
    ~ 128 ~11I2.5 I:.i 12.8 12.5 1.0 ~ = 1.0 ~ ~ ~ I~ 2.2 wW 2.2 ~ I w L.; I~ &0; W &:.; 1,\,1 L:l ~ ...L:. ...E ~ I ..a .. l.. 1.1 1.1 ~~LL -----,---- - 111111.8 11111 1.25 IIIIU.. 4 11111 1.6 111111.25 111111.4 111111.6 • J MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART NATIONAL BUREAU or STANDARDS-1963-A NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS-1963-A Staob TC!chriicaIBulle.tin No. 872 Ma:r19U Decay in Balsam Fir in New England and New York12 By l'!:m.Irr SPAUlDING, seniorvathologi8t, and J. R. l4.\"i8880UGH, assocWte vath­ ologist, Division of Forest Pathology, Burealt of Pla1~t Industry,Soils, and Agriou.ltural Engineef·ing, Agricultural Research Administration CONTENTS Page page Summary________________________ woo. ________ 1 .Relation of cull to sita quality ________________ 18 Past and present forest practices______________ 3 Relation or cull to soil moisture conditions__ __ 19 Pathology of balsam fir_______________________ 4 Relation Of cull to rate ofgrowth ofindividual trees___ ~ ___________________________________- 20 :Review ofprevious investigations____________ 5· Purpose ofthe study.-----__ o________________ 6 Analyses of correlation of cull with age, Field methods_____________ ~__________________ 6 diameter, height, and volume_____________ _ Oulling practices_ __ __________________________ i 22 Importance of fungi causing decay ___________ _ 23 Methodofcompilation_______________________ 8 Entrance offungi and ants into living trees__ _ 23 Cullin relation to ago________________________ 8 External indications oC decay inliving
    [Show full text]
  • Public Works
    AGENDA ITEM C-2 Public Works STAFF REPORT Environmental Quality Commission Meeting Date: 12/11/2019 Staff Report Number: 19-012-EQC Regular Business: Issue Determination on appeal of staff’s approval of one heritage tree removal permit at 614 Laurel Ave. Recommendation Staff recommends the Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) deny the appeal and uphold staff’s decision to approve the permit application to remove a blue gum eucalyptus at 614 Laurel Ave. Policy Issues Under the heritage tree ordinance in the Menlo Park Municipal Code, any resident or property owner may appeal a heritage tree permit decision to the EQC. In addition, any resident or property owner may appeal the decision of the EQC to the City Council within 15 days after commission’s decision. Tree removal decisions made by staff, the EQC, or City Council must be related to the decision-making criteria in section 13.24.040 of the heritage tree ordinance. Background The City adopted its heritage tree ordinance in 1979 to ensure the large population of healthy trees are protected for a long term. The purpose of the ordinance is to: • Protect numerous oak, bay and other trees in the City • Preserve the trees for the health and welfare of the community • Prevent erosion of topsoil and sedimentation in waterways • Provide shade and wildlife habitat • Reduce air pollutants • Decrease wind velocities and noise The ordinance was created to protect and preserve heritage trees on private property by requiring a permit for removal, and only allowing removals if there is a good cause.
    [Show full text]
  • Heart Rot and Root Rot in Tropical Acacia Plantations
    Heart rot and root rot in tropical Acacia plantations Proceedings of a workshop held in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 7–9 February 2006 Editors: Karina Potter, Anto Rimbawanto and Chris Beadle Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research Canberra 2006 The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) was established in June 1982 by an Act of the Australian Parliament. Its mandate is to help identify agricultural problems in developing countries and to commission collaborative research between Australian and developing country researchers in fields where Australia has a special research competence. Where trade names are used this constitutes neither endorsement of nor discrimination against any product by the Centre. ACIAR PROCEEDINGS SERIES This series of publications includes the full proceedings of research workshops or symposia organised or supported by ACIAR. Numbers in this series are distributed internationally to selected individuals and scientific institutions. © Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, GPO Box 1571, Canberra, ACT 2601 Potter, K., Rimbawanto, A. and Beadle, C., ed., 2006. Heart rot and root rot in tropical Acacia plantations. Proceedings of a workshop held in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 7–9 February 2006. Canberra, ACIAR Proceedings No. 124, 92p. ISBN 1 86320 507 1 print ISBN 1 86320 510 1 online Cover design: Design One Solutions Technical editing and desktop operations: Clarus Design Pty Ltd Printing: Elect Printing From: Potter, K., Rimbawanto, A. and Beadle, C., ed., 2006. Heart rot and root rot in tropical Acacia plantations. Proceedings of a workshop held in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 7–9 February 2006. Canberra, ACIAR Proceedings No. 124. Foreword Fast-growing hardwood plantations are increasingly important to the economies of many countries around the Pacific rim, including Australia, Indonesia and the Philippines.
