Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Department of Forest Ecology U SLU Graduate Thesis in Biology 2000 T0 c, C

Secondary Vegetation Succession on Jack Pine (Pinus banksiana) Cutovers in Northeastern Ontario, Canada

Daniel Tiveau

Supervisor: John Jeglum

Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet Stencilserie nr 57

Skogsvetenskapliga fakulteten Institutionen for skogsekologi ISSN 1104-1870 901 83 UMEA ISRN SLU-SEKOL-STL-57-SE DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

Abstract The effects of different harvesting and site preparation methods on competing vegetation were studied in nine jack pine {Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada. Six different treatments plus glyphosate herbiciding and no herbiciding were applied: 1) tree-length harvesting followed by trenching, and full-tree harvesting followed by five site preparations: 2) no site preparation, 3) trenching and 4) blading & compaction as well as blading followed by two planting densities, 5) 1.2m and 6) 2m. Competing vegetation was assessed preharvest and years 1, 2, 3, and 5 postharvest. Data was also available from nine juvenile sites as well as nine semimature sites. Data collection consisted of coverage values of each species as well as structural data for main life forms in height classes. Growth and health data of the planted jack pine seedlings were also available. The data was analyzed using detrended correspondence analysis (DCA), diversity indices and tabular analysis. Three years after the herbicide application there is no difference between the total coverage in the halfplots that have received herbiciding and those that have not, but an alteration of the relative abundances of species groups has developed; glyphosate herbiciding promotes grasses over shrubs. When no site preparation is applied, shrubs increase and compete with the seedlings, whose growth is cut in half compared to the ones that have been site prepared by trenching. Five years after blading, and blading plus compaction, there is still very little vegetation in the research plots, but there is no reduction of the survival rate and growth of the jack pine seedlings. More dense planting after this treatment leads to more competing vegetation, probably due to increased availability of moisture. Grasses do not seem to be affected by compaction and pioneer mosses are promoted by this treatment but compaction leads to a significant reduction of the total coverage of competing vegetation coming in.

Keywords: Secondary vegetation succession, site preparation, blading, compaction, herbiciding, diversity indices.

1 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada. Table of contents

Abstract ...... 1 Preface and acknowledgements ...... 3 1 Introduction ...... 3 2 Study area ...... 4 2.1 Sites ...... 4 2.2 Experimental design ...... 4 3 Methods ...... 6 3.1 Detrended correspondence analysis...... 6 3.2 Diversity indices ...... 6 3.3 Structure ...... 7 3.4 Species ...... 7 4 Results ...... 7 4.1 Controls...... 7 4.1.1 Structure ...... 7 4.1.2 Detrended correspondence analysis...... 8 4.1.3 Diversity indices ...... 9 4.1.4 Species ...... 9 4.2 Effects of herbicide application ...... 10 4.2.1 Structure ...... 10 4.2.2 Species ...... 10 4.2.3 Growth...... 10 4.3 Effects of no site preparation ...... 11 4.3.1 Structure ...... 11 4.3.2 Species ...... 11 4.3.3 Growth ...... 12 4.4 Full-tree blade ...... 12 4.4.1 Structure ...... 12 4.4.2 Species ...... 12 4.4.3 Growth ...... 12 4.5 Effects of 1.2m spacing instead of 2m spacing on bladed plots...... 13 4.5.1 Structure ...... 13 4.5.2 Species ...... 13 4.5.3 Growth...... 14 4.6 Effects of compaction ...... 15 4.6.1 Structure ...... 15 4.6.2 Species ...... 15 4.6.3 Growth...... 15 5 Discussion and conclusions ...... 15 5.1 Use of herbicides ...... 15 5.2 No site preparation...... 16 5.3 Blading...... 16 5.4 Spacing on bladed plots...... 17 5.5 Compaction ...... 17 6 Further research ...... 17 7 Literature cited: ...... 17 Appendices

2 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

Preface and acknowledgements of the province (Howse 1984) and about a third of This paper is the fruit of my graduate work to obtain the total volume of conifers cut annually (OMNR my master's in forestry degree at the Swedish 1990). It has low nutrient requirements and in University of Agricultural Sciences. According to the conjunction with its fast growing character, it could Swedish university system, such a study is to be useful for faelwood production. Jack pine is not roughly equal to 20 weeks of fall-time work including a competitive species and it is thus mostly found fieldwork. on poor sites. Increased public environmental awareness and fear of depletion of nutrients led I would like to thank Natural Resources Canada Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, (NRCan), Canadian Forest Service (CFS) and Great Great Lakes Forestry Centre to develop a study of Lakes Forestry Centre (GLFC) for allowing me to "The effects of a range of biomass removals on join them in their project on the effects of a range long-term productivity of jack pine ecosystems in of harvesting and site preparation methods and for northeastern Ontario" (Tenhagen etal. 1996). supplying the funds for me to do four months of field work in north-eastern Ontario during the Jack pine establishes best after planting in exposed summer of 1999. It was a pleasure and very mineral soil and it is relatively easy to regenerate. educational. The regeneration is normally done by planting after passive or power disc-trenching, Bracke mounding Many people have been involved in establishing the or windrowing. Jack pine is a very shade intolerant research plots and in collecting various data for species and therefore herbicide treatment is the huge jack pine study of which my work is but a normally applied to reduce competition (Tenhagen small part. It is impossible to mention everybody et al. 1996; Wagner et al. 1999; Zoladeski and who has been involved, so I would like to thank Maycock 1990). Bergeron and Dubuc (1989) rank you all collectively. I would however like to mention jack pine as having the shortest expected period in a few people who have greatly contributed to my the canopy of all common boreal tree species. It work, first of all Dr Neil Foster, study co-ordinator has a rather short lifecycle of about 130-150 years of the CFS jack pine study. I would also like to thank after which time it becomes senescent (Desponts Tom Weldon, research technician for the jack pine and Payette 1992; Ferrar 1995). productivity study and Brent Higgins. Tom and Brent have patiently provided all the information I have Jack pine is a fire dependant species (Morris et al. asked for upon my return to Sweden. 1994) and its serotinous cones need heat in order to open and release its seeds. Some authors state Many other people, particularly with the CFS, the the heat needed as high as 65°C, but most agree Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR), the that the ground surface temperature on a hot Ontario Forest Research Institute (OFRI), Ie summer day is adequate. An opportunistic Ministere des Ressources naturelles du Quebec, phenomenon can also in some cases allow jack pine I'universite Laval and the Swedish University of to reproduce from nonserotinous cones (Desponts Agricultural Sciences, have helped me out. Thank and Payette 1992). Ninety-five percent of the you all. I would also like to thank Superior Forest seedlings establish themselves during the first three Management Ltd (Chapleau), Domtar Forest seasons following a fire (St-Pierre and Gagnon Resources (Espanola) and Domtar Wood Products 1992). Ellis and Mattice (1974) found similar results, (Sault Ste Marie Division) who hold the forest namely that most of the recruitment of jack pine management agreements where the sites are was done during the first two years following the located. harvesting.

Last, but not least, I would like to thank my Jack pine on coarse sand deposits is generally supervisor Professor John Jeglum for proposing the considered to be an edaphic-pyric climax (Kenkel topic, for guiding me, and for very many stimulating 1986). In central Quebec, the mean fire rotation discussions. period in jack pine woodlands has been estimated at around 70 years (Desponts and Payette. 1992). 1 Introduction Desponts and Payette also stated that jack pine is more tolerant to hydric stress caused by rapid Jack pine (Pinus banksiana) is an important tree desiccation of sandy soils than black spruce. species to the pulp, paper and lumber industries in northern Ontario, Canada. The species comprises Jack pine forests are known to range from very 15% of the standing volume within the boreal part Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada. open to extremely dense and ground cover plants stocked or overstocked areas, pest and disease free, show similar extremes of density (Brown 1967). with a slope inferior to 10%, and a stand area of a These differences could be due to variation in soil minimum of 10 hectares. These sites were mostly texture, available nutrients, depth to water table, found in glaciofluvial outwash areas with deep sandy waterholding capacity, soil acidity, root competition, or gravelly soils. time and intensity of disturbance, slope exposure, microclimate, seed dispersal, and stochastic events 2.2 Experimental design (Harvey et al. 1995; Brown 1967). For more In 1992,27 sites were selected so that they would information on the autecology of jack pine see include a range of site classes (Plonski site class 1 Appendix 2. to 3). One stand each of juvenile and semimature ages in three climates x three site classes was The aim of this study was to describe the sampled, in other words a total of 18 stands. These development of competing vegetation after a few stands were included for a chronosequence study. selected harvesting techniques, site preparation In 1993 and 1994, an impacts study was established methods, and biomass removal levels. in nine mature stands. Two of them, Wells and Nimitz had been monitored for 20 years and seven 2 Study area more sites were added on land licensed to Superior The study area is located in the Algoma and Sudbury Forest Management Limits or E. B. Eddy Forest districts in northeastern Ontario, from Chapleau in Products Limits. The objective was to include a the northwest to Thessalon, in the southwest, to range of site classes and climatic conditions, but Sudbury in the southeast, and Gogama in the the sites did not uniformly fill the three climates by northeast. West of the study area is Lake Superior three site classes due to difficulties in finding enough and south of it is Lake Huron. The study sites stretch site class 3 stands. north from the Great Lakes Saint Lawrence Forest Region into the Boreal Forest Region. The area is A total of 7 ha were needed to accommodate each situated along a steep thermal gradient. Detailed site, holding at least 15 plots (30-m x 30-m). Out directions on how to find the sites as well as other of these 15, three are unharvested controls left details on the experimental design and on other untouched at the time of the harvest. A buffer of aspects of the CFS jack pine study can be found in 20m was left between plots and a 50-m buffer was Tenhagen et al. (1996). left around the site separating it from adjacent standing forest or road. Four treatments were 2.1 Sites Sites were chosen to include as little variation in topography and other environmental gradients as r ~ ~ possible. Study sites holding a 60% jack pine 50m component or more were selected in normally 50m 30m 20m 30m 1 hi 4 m 20m

3 4 1 2 Ontario 3 1 2 4

1 50m '

Harvested 50m

Border of cut area

Not harvested (control) 50m

5 5 5 figure 1: Map of the study area.

figure 2: General design of experimental sites.

4 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada. replicated three times at each site. used. The blading was done using a D7 or D8 To study the main impacts encountered in jack pine caterpillar bulldozer, exposing the top of the Ae or forestry in Ontario, the following levels of biomass B1 layers. removal were applied: 1) tree-length logging, followed by power-disc Compaction was first achieved by repeatedly trenching passing over the plot with the bulldozers, however 2) full-tree logging, followed by power-disc analysis of the bulk density at Wells revealed a non­ trenching significant difference in the levels of compaction 3) full-tree logging, followed by blading off all between the bladed and the bladed & compacted organic material down to the mineral soil plots. Therefore an industrial tractor (a CFS John 4) same as 3), but followed by compaction Deere Model 401D narrow-tired front-end loader) 5) full-tree logging, without site preparation fully loaded in the front bucket and backhoe was 6) controls of standing timber (unharvested used to systematically pass over the plots, two plots) passes over all areas, followed by another two passes at right angles. New bulk density analysis Tree-length logging involves removal of the revealed a significant compaction effect. Mechanical branches and tops at the site and the bole being site preparation on six of the nine experimental removed to the roadside. In the full-tree logging, sites was completed during 1993. Site preparation the entire tree is hauled to the roadside, delimbed in the remaining three sites (Eddy 2, Superior 3 and the slash left at the side of the road. and Nimitz) and additional compaction (Superior 1,2,3, Nimitz and Wells) were completed early in Operational power trenching (TTS) was performed 1994. at all sites but Wells, where a passive trencher was

North Central Ontario Hwy. 17 -JrChapieau ama

Hwy. 129 Hwy. 144 Lake J&.9 Juvenile sites Superior ■ 9 Semimature sites EDDY1 # 9 Mature sites

lit Ste Marie

IWELLS Hwy. 17 'Sudbury

lessalon Webbwoodi

Figure 3: Location of experimental sites.

5 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

In five sites (Superior 1, 2, 3, Eddy 3 and 4) an All species of vascular plants, mosses and lichen additional treatment, full-tree harvesting not were given cover estimates in the pre- and followed by any site preparation was added in three postharvest conditions in four 2m by 2m quadrats extra plots. This was to apply the least amount of within each plot. Cover was estimated to the closest disturbance as the other extreme end of the blading 1 percent, with the lowest value being 1 percent. treatment. All vascular plants were assessed and those not known to the assessor were collected for later Since only bulldozer compaction that later had identification. All plants were named according to proved not to result in any significant compaction the Ontario Plant List (Newmaster et al. 1998) and had been applied in the Eddy 1, 2, 3 and 4 sites, identified down to the species level. A few species planting with 1.2-m spacing was substituted for the have been lumped together for concordance blading plus compaction. All other plots were between the mature sites and the juvenile/ planted at a spacing of 2 m (operational spacing in semimature ones. Community vegetation structure Ontario). The total number of 30-m x 30-m plots was recorded by cover value for the individual numbered 124. stratum by life form within the quadrat. The matrix of vegetation structure is included in Appendix 10. The null hypothesis was that: 1) Biomass removal has no significant influence The basal diameter, total height, increment per year on seedling establishment and growth. and health of the jack pine seedlings were assessed. 2) Compaction has no influence on seedling establishment and growth. 3 Methods 3) Spacing of seedlings does not influence tree form and stand development. 3.1 Detrended correspondence analysis Detrended correspondence analysis (DCA) has been To provide information on the effect of herbicide used to examine the species composition in nine application, the plots were divided into halfplots at juvenile, nine semimature and nine mature stands. Superior 3, Eddy 3 and Wells and glyphosate This analysis was performed using Canoco v4.02 (Vision®) was applied manually using backpack software package by Cajo J.F. ter Braak and Petr sprayers. The other sites except Eddy 4 have been Smilauer of the Centre for Biometry, Wageningen, operationally sprayed by helicopter. Eddy 4 will be the Netherlands. operationally sprayed in the fall of 2000. For more details of when each site was sprayed, refer to Detrended correspondance analysis is an improved Appendix 9. version of correspondance analysis (CA) that better handles the two major problems with the latter i.e. The data collection included tree biomass, that the ends of the axes are often compressed understory biomass, soils, woody debris, forest floor relative to the axes middle and that the second etc (see Tenhagen et al. 1996) but this study only axis often shows a systematic, often quadratic deals with the competing vegetation aspect of the relation with the first axis. The major result is the trial. This study focuses on the secondary vegetation arch effect which is eliminated by detrending that succession aspect of the CFS jack pine sustainability handles the problem with zero-values (Jongman et project, both from a structural and from an al. 1995; ter Braak CJ.F. 1985). individual species point of view. The aim was to describe how competing vegetation develops depending on what harvesting and site preparation 3.2 Diversity indices method has been applied. To allow a comparison between the survival rate and growth of the planted Diversity indices are often used to describe what jack pine, some analyses of planted seedlings were happens to the so called biodiversity after a done to complement the vegetational work. This particular disturbance. This use is a controvertial paper studies the abundance or presence of one and there are numerous indices available. In understory plants and the changes that occur to this study the Shannon index (sometimes called each stratum after harvesting and site preparation. the Shannon-Weaver index), the Simpson index This may provide important indicators of (sometimes called the Yule index) and species productivity and explain succession and stand richness have been calculated. They have not been development after harvesting. chosen because they are necessarily the best ones but because they have been frequently used.

6 Tlveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

3.4 Species Diversity indices increase for increased number of The coverage of individual species has been quadrats assessed up to a threshold which varies evaluated in order to examine what species are for the different indices. The Shannon and Simpson promoted by the different treatments and what' indices level out at about 20 quadrats. The treatments are effective in limiting the amount of calculations in this study are based on 12 quadrats competing vegetation. The nomenclature follows and it can thus be assumed that the true diversity the Ontario Plant List (OMNR1998). is somewhat higher than the diversity estimated here. A complete list of all 174 species and groups of species that have been encountered in the plots The Shannon index assumes that individuals are can be found in Appendices 11-16. These randomly sampled from an infinitely large appendices also include common names in English population and that all species are represented in and French for most species. The coverage values the sample (Magurran 1996). Since this cannot be have been rounded off to the nearest percent. assumed after a severe disturbance such as blading followed by compaction and herbicide spray, the 3.5 Growth indices in this paper are only presented for the This paper concentrates on the development of juvenile, semimature and mature unharvested competing vegetation after different kinds of controls. The Shannon index is weighted towards .disturbance, but for comparison purposes, a small more rare species and it is calculated using the study of the growth of the jack pine seedlings has following formula: been added. Originally each seedling was classified into one of six health classes: vigorous, healthy, H'= -Sum(p*lnp,) mediocre, moribund, dead, and missing. In this (where p, is the proportion of individuals found in the study, the first three have been lumped together zth species (Magurran 1996)) as living and the last three as dead.

The Simpson index is a dominance measure and it Vitality has been compared for each treatment and is weighted towards the abundance of the more the growth of the seedlings has been examined by common species. It is calculated using the following comparing the average volume per living seedling, formula: using the cone formula, i.e(basal area x height)/3.

D= Sum(p,2) 4 Results The simplest of measures is species richness, i.e. the number of species encountered, and it is here 4.1 Controls presented as the average number of species encountered in the 2x2m quadrats. The expected 4.1.1 Structure number of species, calculated using the rarefaction The juvenile and semimature sites have very low method, has been added for comparison. It is a coverage of broadleaf trees (see Appendix 17), technique which compensates for unequal sample while the mature sites possess more of this category size (Magurran 1996). of species. This coverage is mainly made up of • Betula papyrifera. There are hardly any conifers under 1.5m in the juvenile and semimature sites. 3.3 Structure Most of the conifers on the juvenile sites are in the The structure of the treated plots is presented in a tallest structure category, i.e. taller than 10 m.This tabular format with the average coverage per is also true for the semimature sites, but they have structure category. Some of the height classes have a more significant component of conifers in the 1.5 been lumped together to simplify the tables and to 10m category. The largest coverage of conifers more easily get an impression of what the plots on the mature sites is found in the <1.5m category. look like after the different treatments. Due to the Some of this coverage is due to a small component overlapping of different strata, it is possible to obtain of Picea mariana, but interestingly enough most of sums over 100%. it is made up of jack pine. In other words, despite the fact that jack pine is a very intolerant pioneer species, there is a significant amount of

7 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

Table 1: Ten most abundant shurb and herb species for each stand age. (Juvenile sites Semi-mature sites Mature sites Shrubs Vaccinium angustifolium Diervilla lonicera Vaccinium angustifolium Salix spp Vaccinium angustifolium Ledum groenlandicum Linnaea borealis Vaccinium myrtilloides Diervilla lonicera Vaccinium myrtilloides Linnaea borealis Vaccinium myrtilloides Diervilla lonicera Amelanchier bartramiana Epigaea repens Herbs Corn us canadensis Corn us canadensis Corn us canadensis Hieracium spp Maianthemum canadense Maianthemum canadense Maianthemum canadense Aster macrophyllus Aster macrophyllus Fragaria spp Coptis trifolia Clintonia borealis Trientalis borealis Trientalis borealis Coptis trifolia

regeneration of this species under the canopy. As successional stage (J3A, M2A and Eddy 3). This for shrubs, there is a large coverages in the juvenile, coverage is made up solely of Oryzopsis asperifolia semimature, and in the mature sites. See Table 1 at the juvenile and semimature sites and two-thirds for a list of the most abundant shrubs. of Oryzopsis asperifolia and one third of Calamagrostis canadensis at the mature site. There can be high coverage of herbs in all three successional stages. There are major differences Similar to herb coverage, the coverage of between the juvenile/semimature sites and the feathermosses is more evenly distributed in the mature ones; the herb coverage varies significantly semi-mature sites than in the other two successional from one site to another for the first two, whereas stages. Sphagnum and pioneer mosses occurred all nine mature sites possess moderate to high with presence in only one or two of these well- coverage of herbs. See Table 1 for a list of the drained sites. On the juvenile sites, some Dicranum most abundant herbs. spp can be found.