    [Show full text]
  • Wood Decay Fungi
    Decay Fungi Associated with Oaks and Other Hardwoods in the Western United States. Jessie A. Glaeser, USFS, Northern Research Station, Madison, WI 53726 ([email protected]) and Kevin T. Smith, USFS, Northern Research Station, Durham, NH 03824 ([email protected]) An assessment of the presence and extent of the wood decay process should be part of any hazard tree analysis. Identification of the fungi responsible for decay improves both the prediction of the consequences of wood decay and the prescription of management options including tree pruning or removal. Until the outbreak of Sudden Oak Death (SOD), foresters in the Pacific Northwest emphasized conifer diseases and decay with little attention to hardwood pathology. The SOD outbreak has drawn attention to hardwood tree species, particularly for the urban forest in which native or introduced hardwoods may predominate. Consequently, the hazard tree specialist needs a working knowledge of the fungi associated with hardwood decay. We present here some of the common fungi responsible for decay of hardwoods, particularly of oak, tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus), and chinquapin (Castanopsis spp.) in the West. Identification of wood decay fungi is made a little easier through grouping wood decay fungi by habitat, spatial position, and the appearance of the decayed wood (Tainter and Baker, 1996). Some wood decay fungi are saprotrophic and attack wood in service or felled logs, slash, or snags (Toupin et al., 2008). Pathogenic wood decay fungi are sometimes placed in convenient categories such as heartrot fungi (that can decay heartwood in living trees despite tree-produced protective chemicals and low oxygen conditions (Highley and Kirk, 1979), saprot fungi (that decay sapwood exposed by more-or-less recent mechanical injury), and primary pathogens that directly kill living sapwood cells in advance of infection (canker rot and many root rot fungi) (Shortle et al., 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Silvicultural Guide for Northern White-Cedar (Eastern White Cedar)
    Silvicultural Guide for Northern White-Cedar (Eastern White Cedar) General Technical Report NRS-98 2012 United States Forest Northern Department of Agriculture Service Research Station ABSTRACT Northern white-cedar (eastern white cedar; Thuja occidentalis L.) is an important tree species in the northeastern United States and adjacent Canada, occurring both in pure stands and as a minor species in mixed stands of hardwoods or other softwoods. Yet practitioners have little and often contradictory information about cedar ecology and silviculture. In response to this information need, a group of university and government researchers in the United States and Canada embarked on more than a decade of collaborative research; this guide is a compilation of the knowledge generated by that effort. It includes an overview of the commodity and non-commodity values of cedar, silvics of cedar and companion species, descriptions of the cedar resource in the northeastern United States, Quebec, and Ontario, and silvicultural guidelines based on previously published literature and new studies of cedar regeneration, growth, mortality, site relationships, and responses to treatment. With generally slow growth and little to no ingrowth on most inventory plots in the region, silvicultural prescriptions that explicitly address cedar are warranted. Recommendations include retaining and releasing cedar in managed stands, as well as establishing and protecting advance cedar regeneration and residual trees during harvesting. Partial cutting (e.g., the selection or irregular shelterwood method) is suggested for regenerating stands with a component of cedar, though browsing by white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus Zimmermann) may infl uence treatment outcomes and must be considered. Once established, cedar responds well to release and will benefi t from competition control and thinning.