Graminoids are present at all 27 sites, but the coverage only exceeds 10% at one site of each 4.1.2 Detrended correspondence analysis A detrended correspondence analysis (DCA) scatter plot (Fig 4) based upon average coverage of each individual species at each of the nine juvenile, nine semimature and nine mature Ordination of all 9 juvenile, 9 midrotation and 9 mature sites. sites shows that geographic location in the study area is more important in 2- determining the species M2A composition than site class M1Q2B or age of the stand. Three juvenile sites, two J16CB Sup3 J3C semimature sites and one tofy2£ddy3 J1BM18 mature site (site classes J3B

M3A ranging from 1 to 3) that are

M3C Eddy4 all located in the southwestern part of the study area, near the town of 0 - Eddyl Thessalon, have high DCA rankings putting them to the far right in the DCA scatter

1 Axis 1. eigenvalue; 0.52 plot. Near the town of figure 4: DCA scatter plot of all 27 experimental sites. Chapleau in the

8 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

Juvenile Semimature Mature 1 Pleurozium schreberi Pleurozium schreberi Vaccinium angustifolium 2 Pinus banksiana Maianthemum canadense Maianthemum canadense 3 Oryzopsis asperifolia Pinus banksiana Pinus banksiana 4 Vaccinium angustifolium Vaccinium angustifolium Cornus canadensis 5 Maianthemum canadense Cornus canadensis Pleurozium schreberi 6 Linnea borealis Unnea borealis Vaccinium myrtilloides 7 Cladina rangiferina Oryzopsis asperifolia Diervilla lonicera 8 Cornus canadensis Diervilla lonicera Linnea borealis 9 Dicranum polyseum Vaccinium myrtilloides Dicranum polyseum 10 Comptonia peregrine Cladina rangiferina Oryzopsis asperifolia Table 2: Ten most frequent spedes in each stand age. northwestern corner of the study area, are ten sites, most abundant species (Magurran 1996). The four juvenile, two semimature and four mature sites highest Simpson index is found for MIC, a of all three site classes. These sites are clustered semimature site with site class 1 on medium coarse in the centre left of the DCA scatter plot. The same sand, moderately dry moisture regime and rapid is true for the other sites, i.e. that adjacent sites drainage. The second highest Simpson index is end up near one another in the DCA. Sites that are found for J3B, presented above as having the lowest located close to each other in the DCA do not closely Shannon index. The lowest Simpson index is found resemble one another in terms of the Shannon or for Eddy 1, also presented above and having the Simpson indices nor the expected number of species highest Shannon index. calculated using the rarefaction method. There is a higher average number of species for A separate DCA run (Appendix 18) was done for the mature sites and there is less of a range the six sites in the southwestern comer of the study between the maximum and minimum number of area, that ended up in the left part of the first DCA species for these sites than for the juvenile and scatter plot in order to further explain the variation semimature sites. The range between the maximum in the species composition on these sites. There is and minimum number of species is particularly great a clear resemblance between the scatter plot and for the juvenile sites. the location of the sites on the map. This further emphasizes that geographic location is more 4.1.4 Species important in determining the species composition A top ten list of the species that are most frequently than are stand age or site class. found in each successional stage reveals that the juvenile, semimature and mature sites are 4.1.3 Diversity indices remarkably uniform (Table 2). Seven species out The Shannon index (H') increases with increasing of the top ten are found in all three site types, the stand age (Appendix 19), which is natural since most common being Pleurozium schreberi, Pinus this index is weighted towards species richness banksiana and Maianthemum canadense. (Magurran 1996). The highest Shannon index is found for Eddy 1, a mature site with site class 1 on By calculating the ratio of how many occurences very fine sand, moist moisture regime and imperfect out of the total number of occurences of each drainage. This site also has the highest species species have been found in the unharvested richness. The lowest Shannon index occurs for J3B, controls, the following list, in decreasing magnitude a juvenile site with site class 3 on medium coarse of ratio, was obtained: sand, very fresh moisture regime and moderately 1) Coratiorhiza bifida well-drained. J3B has the second lowest species 2) Cyperipedium acaule richness. 3) Pinus resinosa 4) Athyrium filix-femina On the other hand, the Simpson index (C) is lower 5) Picea glauca on the mature sites than on the other ones due to 6) Lonicera canadensis the (act that this index is weighted towards the 7) Trifolium spp

9 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation successionon jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

8) Acerspicatum 9) Moneses uniflora 4.2 Effects of herbicide application 10) Pyrola spp 4.2.1 Structure The first two species are two out of the three orchids At the Wells site there is a significant difference in that have been assessed in the study, the third one the amount of shrubs in the unsprayed halfplots being Goodyera pubescens. Cyperipedium acaule compared to the ones that have received herbicide is an indicator species of nutrient poor, dry to fresh, treatment. However, there is no major difference sandy and coarse loamy soils in dry woods and on in the amounts of herbs and grasses between the sand dunes (Ringius and Sims 1997). More than two treatments. A simple paired t-test does not half of the listings of this species have been show any significant difference (p=0.921) in the assessed at Eddy3, the poorest site of the study total amount of coverage of vascular plants, (site index 12.3) which is a dry site with medium to excluding jack pine, between the plots that have medium coarse sand. All other listings are at the been full-tree harvested compared to those that Superiors and Eddy4 sites, which are richer, site have been tree-length harvested. indices 16.5 and 15.2 respectively, but of the same texture and moisture regime. These two orchid 4.2.2 Species species contribute to species richness in otherwise species-poor forests. There is a significant difference (p=0.004) in the total coverage .of vascular plants (excluding planted Eighty-five percent of the listings of Pinus resinosa Pinus banksiana) at the Wells site one year after are found at the Wells site which is the only site the herbicide treatment on halfplots that have with 10% or more of this species in its initial tree received the spray compared to those that have composition. Athyrium filix-femina is an indicator not. The third year after the application, there is species of rich, wet to fresh sites (Ringius and Sims. no longer a significant difference between the two 1997) and often associated with well-decomposed treatments (p=0.256). The plots at the Wells site organic soils. In this study the species has 90% of were not assessed in 1997 and it is therefore not its occurrences at Eddyl. Eddyl has been classified possible to judge whether the total coverage had as very moist and with the deepest LFH-layer of all recovered by year 2. The same pattern, i.e. rapid sites in the study (11 cm). recovery (Appendices 20 & 21) of the total coverage of vascular plants a few years after herbicide Table 3: Effect of herbicide spray after full-tree and tree- treatment can be found at the Superiorl site, but length harvesing at the Wells site. since it was operationally sprayed there are Site: Wells :is.3) consequently no unsprayed halfplots to compare to the sprayed ones. Full-1tree Tree- ength Treatment: trei ich tre nch The recolonization after spraying is, however, not No No Spray: Spray Spray by shrubs or herbs but by grasses, mostly Oryzopsis spray spray asperifolia. Grasses in general are listed as being Broadleaves <1.5m 2 0 O 0 sensitive to intermediate sensitive to Vision® spray Broadleaves 1.5-10m 2 0 0 0 both according to OMNR (1997) and to Buse and Broadleaves >10m 0 0 0 0 Bell (1992). No details are provided for Oryzopsis Conifers <1.5m 12 13 13 32 aspenfolia in either of these two publications, but Conifers 1.5-10m 0 0 1 0 Buse and Bell (1992) list Calamagrosb's canadensis Conifers >10m 0 0 0 0 (the only graminoid in the publication) as recovering Shrubs <1.5m 36 24 56 18 quickly after the herbicide application, most of the Shrubsl.5-10m 0 0 3 0 effect being gone two years after spraying. Herbs 42 66 40 31 Grasses 33 38 46 40 4.2.3 Growth Feather mosses 0 0 0 1 There is a tendency towards decreasing survival Sphagnum 0 0 0 0 rate of seedlings with increasing site index (Fig. 5) Pioneer mosses 9 9 8 5 and this pattern does not seem to be effected by Dicranum 0 1 0 0 the use of herbicides. The seedlings in Wells on Bare mineral soil 8 2 2 2 Woody material 19 14 17 30 10 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada. halfplots that were sprayed seemed to grow better 4.3 Effects of no site preparation than those that did not receive this treatment and this trend seemed to be more noticeable with 4.3.1 Structure increasing site index (Fig. 6). A comparison has been made as to what happens to the establishment of competing vegetation If

Survival rate (5yrs) no site preparation is applied after conventional full-tree harvesting (Table 4). There is a remarkable amount of broadleaves under 1.5m in the plots that have not received any site preparation at the □ 6idy3(12.3) Eddy4 site. On the other two sites that have not HSup3(15.9) been operationally sprayed and that hence have H Wells (18.3) unherbicided halfplots, Superiors and EddyS, there are much more low shrubs in the no site preparation plots, but this is not the case at Eddy4. The herb coverage is much more extensive in the Figure 5: Survival rate (5yrs): Full-tree harvesting and tree- no site preparation plots. Grasses seem to prefer length harvesting followed by trenching. the trenched plots in EddyS and Superiors.

4.3.2 Species A few species benefit greatly from the no site preparation treatment, especially Vaccinium angustifolium, Ledum groenlandicum, Cornus canadensis, Oryzopsis asperifolia and Prunus pensylvanica. Five years after the harvesting there is three times the amount of Vaccinium angusdfolium for the plots that have not been site prepared. According to Buse and Bell (1992), the Figure 6: Growth (5yrs): Full-tree harvesting and removal of the overstory greatly stimulates the root tree-length harvesting followed by trenching. system and increases vigour Table 4: Structure of competing vegetation in no site prep plots compared to and abundance of this trenched plots. No herbicide spray. •______species. The same results Site: Bddv3 (12.3) 6ddy4 (15.2) Superiors (15.9) have been found in this 1998 1998 1998 1998 1998 1998 study. The same reference Year: (yrs) (yr 5) (yr 5) (yr5) (yr 5) (yr5) lists Vaccinium angustifolium as an Full tree/ run- Rill tree/ run- tun tree/ run- important.competitor for no site tree/ no site tree/ no site tree/ Treatment: prep trenched prep trenched prep trenched moisture early in the stand Broadleaves <1.5m 2 1 23 4 0 0 development. Ledum Broadleaves 1.5-10m 0 0 12 0 0 0 groenlandicum might be Broadleaves >10m 0 0 0 0 0 0 allelopathic (Buse and Bell. Conifers <1.5m 6 3 7 9 3 7 1992) and it is a serious 0 5 0 0 0 0 Conifers 1.5-10m competitor for nutrient Conifers >10m 0 0 0 0 0 0 Shrubs <1.5m 71 18 61 83 70 38 resources, as is Prunus Shrubsl.5-10m 0 0 2 1 0 0 pensylvanica. Cornus Herbs 23 17 58 20 13 6 canadensis and Prunus Grasses 22 38 0 1 10 17 pensylvanica are likely to Feather mosses 1 0 2 1 9 1 continue to increase in Sphagnum 0 ■ 0 0 0 0 3 abundance for at least Pioneer mosses 0 3 1 5 0 16 another five years (Ellis and Dicranum 2 3 6 3 5 0 Bare mineral soil 1 5 8 8 9 15 Mattice 1974). Woody material 28 10 9 16 13 11

11 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

example, at the Wells site there is 80% bare mineral soil and the remaining 20% is made up of 19% 4.3.3 Growth planted jack pine and 1% other species. By blading The failure to site prepare before outplanting of off all organic matter one would expect the jack pine seedlings does not effect the survival recolonization by species capable of using windborn rate of the new generation (Figure 7). There is a reproduction strategies and capable of germinating trend towards increasing survival rate with on bare mineral soil. This theory is supported by decreasing site index and the same can be said for the fact that the following species are most the average volume of the seedlings (Figure 8). frequently found after this treatment: 1) Vacciniumangustifolium 2) Polytrichum juniperinum Survival rate (Syrs): 3) Polytrichum commune 4) Cornus canadensis 5) Viola spp 6) Oryzopsis pungens □ Eddy3(12.3) 7) Maianthemum canadense BEddy4(15.2) BSup3(15.9) 8) Salixspp 9) Diervilla lonicera 10) Betula papyrifera FT/nosip FT/tr figure 7: Survival rate of the jack pine seedlings after See Appendix 22 for a complete list of the species no site prep and trenching. No herbicide spray. found on the bladed plots.

Growth (Syrs): 4.4.3 Growth 300 There is a weak tendency towards increasing 250 survival rate in full-tree trench among the planted

m 200 OEddy3(123) jack pine with increasing site index (Figure 9), but 1150 BEddy4(15-2) as shown before, the Superiors site has the lowest 2 100 BSup3 (15.9) survival rate. It also has the lowest production 50 and only produces about a third of the production 0 at the Eddy4 site, which has a similar site index Full-tree no sp Full-tree trench (Figure 10). The operational treatment of full-tree TigDre'Srseedimggrowth comparison between ------no site prep and trenching. No herbicide spray. Table 5: Structure of competing vegetation after blading. Sup3 Eddy3 Eddy4 Wells When not applying any site preparation, the (15.9) (12.3) (15.2) (18.3) average seedling volume decreases by more than 1998 1998 1998 1998 Year: (yr 5) (yr 5) (yr 5) (yr 5) 50%. ' Full-tree Full-tree Fir 11-tree Rill-tree Treatment: blade blade blade blade 4.4 Full-tree blade Spray: No spray No spray No spray No spray Broadleaves <1.5m 0 0 3 0 4.4.1 Structure Broadleaves 1.5-10m 0 0 0 0 Broadleaves >10m 0 0 0 0 Five years after the planting in the bladed plots, Conifers <1.5m 9 29 19 28 75% of the ground is still bare mineral soil (Table Conifers 1.5-10m 0 1 0 1 5). Some pioneer mosses have come in as have Conifers >10m o' 0 0 0 some grasses, but apart from that the only Shrubs <1.5m 10 8 14 22 competing vegetation is some coverage of low Shrubsl.5-10m 0 0 0 0 Herbs 1 6 1 11 shrubs. ■ Grasses 4 17 4 30 Feather mosses 0 0 0 0 4.4.2 Species Sphagnum 0 0 0 0 Five years after site preparation, there is still Pioneer mosses 14 5 7 21 hardly any ground vegetation on the plots that Dicranum 0 0 0 0 Bare mineral soil 77 77 80 57 have received the full-tree blade treatment. For Woody material 1 3 3 2 12 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontano, Canada.

harvesting followed by trenching has been added Survival rate (5yrs): to the graphs for comparison.

4.5 Effects of 1.2m spacing instead DEddy3(123) HEddy4(15.2) of 2m spacing on biaded plots ■Sup3 (15.9) swells (18.3) 4.5.1 Structure At the Eddy sites, two planting densities were Full-tree blade FuHree trench applied on the full-tree harvested plots that were biaded. The jack pine seedlings have been planted Figure 9: Survival rate after blading compared to trenching. at operational spacing of 2m and 1.2m. The Eddy3 No herbicide spray. site is the only one of the Eddy sites that received manual herbicide spray and it is hence the only Growth (Syrs): site that has both sprayed and unsprayed halfplots. As one would expect there's a significant (p=0.020) difference in the total coverage of competing vascular vegetation, disregarding jack pine between □ Eddy3 (12.3) 8Eddy4(15.2) the two planting densities. However, it is in the HSup3(15.9) more dense plantations that more coverage of swells (18.3) competing vegetation is to be found. More shrubs are coming in on the more productive site, whereas

Full-tree blade Full-tree trench the opposite is the case for grass coverage. The amount of bare mineral soil is about the same after Figure 10: Growth of the jack pine seedlings after the two treatments (Table 6). blading compared to trenching. No herbicide spray.

4.5.2 Species Table 6: Structure of competing vegetation on biaded plots, plating , densities 2m and i.2m. The following species prefer the more dense planting of the jack pine seedlings: Aster Site: Eddy3 (12.3) 6ddy4 (15.2) 1998 1998 1998 1998 macrophyllus, Anaphalis margaritacaea and Year: (yrs) (yrs) (yrs) (yrs) Calamagrostis canadensis. Biaded, Biaded, Biaded, Biaded, planted planted planted planted Eddy4 is the only other site except for Eddy3 Treatment: at 2m at 1.2m at 2m at 1.2m that has received the alternative spacing as well Broadleaves <1.5m 0 0 3 4 Broadleaves 1.5-10m 0 0 0 0 as the no spray treatment (it is to be operationally Broadleaves >10m 0 0 0 0 sprayed at the end of the growing season 2000). Conifers <1.5m 29 42 19 41 At this site there is higher abundance of the Conifers 1.5-10m 1 0 0 1 following species on the densely planted plots Conifers >10m 0 . 0 0 0 (largest difference first): Comptonia peregrina, Shrubs <1.5m 8 3 • 14 23 Shrubsl.5-10m 0 0 0 0 Cornus canadensis, Prunus pensyivanica, Herbs 6 2 1 3 Vaccinium angustifolium and Diervilla lonicera. Grasses 17 16 4 3 In other words, the more dense spacing results Feather mosses 0 0 0 0 in more shurbs coming in compared to the Sphagnum 0 0 0 0 operational spacing. Ellis and Mattice (1974) Pioneer mosses 5 1 7 8 Dicranum 0 0 0 0 found that Cornus canadensis, Diervilla lonicera Bare mineral soil 77 78 80 66 and Prunus pensyivanica continuously increase Woody material 3 5 3 2 during the first 10 years after harvesting. It can therefore be concluded that these species are likely to become even more abundant during the coming few years.

At the Eddyl site which has the highest site index of all the mature sites, Aster macrophyllus and Rubus idaeus are also more abundant in the plots that have been planted at 1.2m spacing. Eddy 3 13 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Plnus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

has the lowest site index of all sites and there the Comptonia peregrina is an indicator species of dry, higher coverage in the denser plots is made up of sandy and nutrient poor sites (Ringius and Sims. Comptonia peregrina and Epigaea repens and 1997). It is also generally known as a shade especially by Pteridium aquilinum which is much intolerant species, which is contradicted by the more abundant in the denser plots. Pteridium results in this study where it is more abundant in aquilinum is usually more abundant on richer sites the denser and hence more shaded plantations. (Buse and Bell. 1992) but the higher abundance of From a silvicultural point of view it is not desirable this species in this study could be explained by the to have abundant coverage of this species since it fact that Eddy3 has rapid drainage (Tenhagen et is an alternate host to sweet fern blister rust al. 1996). The drainage at the other Eddy sites {Cronartium comptoniae) that infects jack pine range from very poor to imperfect. (Ringius and Sims. 1997).

Epigaea repens is an indicator species of poor sites with low levels of available nitrogen (Ringius and Sims. 1997) and its relative abundance at the poor Survival rate (5yrs): Blading followed by Eddy3 site confirms this fact. However, this species planting at 2m & at 1.2m spacing. like Comptonia peregrina is also generally known to be a shade intolerant species, but in this study, it is more abundant in the plots that have been planted with the 1.2m spacing compared to those that have been planted at operational spacing 2m.

4.5.3 Growth FT/bl 2m FT/bl 1.2m Contradictory to what one might expect, there is Figure 11: Survival rate of jack pine seedlings planted no difference in the resulting survival rate 5 years at 2m and 1.2m spacing on bladed plots. after planting with the operational spacing of 2m and that of 1.2m (Fig. 11). The survival rate is Growth (5yrs): Blading followed by similar on the higher site index site, but the volume planting at 2m & at 1.2m spacing. growth is lower (Fig. 12). For the Eddy3 site, the average seedling volume is 23% greater at the 350 sites where operational spacing has been used 300 to 250

§ 200 m □ Eddy3 (12.3) ~ 150 im HEddy4(15.2) § 100 Table 7: Structure of competing vegetation on bladed & 50 compacted plots. No herbicide spray. . 0 Site: Superiors (15.9) Wells f 18.31 FT/bl 2m FT/bl 1.2m 1998 1998 1998 1998 (Yr5) Figure 12: Average volume of jack pine seedlings Year: (yr 5) (yr 5) (yr 5) planted at 2m and 1.2m on bladed plots. Bladed & Bladed & Treatment: comp. Bladed comp. Bladed Broadleaves <1.5m 1 6 0 0 Broadleaves 1.5-10m 0 o 0 0 Broadleaves >10m 0 0 0 0 Conifers <1.5m 7 9 32 28 Conifers 1.5-10m 0 0 0 1 Conifers >10m 0 0 0 0 Shrubs <1.5m 4 10 5 22 Shrubsl.5-10m 0 0 0 0 Herbs 3 1 2 11 Grasses 12 4 13 30 Feather mosses 0 0 0 0 Sphagnum 0 0 0 0 Pioneer mosses 27 14 8 21 Dicranum 0 0 0 0 Bare mineral soil 61 77 73 57 Woody material 1 1 3 2

14 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada. compared to the denser plots. The data also 4.6.2 Species suggests that there is a larger difference in the A paired t-test shows a significant difference average seedling volume for the operational spacing (p=0.021) of the total coverage of vascular plants in the higher site index site Eddy4. (excluding planted Pinus banksiana) between the plots that have received the blading treatment and 4.6 Effects of compaction those that have received blading followed by compaction. 4.6.1 Structure Less shrubs are coming in on the compacted plots Only two sites, Superiors and Wells, have both (Table 7). Some grass and some pioneer mosses received the blading and the blading followed by are coming in regardless if the plots have been compaction treatment as well as no herbiciding of compacted or not Five years after the planting, some halfplots. Both of these sites (site indices 15.9 the ground is still made up almost entirely of bare and 18.3 respectively)showmore Viola spp without mineral soil and the remainder is chiefly made up than with compaction. At the Superiors site there of pioneer mosses. There is no difference between are much more Polytrichum commune, Polytrichum the plots that have been compacted and those that juniperinum and Danthonia spicata in the have not. compacted plots, whereas the opposite is the case for the Wells site. At Superiors there is much less Comptonia peregrina in the compacted plots and at Wells there is not any Comptonia peregn'na at all. For Diervilla lonicera, the species has not been found at Superiors, but at Wells it is found both in the compacted and in the uncompacted plots, more Survival rate (5yrs): abundant in the uncompacted plots.