    [Show full text]
  • Wood Decay Fungi in Landscape Trees
    Wood decay Fungi in Landscape Trees Integrated Pest Management for Home Gardeners and Landscape Professionals Several fungal diseases, sometimes winter. Some fruiting bodies such as called heart or sap rots, cause the wood Armillaria mushrooms are annual (i.e., in the center of trunks and limbs to de- they appear soon after the beginning cay (Fig. 1). Under conditions favoring of seasonal rains), but many are peren- growth of certain rot fungi, extensive nial and grow by adding a new layer portions of the wood of living trees each year. can decay in a relatively short time (i.e., months to years). This significantly Decay fungi often are divided into reduces wood strength and kills sap- white rots, brown rots, and soft rots. wood storage and conductive tissues. White rots break down lignin and cellu- Figure 1. Heart rot in a conifer trunk. Almost all species of woody plants lose and commonly cause rotted wood are subject to trunk and limb decay, to feel moist, soft, spongy, or stringy although older, weaker trees are most and appear white or yellow. susceptible. Table 1, which starts on Page 3, lists several wood decay fungi Brown rots primarily decay the cellu- on California trees and some of their lose and hemicellulose (carbohydrates) common hosts and symptoms. in wood, leaving behind the brownish wood lignin. Wood affected by brown DAMAGE rot usually is dry and fragile, readily Decay fungi destroy the tree’s inter- crumbles into cubes because of lon- nal supportive or structural compo- gitudinal and transverse cracks, and nents—its cellulose and hemicellulose commonly forms a solid column of rot and sometimes its lignin.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Heart Rot in Live Trees for Wildlife Habitat in Young-Growth Forests of Coastal Alaska
    D E E P R A U R T LT MENT OF AGRICU United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Managing Heart Rot in Live General Technical Report PNW-GTR-890 Trees for Wildlife Habitat in February 2014 Young-Growth Forests of Coastal Alaska Paul E. Hennon and Robin L. Mulvey The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.) If you wish to file an employment complaint, you must contact your agency’s EEO Counselor (PDF) within 45 days of the date of the alleged discriminatory act, event, or in the case of a personnel action. Additional information can be found online at http://www. ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_file.html. If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at http://www.ascr.usda. gov/complaint_filing_cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or letter to us by mail at U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • State F O Rester Fo
    STEM DECAYS Introduction Wood decay is caused by fungi that use the woody cell wall material as a food source. These fungi inhabit and break down the heartwood of living trees, and both the heartwood and sapwood of dead trees. With the exception of several root decay and sap rot fungi, decay fungi do not attack living tissue. They break down the wood, producing a decay characteristic of the fungus. All conifers and broad-leaved trees are susceptible to decay organisms. Some decay fungi are restricted to one, or a very few tree species, while others attack a wide range of species. Wood decay organisms are an important factor in forest ecosystems because they: Remove woody debris from the forest thereby reducing the buildup of fuels and the risk of fire. Recycle nutrients that are often in short supply in forest ecosystems. Add beneficial organic matter to the soil. Figure 1. Stem breakage resulting from ad- Provide habitats for small mammals, vanced decay. Photo: U. S. Forest Service. birds, and insects. Cause significant losses of Destroying and degrading valuable merchantable volume in older stands. sawtimber. —Heartrot is most common in older Damage trees where the fungi can cause more loss of sawlog volume than all Wood decay fungi cause damage by: other diseases combined. Decaying roots and butts, causing Degrading sapwood in dead trees and mortality and windthrow. trees attacked by bark beetles and wood-boring insects. State Forester ForumState Forester Weakening tree stems and predisposing them to snow and wind —The loss of sapwood can reduce breakage (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Station Paper No 134 . Northeastern Forest Experiment Station