□ Sup3(15.9) 4.6.3 Growth . mm BWefc (18.3) Compaction does not seem to effect the survival rate of the jack pine seedlings and neither does the combination of compaction and spray (Fig. 13). Cdnp.no No conp. Conp. No carp, spray no spray spray spray There is a higher survival rate at the more productive site. Compaction does not seem to have figure 13: Survival rate of jack pine seedlings on bladed plots a clear impact on the average volume of the that have received blading and herbidde spray. planted jack pine and neither does the combination of compaction and spray (Fig. 14). The results Growth (5yrs): • suggest that the less productive Superiors site produces less than a third of what the productive Wells site does. The Superiors site has the lowest average volume of all nine sites.

□Sup3 (15.9) H Wells (18.3) 5 Discussion and conclusions The fact that no two sites have received exactly the same treatments makes it difficult to draw Conp.no No conp. Conp. No conp. spray no spray spray spray any definite conclusions as to what happens to the groundcover after a particular harvesting and figure 14: Average volume of jack pine seedlings on bladed plots site preparation combination. This is due to that have received blading and herbidde spray. different times of the herbicide application for each site.

5.1 Use of herbicides There is no significant difference in the total amount of competing vegetation in the plots that have been harvested by tree-length harvesting followed by 15 Ttveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

trenching compared to those that have been full- detrimental effect on biodiversity. tree harvested followed by trenching. The difference between the halfplots that have received the The results of Vision® spray are different from the herbicide treatment to those that have not in terms results of other herbicides on the market that attack of total coverage of competing vegetation or promote other species. It is therefore important diminishes after a few years, but at least for a few for the forester to choose an herbicide and a time years longer it alters the relative species of application by taking the situation in each abundances of species groups. Three years after plantation into account. The situation in each the time of the herbicide spray application there is plantation differs due to variation in soil texture, no longer any significant difference in the total nutrient availability, depth of water table, coverage of vascular plants excluding planted jack waterholding capacity, soil acidity, root competition, pine. This study has shown that grasses are time and intensity of disturbance, slope exposure, promoted over shrubs, but the study only deals microclimate, stochastic events, etc (Harvey et al. with one type of herbicide, Vision® (glyphosate). 1995; Brown 1967). The recovery could have happened as early as in year 2, but there was no assessment in that year. 5.2 No site preparation Wagner et al (1999) used critical period analysis to The no site preparation treatment has led to an examine the effects of competition from herbaceous important coverage of shrubs. A few species greatly vegetation on four conifer species, including jack benefit from this treatment, especially Ledum pine, five years after planting. They found that the groenlandicum, Cornus canadensis, Oryzopsis critical period, i.e. the time period during stand asperifolia and Prunus pensylvanica and five years development when interspecific competition after the planting, there are three times the amount reduces tree growth, is shorter for shade intolerant of Vaccinium angustifolium on the no site jack pine than for the more shade tolerant species. preparation plots compared to those that have been They found the critical period to be one to two trenched. The study does not show any significant years after planting, which would suggest that impact on the survival rate of the planted jack pine, herbicide application should be applied very soon but the failure to site prepare has cut the volume after the planting. growth by more than 50%. This suggests that size preparation is a valuable treatment to be Glyphosate is not soil active which allows vegetation maintained. to recover in the year following each herbicide application. Wagner et al (1999) also found that herbaceous competing vegetation achieved a 5.3 Blading maximum of 70% coverage without chemical The other extreme end of biomass removal of no vegetation control and 5% with repeated site preparation at all is the blading off of all organic application. They found height growth to be less material. Five years after the site preparation, 75% sensitive than stem diameter growth. According to of the ground is covered by bare mineral soil and their study, tolerant conifers are better able to take most of the rest of the total coverage is made up advantage of the increased environmental "resources of the planted jack pine. There are, however, some made available from the continuous removal of species that colonize these plots, mostly Vaccinium herbaceous vegetation than are intolerant ones like angustifolium, pioneer mosses and a few herbs such jack pine. The authors in the above study conclude as Cornus canadensis and Viola spp. It will take that herbaceous vegetation did not affect survival years before the plots are totally covered by and had a variable influence on height growth of vegetation. The survival rate of the planted jack all conifer species. pine is equal to that after full-tree harvesting followed by trenching. Oddly, there is not any Conifer release treatments change the relative difference between the two treatments in terms of abundance of plant species, but individual species average volume growth of the seedlings. This is are seldom eliminated. Sullivan etal. (1998) argues supported by a study by Bulmer et al (1998) who that herbicide induced disturbance provides an found that the nutrient losses on bladed plots were opportunity for enhanced species richness, not sufficient to decrease productivity during the particularly in the herbaceous community. They also first 15 years. claim that there should not be any long-term

16 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

On poor sites of glaciofluvial origin, blading off the the survival rate of the planted seedlings and there humus layer and upper mineral horizons, in addition is a small decrease in the average volume growth to forest removal may increase heat stress and of the seedlings, however only on the poorer sites. water and nutrient deficiencies and thus slow down Corns (1988) in greenhouse studies found that secondary succession (Harvey etal. 1995). Slower increased bulk density resulted in decreased growing, stress-tolerant species may occupy and seedling growth. dominate these sites (Chapin 1980). 6 Further research In a study comparing the effects of blading to those The aim of this study was to describe the of burning as site preparation in the sub-boreal development of competing vegetation after a few spruce zone in British Columbia, Bulmeretal (1998) selected harvesting techniques and site preparation found the mean intemode length above breast methods. It would be interesting to go deeper into height to be 21% greater on the bladed plots. They the subject by using multivariate analysis techniques also calculated an expected site index for the two and to use the many other variables that have been treatments; 22m for the bladed plots and 19.5m collected that have not been used in this study as for the burned plots. In addition, the authors found explanatory variables. It would also be useful to that soil temperature, moisture status and the look into the nutrient uptake by the early developing amount of competing vegetation probably had vegetation and to compare the nutrient content greater influence on soil nutrient availability, tree with site and soil factors. Hopefully NRCan, CFS, nutrient uptake and productivity than did the total GLFC will find funding to do a full vegetation carbon and nutrient contents. In removing the forest assessment at year ten which would provide useful floor, blading allows soils to warm faster in the information on succession, especially on the bladed spring and this might have positive effects on plots. seedling growth! To further study community structure in the 5.4 Spacing on bladed plots cutovers, it would be interesting to calculate More competing competition is coming on the competition indices in order to more dosely examine bladed plots that have been planted with 1.2m the effect of competing vegetation on the growth spacing compared to those that have been planted of the planted seedlings. It would also be very at operational spacing 2m. This difference is interesting to study what year after the planting significant and it is mostly due to Aster that the seedlings suffer the most from the macrophyllus, Anaphalis margaritacaea and competing vegetation and to look into other causes Calamagrostis canadensis, as well as some shrubs of mortality. What is the most important factor on the denser plots. It can be assumed that this is limiting growth? due to a difference in the availability of moisture. Denser planting results in slower desication after a 7 Literature cited: rain and competing vegetation gets some shelter Bergeron, Y. and Dubuc, M. 1989. Succession in from the elements in this harsh environment. the Southern Part of the Canadian Boreal Forest. Spacing does not affect the survival rate of the jack Vegetatio 79: 51-63. ' pine seedlings, but the denser spacing does result ter Break, CJ.F. 1985. Correspondence Analysis of in lower average seedling volume. Incidence and Abundance Data: Properties in Terms of a Unimodal Response Model. Biometrics 41,859-873. 5.5 Compaction Brown, Robert Thorson. 1967. Influence of Naturally Less shrubs are coming in on the plots that have Occurring Compounds on Germination and received the compaction treatment, but grasses do Growth of Jack Pine. Ecology, Vol. 48, No.4. not seem to be affected and pioneer mosses seem Bulmer, C., Schmidt, M.G., Kishchuk, B. and Preston, to be promoted by this treatment. There is a C. 1998. Impacts of blading and buring site significant difference in the total coverage of preparation on soil properties and site vascular plants excluding planted jack pine between productivity in the sub-boreal spruce zone of the bladed plots that have received the compaction central British Columbia. Natural Resources treatment to the bladed plots that have not. Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Compaction does not seem to have any effect on Forestry Centre, Victoria, British Columbia.

17 Tiveau, D.: Secondary vegetation succession on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) cutovers in northeastern Ontario, Canada.

Information Report BC-X-377. Ontario Forest Research Institute, Sault Ste. Buse, LJ. and Bell, F.W. 1992. Critical Silvics of Marie, Ontario, Forest Research Information Selected Crop and Competitor Species In Paper No. 123,550 pp. + appendices. Northwestern Ontario. Northwestern Ontario OMNR. 1990. Statistics 1988-1989. Queen's printer Forest Technology Development Unit, Thunder for Ontario, Toronto, Canada. Bay, Ontario, 138p. OMNR. 1997. Silvicultural guide to managing for Chapin, F.S. 1980. The Mineral Nutrition of Wild black spruce, jack pine and aspen on boreal Plants. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. Ill: 1119-1144. forest ecosites in Ontario. Version 1.1. Ont Min. Corns, I.G.W. 1988. Compaction by forestry Nat. Resour., Queen's Printer for Ontario, equipment and effects on coniferous seedling Toronto, Canada. 3 books. 822p. growth on four soils in the Alberta foothills. Can. Zoladeski, C.A. and Maycock, P.F. 1990. Dynamics J. For. Res. 18: 75-84. of the boreal forest in northwestern Ontario. Desponts, M. and Payette, S. Recent dynamics of The American Midland Naturalist. 124:289-300. jack pine at its northern distribution limit in Ringius, G. S. and Sims, R. A. 1997. Indicator plant northern Quebec. Can. J. Bot. 70:1157-1167. species in Canadian forests. Natural Resources Ellis, R.C. and Mattice C.R. 1974. Stand Canada, Canadian Forest Service. Ottawa, development following pulpwood harvesting at Ontario, Canada. 218p. the experimental lakes area in northwestern St-Pierre, H. and Gagnon, R. 1992. Regeneration Ontario. Department of the Environment, apres feu de I'epinette noire (Picea mariana) et Canadian Forestry Service, Great Lakes Forest du pin gris (Pinus banksiana) dans la foret Research Centre, Sault Ste Marie, Ontario. Inf. boreale, Quebec. Can. J. For. Res. Vol. 22. Rep. 0-X-207.43p.+appendices. Sullivan, T.P., Wagner, R.G., Pitt, D.G., Ferrar, J.L. 1995. Trees in Canada. Fitzhenry & Lautenschlager, R.A. and Chen D.G. 1998. Whiteside Ltd and the Canadian Forest Service, Changes in diversity of plant and small mammal Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, communities after herbicide application in sub- Canada. 502p. boreal spruce forest. Can. J. For. Res. 28: 168 ­ Harvey, B.D., Leduc, A. and Bergeron, Y. 1995. Early 177. postharvest succession in relation to site type Tenhagen, M.D., Jeglum, J.K., Ran, S. and Foster, in the southern boreal forest of Quebec. Can. J. N.W. 1996. Effects of a range of biomass For. Res. 25:1658-1672. removals on long-term productivity of jack pine Howse, G.M. 1984. Insects of jack pine: biology, ecosystems: establishment report. Natural damage, and control. Pp. 131-138. In: Smith, Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service. C.R. and Brown, G. (eds.) Jack pine symposium. Sault Sainte Marie, Ontario, Canada. Information Canadian Forestry Service, Great Lakes Forest Report O-X-454. Research Centre, Sault Ste Marie, Ont. COJFRC Towill, W.D. and Archibald, D.A. 1991. A competition Symposium Proceedings O-P-12. Index Methodology for Northwestern Ontario. Jongman, R.H.G., ter Braak, C.J.F and van Technical notes, Northwestern Ontario Forest Tongeren, O.F.R. 1995. Data analysis in Technology Development Unit, Ontario Ministry community and landscape ecology. Cambridge of Natural Resources. University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Wagner, R.G., Mohammed, G.H. and Noland, T.L. 299p. 1999. Critical period of interspecific competition Kenkel, N. C. 1986 Structure and Dynamics of Jack for northern conifers associated with herbaceous Pine Stands Near Elk Lake, Ontario: a vegetation. Can. J. For. Res. 29: 890-897. Multivariate Approach. Can. J. Bot Vol. 64,1986. Magurran, Anne E. 1996. Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement. 2nd ed. Chapman & Hall, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 179p. Morris, D,M., Bowling, C. and Hills, S.C. 1994. Growth and form responses to pre-commercial thinning regimes in aerially seeded jack pine stands: 5th year results. The Forestry Chronicle, Vol. 70, No. 6. Newmaster, S.G., Lehela, A., Uhlig, P.W.C., McMurray, S. and Oldham, M.J. 1998. Ontario Plant List. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 18 Appendices

Exact location of each of the 27 experimental sites...... 2 Autecology of jack pine ...... 3 General site characteristics of the juvenile and midrotation stands ...... 4 General stand characteristics of the juvenile and midrotation stands...... 5 General site characteristics in the mature stands...... 6 General stand characteristics of the mature stands...... 7 Climatic data for all 27 experimental sites ...... 8 Details on treatments ...... 9 Vegetation structure matrix ...... 10 Species list: Abies to Betula ...... 11 Species list: Carexto Dryopteris ...... 12 Species list: Dryopteris to Kalmia...... 13 Species list: Kalmia to Phegopteris ...... 14 Species list: Picea to Rosa...... 15 Species list: Rubus to Viola...... 16 Average structural value for all 27 sites ...... 17 DCA scatter plot of six sites in the south-west corner of the study area ...... 18 Diversity indices for each of the 27 sites...... 19 Total coverage of vascular plants excluding conifers over time, full-tree harvesting followed by trenching, herbicide sprayed and unsprayed...... 20 Selected competing species that are sensitive to glyphosate spray...... 21 Species that have been encountered in the bladed plots...... 22 Percentage of each life form before and year 5 after harvesting...... 23 The ten most frequent species at each of the nine mature sites (ctrls) before harvesting.24 Development of total plant coverage over time and volume growth of the planted jack pine seedlings ...... 25 Appendix 2 Exact location of each of the 27 experimental sites. Succession Site Name Longitude Latitude Elevation (m) Juvenile J1A -83.51556 46.47194 256.96 JIB -83.11667 47.13250 425.14 J1C -83.13750 47.59306 457.89 J2A -83.61056 46.20583 259.00 J2B -83.13917 47.12806 423.58 J2C -83.09111 47.58694 457.49 J3A -83.53917 46.46000 300.11 J3B -82.99722 47.57361 457.33 J3C -83.11750 47.59306 458.82 Midrotation MIA -83.54139 46.47194 299.18 M1B -83.13917 47.11278 423.39 MIC -83.26306 47.63250 458.25 M2A -83.54944 46.46000 298.80 M2B -83.13528 47.12278 424.83 M2C -83.27222 47.64056 458.95 M3A -83.22222 46.82889 454.18 M3B -83.20222 47.27694 454.07 M3C -83.19972 47.26972 453.64 Mature Eddyl -81.77583 47.25972 456.87 Eddy2 -81.71250 47.26056 426.06 Eddy3 -82.24444 46.74639 487.89 Eddy4 -82.24861 46.75861 489.97 Nimitz -83.23806 47.63472 457.56 Superiorl -82.79028 47.58389 458.48 Superior2 -82.80667 47.58194 460.94 Superiors -83.83528 47.56944 425.94 Wells -83.36250 46.40917 223.36 Appendix 3 Autecology of jack pine (summary of tables 1 to 10 in OMNR. 1997)

Form, longevity and growth habit Scientific name: Pinus banksiana Common English name: jack pine Common French name: pin gris Longevity (yrs): 200+ Maximum stem height (m): 30 Zone of rooting: Mineral Preferred NWO FEC vegetation type Conifer mixedwoods 17 & 18 Conifer 28 to 32

Preferred NE-FEC site type Coarse soils 2a & 2b Asexual reproduction methods nil Sexual reproduction methods: Reproduction class: Monoecious Propagule fruit type: Cone Minimum seed bearing age (yrs): 3-15 Periodicity of large seed crops (yr): 3-4 Seeding regeneration strategy: Current seed crop Seed dispersal characteristics: Seed type: Winged seed Average cleaned seeds/kg: 288,200 Time of seed ripening: September Dispersed Distance (max.): 40-60m Primary mode of dispersal: Wind & mammals Time of seed dispersal: All year Seed germination characteristics: Viable seeds per kg:. 273,000 Dormancy: None due to chemical inhibition Cold stratification period (days): 14 Percent germination: 70-85 Optimal germination temperature (°C): 16-27 Preferred seedbed: Mineral soil & burned duff Environmental requirements and Water: adaptation to environmental stress: Low Nutrients: Low Shade: Very intolerant Soil pH: 4.5-7.0 Drought: High Waterlogging: Low Frost: Moderate Wind: Moderate to high Susceptability to herbicides: 2,4-D Resistant Velpar® -L Susceptible Vision® Intermediate to resistant Release® Intermediate to resistant Appendix 4 General site characteristics of the juvenile and semi-mature stands (Tenhagen et al. 1996)

Site Operational Veg. Soil Forest Depth Texture2 Moisture Drainage group type type humus of LFH Regime forml (cm)

J1A 5 V7 Sandy HF 8 mS Mod. Fresh Mod. Well S2/S3 (1) (4)

JIB 2 V2 Sandy HF 7 mS Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

J1C 5 V6 Sandy HF 9 mS Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

J2A 3 V4 Sandy F 4 mf5 Fresh Mod. Well S2/S3 (2) (4)

J2B . 2 V2 Sandy HF 8 cS Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

J2C 2 V2 Sandy HF 8 mS Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

J3A 2 V2 Fine F 2 mfS Moist Imperfect Loamy-dayey (5) (5) Sll

J3B 3 V4 Sandy F 5 mcS Very Fresh Mod. Well S4 (3) (4)

J3C 3 V2 Sandy HF 9 mS Mod. Dy Rap'd S2/S3 (0) (2)

MIA 3 V3 Sandy HF 14 mS Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

M1B 3 V4 Sandy HF 12 cS tovcS Mod.Oy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

MIC 3 V3 Sandy HF 7 mc5 Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

M2A 2 V2 Sandy HF 6 cS Very Fresh Mod. Well S4 (3) (3) M2B 3 V3 Sandy HF 9 cS to mS Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

M2C 3 V3 Sandy HF 9 mS Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

MSA 2 V2 Sandy H 11 vfS tovcS Mod. Dy Very Rap'd S2 (0) (1)

MSB 2 V2 Sandy HF 8 mS Mod. Dy Rapid S2/S3 (0) (2)

M3C 5 V7 Fine HF 6 fs Mod. Moist Imperfect Loamy-dayey (4) (5) Appendix 5 General stand characteristics of the juvenile and semi-mature stands (revised fr. Tenhagen etal. 1996). Site Spedes comp. 3,4 Age DBH Height Stems Basal Vo!.5 Stocking 6 Stocking 6 designation 1,2 (number (yrs) (cm) (m) /ha area (m3/ha) (a) (b) of stems) (mfVha) J1A-F4 Pjio 50 19.9 16.7 1000 31.1 236 1.1 0.5 J1A - UF4 PjsSbz 50 22.4 18.0 1000 39.4 320 1.3 0.5 JIB - F PjgOther (Ot)i 43 14.9 14.3 1900 33.1 219 1.3 0.9 JIB - UF PjgOti 43 15.4 15.3 1900 34.9 249 1.4 0.9 J1C-F Pjio . 34 12.5 12.8 1800 22.1 133 0.9 0.9 J1C - UF Pjio 34 14.0 12.5 1800 27.7 162 1.1 0.9 J2A-F PjsPwaSbi 55 20.1 16.1 1100 34.9 257 1.3 0.4 J2A-UF PjsSbgSWsPWi 55 28.3 20.1 800 50.3 449 2.2 0.3 J2B-F Riio 45 12.5 14.0 2800 34.4 223 1.5 1.0 J2B-UF Pjio 45 12.9 13.6 2 700 35.3 224 1.5 1.0 J2C-F Pjio 37 13.3 13.3 2100 29.2 181 1.3 0.7 J2C - UF Pjio 37 15.0 13.9 1300 23.0 148 1.0 0.5 J3A-F PjgOti 27 11.8 9.8 2100 23.0 108 1.4 0.4 J3A - UF PjsSbz 27 14.6 10.2 1600 26.8 131 1.2 0.3 J3B-F Pjio 40 12.7 10.0 1200 15.4 74 1.3 0.3 J3B-UF Pj6Sb4 40 17.6 13.5 1300 31.6 199 1.0 0.3 J3C-F Pjio 36 14.2 11.8 1400 22.2 124 1.2 0.3 J3C-UF Pjio 36 14.2 12.2 2200 34.8 200 1.9 0.6 MIA - F PjySWzOLi 52 28.8 17.2 600 39.0 305 1.4 0.5 M1A-UF PjgSbgSWz 52 22.8 16.1 1100 45.1 330 1.7 0.9 M1B-F PjgSbiSWi 47 13.1 14.2 2100 28.3 186 1.1 1.5 M1B-UF PjgSbi 47 14.7 15.1 2 900 49.2 342 1.8 2.0 MIC - F Pjio 70 14.6 16.6 1900 31.8 266 1.1 1.9 MIC - UF Pjio 70 15.8 16.5 2 500 49.0 368 1.8 0.6 M2A-F FJsShiSWi 54 17.8 16.2 1000 24.8 184 0.9 0.7 M2A-UF PjgSwaOLi 54 20.7 14.9 900 30.3 208 1.2 0.6 M2B-F PjgSbi • 45 14.4 14.4 1800 29.3 195 1.1 1.1 M2B-UF Pjio 45 11.3 13.4 2300 23.1 144 0.9 1.4 M2C-F PjgSbi 71 18.0 17.6 1300 33.1 263 1.3 1.1 M2C-UF Pjio 71 16.0 16.9 1900 38.2 293 1.0 1.6 M3A-F PjsSb4 43 11.5 10.4 2600 27.0 134 1.3 1.2 M3A-UF PjsSbz 43 12.9 13.6 2400 31.4 199 1.5 1.1 M3B-F PjgSbiSWi 44 16.7 16.5 1500 32.9 247 1.5 0.6 M3B-UF PjySbs 44 16,2 16.2 1400 28.9 216 1.5 0.6 M3C-F PjsSbz 44 15.6 15.8 1500 28.7 207 1.4 0.6 M3C-UF PjySba 44 13.9 16.2 2300 34.9 258 1.7 0.9 Notes: 1. J = juvenile, M =semrrature; nurrber denotes site dass; A,B,C denotes replication. 2. F = fertilized treatment, UF = unfertilized treatment 3. Spedes composition is based upon number of stems, not canopy cover 4. Pj = jack pine, Sb = black spruce, Bw = white birch/ Pr = red pine, and Fb = balsam fir. 5. Volume calculations were performed using Honer et al.'s (1983) volume equations for jack pine. 6. Stocking (a) is based upon basal area and Stocking (b) Is based upon number of stems. Appendix 6 General site characteristics in the mature stands (Tenhagen et al. 1996).