    STATION PAPER NO 134 . NORTHEASTERN FOREST EXPERIMENT STATION . 1960 FOREST SERVICE . U S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTLIRE . UPPER DARBY. PA RALPH W. MARQUIS. DIRECTOR MUCHof the silvical information on our for- est trees is widely scattered and some- times difficult to find. To make this material more readily available, the Forest Service is assembling information on the silvical charac- teristics of all the important native forest tree species of the United States. It is ex- pected that this information will be published as a comprehensive silvics manual. This report presents the silvical charac- teristics of one species. It contains the essen- tial information that will appear in the general manual but has been written with particular ref- erence to the species in the Northeast. Similar reports on other species are being prepared by this Experiment Station, and by several of the other regional forest experiment stations. ADRIAN M. GILBERT received h~sBachelor's degree in forestry at the Univers~ty of Michigan in 1943. Joining the North- eastern Forest Experiment Station in 1946, he served in the Forest Survey of the Northeast. In 1948 he took a year's advanced study at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technolo~y at Zurich, Switzerland. More recently (1957-58) he has been studying for a doctorate at the State University of New York College of Forestry at Syracuse. Since 1952 he has conducted research in the silviculture and management of northern hard- wood forests. At present he is in charge of the Northeastern Station's research center at Burlington, Vermont. THE BIRCHES in the Northeast, the yellow birch is the elite species, by far the most valuable as a timber tree.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects and Diseases of Alaskan Forests
    Cover photos clockwise from top: Spruce bark beetle damage (inset spruce bark beetle) Chicken of the woods conks Hemlock fluting and wood decay Wood wasp 2 Insects and Diseases of Alaskan Forests Edward Holsten, U.S. Forest Service Entomologist (retired) Paul Hennon, U.S. Forest Service Pathologist Lori Trummer, U.S. Forest Service Pathologist James Kruse, U.S. Forest Service Entomologist Mark Schultz, U.S. Forest Service Entomologist John Lundquist, U.S. Forest Service Entomologist Publication Number R10–TP–140 3 Acknowledgments The authors thank Tom Laurent, Richard Werner, and John Hard, retired U.S. Forest Service Pathologist and Entomologists, respectively, who were instrumental in developing previous editions of this handbook. We thank Courtney Danley, biological technician, U.S. Forest Service Juneau, for her efforts in obtaining new insect photos. We also appreciate the technical assistance of Ken Zogas, biological technician, U.S. Forest Service Anchorage, and Roger Burnside, Entomologist, Division of Forestry, State of Alaska, as well as the enthusiasm and professionalism of the Alaska Cooperative Extension IPM Technicians. This handbook would not have been possible without the hard work and dedication of David Allen, graphic designer, Public Affairs Office, Chugach National Forest, Anchorage, Alaska. Photographs and other illustrations were obtained, as credited in the Appendix, from individuals and from the files of the State of Alaska, Canadian Forestry Service, the U.S. Forest Service, and other sources as cited. Preface The U.S. Forest Service publication, Identification of Destructive Alaska Forest Insects (91), dealt mainly with the damaging forest insects of Southeastern Alaska. Insects and Diseases of Alaskan Forests (137, 138) included disease agents and were a logical statewide expansion of Hard’s (1967) earlier insect work.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Report Number: GLC-X-6
    ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF FOREST FIRES IN THE BOREAL AND GREAT LAKES - ST. LAWRENCE FOREST REGIONS OF ONTARIO: A PARTIALLY ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY T.J. Lynham, M.E. Alexander, D.M. Morris, and J.L. Kantor Information Report Number: GLC-X-6 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF FOREST FIRES IN THE BOREAL AND GREAT LAKES - ST. LAWRENCE FOREST REGIONS OF ONTARIO: A PARTIALLY ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Timothy J. Lynham Natural Resources Canada Canadian Forest Service Great Lakes Forestry Centre 1219 Queen St. East Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario P6A 2E5 Martin E. Alexander Natural Resources Canada Canadian Forest Service Northern Forestry Centre 5320 - 122 Street Edmonton, Alberta T6H 3S5 David M. Morris and Jamie L. Kantor Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem Research c/o Lakehead University 955 Oliver Road Thunder Bay, Ontario P7B 5E1 Published by: Natural Resources Canada Canadian Forest Service Great Lakes Forestry Centre Information Report Number: GLC-X-6 © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2002 Catalogue No. Fo29-51/6-2002E ISBN 0-662-32586-9 ISSN 2562-0738 (online) National Library of Canada cataloguing in publication data Main entry under title : Ecological effects of forest fires in the boreal and Great Lakes – St. Lawrence forest regions of Ontario : a partially annotated bibliography (Information report ; GLC-X-6) Includes preliminary material in French. ISBN 0-662-32586-9 ISSN 2562-0738 (online) Cat. no. Fo29-51/6-2002E 1. Fire ecology – Ontario — Bibliography 2. Forest fires – Environmental aspects – Ontario – Bibliogaphy. 3. Forest fires – Environmental aspects – Great Lakes Region – Bibliography. 4. Forest fires – Environmental aspects – Saint-Lawrence River Region —Bibliography.
    [Show full text]