Site Operational Veg. Soil Forest Depth Texture 3 Moisture Drainage group type type humus of LFH2 Regime form1 (cm) Superiorl 3 V4 Sandy HF 4.0 fStocS Mod. By (0) to Rapid pit 1 S2 (90% to 5% Mod. Fresh (1) (2) Superiorl 3 V4 Sandy HF 7.0 vcS Very Fresh (3) Very rapid pit 2 S4

Superior 3 V4 Sandy HF 5.0 mS tovcS Mod. Dry Rapid pit 1 S2 (0) (2) Superior 3 V4 Sandy HF 4.0 vcStomcS Mod. Dry Rapid pit 2 S2 (0) (2)

Superior] 3 VS Sandy FI 3.0 fS tovcS Mod. Dry Very rapid S2

Eddy 1 3 V5 Fine F 6.2 vfS Moist Imperfect pitl Loamy-dayey (5) (5) Sll Eddyl 3 V5 Fine HF 11.0 vfS Very Moist Very poor pit 2 Loamy-dayey (6) (7) Sll

Eddy2 3 V5 Fine F 8.5 vfS Mod. Moist Imperfect pitl Loamy-dayey (4) Eddy2 3 V5 Fine F 7.0 vfS Mod. Moist Imperfect pit 2 Loamy-dayey . (4)

Eddy3 3 V4 Sandy HF 6.0 mStocS Mod. Dry Rapid pitl S2 (0) (2) Eddy3 3 V4 Sandy HF 5.0 mS to C.S Mod. Dry Rapid pit 2 S2 (0) (2)

Eddy4 3 V4 Sandy HF 5.0 fS to mS Mod. By (0) to Rapid pitl S2 Mod. Fresh (1) (2) Eddy4 3 V4 Sandy F 7.0 vcS Mod. Dry Rapid pit 2 S2 (0) (2)

Nimitz 3 V4 Sandy HF 8.6 mLS Mod. Dry Very rapid pitl S2 (0) (1) Nimitz 3 V4 Sandy HF 8.6 mS Mod. Dry Very rapid pit 2 S2 (0) (1)

Wells 2 V2 Sandy HF 6.3 cS Mod. Dry Very rapid pitl S2 (0) (1) Wells 2 V2 Sandy HF 6.3 cS Mod. Dry Very rapid pit 2 S2 (0) (12

NOTES: HF - HumiFBRIMOR 3 vfS - very fine Sand F- RBRIMOR fS.-fine Sand 2 Depths of LFH averaged from sampled humus divots. mfS - medium Fine Sand Appendix 7 General stand characteristics of the mature stands.1 Site Site Site Stand comp. 2'3 Age Mean Mean Stems Basal Vol.4 Stocking 5 Stocking 5 Class Index (number (yrs) DBH2 height 3 /ha. area (m3/ha) (a) (b) of stems) (cm) (m) (m2/ha) Eddy 3 3 12.3 PjeFbaBw: 71 19.2 15.9 563 16.3 112 0.7 0.4 Eddy2 2 14.3 PisSbs 97 18.4 15.5 1003 26.7 190 0.8 1.2 Eddy4 2 15.2 Pho 71 19.2 15.9 818 23.7 172 0.9 0.8 Superior 3 2 15.9 PjgSbi 82 22.9 17.0 706 29.1 224 0.9 0.8 Nimitz 2 16.5 PjsSbi 68 18.4 18.2 1140 30.3 248 0.9 1.3 Superior! 2 16.5 Pi 10 75 20.7 17.9 814 27.4 221 1.1 0.8 Superior 1 1 17.9 PjySbs 65 20.8 16.5 625 21.4 161 0.8 0.7 Wells 1 18.3 PhSbjPri 57 19.0 19.3 703 19.9 172 0.7 0.7 Eddyl 1 19.3 Pj5Sb3BW2 92 24.2 22.6 581 26.6 253 1 0.7 1. All measures are based upon data collected from three representative plots (control) within each site, except for Wells, Notes: where all measures are based upon the 12 treatment plots. 2. Species composition Is based upon number of stems, not canopy cover. 3. Pj jack pine, Sb = blacksprece, Bw = white birch, Pr = red pine, and Fb = balsam fir. 4. Volume calculations were performed using Honer et aVs (1983) volume equations for jack pine. 5. Stocking for jack pine (a) is based upon basal area and Stocking (b) is based upon number of stems. Appendix 8 Climatic data for all 27 experimental sites 1

Maximum Minimum Annual Mean temp Mean temp temp of temp of Annual Growing mean of hottest of coldest hottest coldest precipita ­ season Site temp month month month month tion duration J1A 4.07 19.33 -12.70 25.83 -19.30 947.38 197 JIB 2.30 18.20 -15.50 24.71 -22.60 900.33 181 J1C 1.53 17.72 -16.80 24.19 -24.10 831.46 175 J2A 4.39 19.27 -11.90 25.53 -18.00 956.45 200 J2B 2.32 18.20 -15.50 24.71 -22.60 902.14 181 J2C 1.54 17.75 -16.80 24.23 -24.10 833.56 175 J3A 3.88 19.14 -12.90 25.64 -19.50 962.42 194 J3B 1.55 17.80 -16.80 24.30 -24.10 839.03 175 J3C 1.53 17.73 -16.80 24.20 -24.10 832.18 175 MIA 3.87 19.14 . -12.90 25.64 -19.50 962.08 194 M1B 2.34 18.22 -15.50 24.73 -22.60 904.29 181 MIC 1.48 17.63 -16.80 24.06 -24.10 823.59 175 M2A 3.88 19.14 -12.90 25.63 -19.40 962.86 194 M2B 2.32 18.20 -15.50 24.71 -22.60 902.98 181 M2C 1.47 17.61 -16.90 24.04 -24.20 822.19 175 MSA 2.57 18.31 -15.00 24.86 -22.00 955.14 183 MSB 1.98 17.95 -16.00 24.45 -23.20 892.06 179 M3C 1.99 17.95 -16.00 24.46 -23.20 892.99 179 Eddyl 1.88 18.24 -16.60 24.83 -23.60 901.66 178 Eddy2 2.03 18.38 -16.40 24.95 -23.40 892.85 180 Eddy3 2.33 18.11 -15.40 24.51 -22.30 930.39 181 Eddy4 2.30 18.10 -15.40 24.51 -22.30 930.43 181 Nimitz 1.48 17.64 -16.90 24.08 -24.20 822.35 175 Superiorl 1.53 17.85 -16.90 24.39 -24.20 849.20 175 Superior2 1.52 17.84 -17.00 24.38 -24.20 849.15 175 Superiors 1.77 17.28 -16.00 23.61 -23.10 960.24 177 Wells 4.30 19.62 -12.50 26.12 -19.20 927.74 199 'Based on five year averages Appendix Harvesting Unharv. Herbicide spray technique: Rill-tree Full-tree Full-tree Full-tree Tree-length Full-tree ctrls application 1 Site prep Blading + blading no site prep trenching trenching blading technique: compaction

Planting planted at planted at planted at planted at planted at planted at 9 spacing: 2m. 2m. 2m. 2m. 2m. 1.2m

Superiorl * * * * * * Operationally 1995

SuperiorZ * * * * * * Operationally 1995

Superiors * * * * * * Manually 1997 Manually 1995 + Nimitz * * * * * operationally 19962

Eddyl * * * * * Operationally 1996

Eddy2 * * * * * Operationally 1997

EddyS * * * * * * Manually 1996

Eddy4 * * * * * * scheduled fall 2000

Wells * * * * * Manually 1995

1 The plots have either been operationally sprayed by air or manually using backpack sprayers. With operational spray everything gets hit and there are no unsprayed halfplots. The sites that have been manually sprayed have both sprayed and unsprayed halfp 2 Nimitz was meant to be one of four sites including both sprayed and unsprayed halfplots, but it was accidentally sprayed by air the next year by the forest company. + Vegetation Appendix o M m i-1 U1 O o tx> in o n o n 8 3 3 3 3 H- in 3 in 3

structure Broadleaf spp. 10

Conifer spp.

matrix Shrubs

Herbs

Graminoids

Lichen

Mosses

Feathermosses

Pioneer mosses

Dicranum spp.

Water

Broadleaf litter

Conifer litter

Bare peat

Bare mineral

Woody material Appendix English common Scientific name Family name French common name OPL code Abies balsamea ((L) Miller) Pinaceae Balsam Fir Sapin baumier WABIbal Acer rubrum (L) Aceraceae Red Maple Erable rouge WACErub

Acer saccharum (Marshall) Aceraceae Sugar Maple Erable a sucre WACEsaS 11 Acer spicatum (Lam.) Aceraceae Mountain Maple Erable a epis WACEspi Acerspp Aceraceae Maple Erable WACEspp Achillea millefoliumYarrow Asteraceae Achillee HACHmil Agrostis capillaris (L.) Poaceae Colonial Bent Grass Agrostide fine GAG Reap Agrostis gigantea (Roth) Poaceae Red-top Agrostide blanche GAGRgig Agrostis mertensii (Trin.) Poaceae Northern Bent Grass Agrostide de Mertens GAGRmer Agrostis scabra (Willd.) Poaceae Fly-away Grass Agrostide scabre GAGRsca Agrostis sppRedtop Poaceae Agrostide GAGRspp Agrostis stolonifera (L) Poaceae Redtop Agrostide stolonifere GAGRsto Alnus incana ((L.) Moench) Betulaceae Speckled Alder Aulne rugueux WALNinR Alnus viridis((Villars) DC.) Betulaceae Green Alder Aulne crispe WALNviC Amelanchier bartramiana ((Tausch) M. Roem.) Rosaceae Bertram's Juneberry Amelanchier de Bartram WAMEbar Amelanchier spp Rosaceae Serviceberry Amelanchier WAMEspp Anaphalis margarltacea ((L.) Benth. & Hook. f. ex C.B. Clarke) Asteraceae Pearly Everlasting Anaphale marguerite HANAmar Anemone qulnquefolia (L.) Ranunculaceae Wood Anemone Anemone a cinq folioles HANEquQ Apocyn a feuilles Apocynum androsaemifollum (L.) Apocynaceae Spreading Dogbane d'Androseme HAPOanA Aralia hisplda (Vent.) Araliaceae Bristly Sarsaparilla Aralie hispide HARAhis Aralia nudicaulis (L.) Araliaceae Wild Sarsaparilla Aralie a tige nue HARAnud Aralia sppSarsaparilla Araliaceae Aralie HARAspp Arctostaphylos uva-ursi ((L.) Spreng.) Ericaceae Common Bearberry Arctostaphyle raisin-d'ours WARCuva Aster ciliolatus (Lindl.) Asteraceae Ciliolate Aster Aster a feuilles cordees HASTcil Aster macrophyllus (L.) Asteraceae Large-leaved Aster Aster a grandes feuilles HASTmac Aster urophyllus (Lindl.) Asteraceae Arrow-leaved Aster HASTuro Athyrium filix-femina ((L.) Roth ex Mert.) Dryopteridaceae Northern Lady Fern Athyrie fougere-femelle PATHfil Aulacomnium palustre ((Hedw.) Schwaegr.) Aulacomniaceae Ribbed Bog Moss Aulacomnie des marais BAULpal Betula alleghanlensis (Britton) Betulaceae Yellow Birch Bouleau jaune WBETall Betula papyrifera (Marshall) Betulaceae White Birch Bouleau a papier WBETpap Appendix English common Scientific name Family name French common name OPL code Carex brunnescens ((Pers.) Poir. ex Lam.) Cyperaceae Brownish Sedge Carex brunatre SCXbruB Carex houghtoniana (Torr. ex Dewey) Cyperaceae Houghton's Sedge Carex d'Houghton SCXhoug

Carex intumescens (Rudge) Cyperaceae Bladder Sedge Carex gonfle SCXintu 12 Carex normalis (Mack.) Cyperaceae Larger Straw Sedge Carex normal SCXnorm Carex sppSedge Cyperaceae Carex SCX_spp Carex vaginata (Tausch) Cyperaceae Sheathed Sedge Carex engame SCXvagi Chamaedaphne calyculata ((L.) Moench) Ericaceae Leatherleaf Cassandre calicule WCHAcal

Chimaphila umbellata ((L.) Barton) Pyrolaceae Common Pipsissewa Chimaphille a ombelles WCHIumC Chrysanthemum leucanthemum (L.) Asteraceae Ox-eye Daisy Marguerite blanche HCHRIeu Broad-leaved Reed Cinna latifolia ((Trevir. ex Goepp.) Griseb. in Ledeb.) Poaceae Grass Cinna a larges feuilles GCINIat Cladina & Cladonia Cladoniaceae LCLAspp Ciintonia borealis ((Aiton) Raf.) Liliaceae Bluebead-lily Clintonie boreale HCLIbor Comptonia peregrina ((L) J.M. Coult.) Myricaceae Sweetfern Comptonie voyageuse WCOMper Conyza canadensis ((L.) Cronquist) Asteraceae Horseweed Vergerette du Canada HCONcan Coptis trifolia ((L.) Salisb.) Ranunculaceae Goldthread Coptide trifoliolSe HCOPtri Corallorhiza trifida (Chatel) Orchidaceae Early Coral-root Corallorhize tritide HCORtri Cornus canadensis (L.) Cornaceae Bunchberry Cornouiller du Canada HCORcan Cornus stolonifera (Michx.) Cornaceae Red-osier Dogwood Cornoulller stolonifere . WCORsto Corydalis sempervirens ((L.) Pers.) Fumariaceae Pale Corydalis Corydale toujours verte HCORsem Corylus cornuta (Marshall) Betulaceae Beaked Hazel Noisetier a long bee WCORcoC Cypripedium acaule (Aiton) Orchidaceae Moccasin Flower Cypripede acaule HCYPaca Cystopteris fragilis ((L.) Bernh.) Dryopterldaceae Fragile Fern Cystoptere fragile PCYSfra Danthonia spicata ((L.) P. Beauv. exRoem. & Schult.) Poaceae Poverty Oat Grass Danthonie a epi GDANspi Dicranum polysetum (Sw. ) Dicranaceae Wavy-leaved Moss BDICpol Dicranum spp Dicranaceae Dicrane BDICspp Diervilla lonicera (Miller) Caprifoliaceae Bush Honeysuckle Dierville chevrefeuille WDIEIon

Dryopteris carthusiana ((Vill.) H.P. Fuchs) Dryopterldaceae Spinulose Wood Fern Dryoptere spinuleuse PDRYcar Dryopteris cristata ((L.) A. Gray) Dryopterldaceae Crested Wood Fern Dryoptere a cretes PDRYcri Appendix English common Scientific name Family name French common name OPL code

Dryopteris expansa ((C. Presl.) Fraser-Jenk. &Jermy) Dryopteridaceae Northern Wood Fern PDRYexp

Evergreen Wood 13 Dryopteris intermedia ((Muhtenb. ex Willd.) A. Gray) Dryopteridaceae Fern Dryoptere intermediare PDRYint Dryopteris spp Dryopteridaceae Wood Fern Dryoptere PDRYspp Epigaea repens (L) Ericaceae Trailing Arbutus Epigee rampante WEPIrep Epiloblum angustifolium (L) Onagraceae Fireweed Epilobe 6 feuilles etroites HEPIang Epilobium palustre (L.) Onagraceae Marsh Willow-herb Epilobe palustre HEPIpal Equisetum arvense (L.) Equisetaceae Field Horsetail Prele des champs PEQUarv Equisetum pratense (Ehrh.) Equisetaceae Meadow Horsetail Prele des pres PEQUpra Equisetum spp Equisetaceae Horsetail Prele PEQUspp Equisetum sylvaticum (L) Equisetaceae Wood Horsetail Prele des bois PEQUsyl Festuca spp Poaceae GFESspp Fragaria spp Rosaceae Strawberry Fralsier HFRAspp Galium spp Rubiaceae Bedstraw Gaillet HGALspp

Gaultheria hispidula ((L.) Muhlenb. ex Bigelow) Ericaceae Creeping Snowberry Chiogdne hisplde WGAUhis Gaultheria procumbens (L) Ericaceae Wintergreen Gaultherie couchee WGAUpro Northern Geocaulon lividum ((Richardson) Fern.) Santalaceae Commandra Comandre livide HGEOliv Downy Rattlesnake- Goodyera pubescens ((Willd.) R. Br.) Orchidaceae plantain Goodyerie pubescente HGOOpub Gymnocarpium dryopteris ((L.) Newman) Dryopteridaceae Oak Fern Dryoptere disjointe PGYMdrD Hieracium spp Asteraceae Hawkweed Eperviere HHIEspp Hypnumspp Hypnaceae BHYPspp Iris spp Iridaceae Iris HIRIspp Juncus bufonius (L.) Juncaceae Toad Rush Jonc des crapauds SJUNbuf Kalmia angustifolia (L.) Ericaceae Sheep Laurel Kalmia a feuilles etroites WKALang Kalmia a feuilles Kalmfa polifolia (Wangenh.) Ericaceae Bog Laurel d'Andromede WKALpol Appendix English common Scientific name Family name French common name OPLcode Kalmia spp Ericaceae Laurel Kalmia WKALspp Lactuca spp Asteraceae Wild Lettuce Laitue HLACspp

Larix laricina ((Du Roi) K. Koch) Pinaceae Tamarack Meleze laricin WLARlar 14 Ledum groenlandicum (Oeder) Ericaceae Labrador-tea The du Labrador WLEDgro Linnaea borealis (L.) Caprifoliaceae Twinflower Unnee boreale WLINboL American Fly Lonlcera canadensis (Bartram) Caprifoliaceae Honeysuckle Ch6vrefeuille du Canada WLONcan Luzula acuminata (Raf.) ■ Juncaceae Hairy Woodrush Luzule acuminee SLUZacu Luzula spp Juncaceae Woodrush Luzule SLUZspp Nothern Bog Club- Lycopodiella inundata ((L.) Holub) Lycopodiaceae moss Lycopodielie inconde PLYCind Lycopode interrompu variete Lycopodium annotinum (L.) Lycopodiaceae Bristly Club-moss piquant PLYCann Lycopodium clavatum (L.) Lycopodiaceae Running Club-moss Lycopode a massue PLYCcia Prickly Tree Club- Lycopodium dendroideum (Michx.) Lycopodiaceae moss Lycopode fonce PLYCden Lycopodium obscurum (L.) Lycopodiaceae Ground-pine Lycopode obscur PLYCobs Lycopodium spp Lycopodiaceae Club-moss Lycopode PLYCspp Wild Lily-of-the- Maianthemum canadense (Desf.) Liliaceae valley Mai'antheme du Canada HMAIcan Melampyrum lineare (Desr.) Scrophulariaceae Cow-wheat Melampyre lineaire HMELlin Mentha arvensis (L) Lamiaceae American Wild Mint Menthe des champs HMENarB Monotropa uniflora (L) Monotropaceae Indian-pipe Monotrope uniflore HMONuni White-grained Oryzopsisasperifolia (Michx.) Poaceae Mountain-rice Orysopsis a feuilles rudes GORYasp Slender Mountain- Oryzopsis pungens ((Torr. exSpreng.)A. Hitchc.) Poaceae rice Orysopsis piquant GORYpun Oryzopsis spp Poaceae Mountain-rice Orysopsis GORYspp Osmunda claytoniana (L) Osmundaceae Interrupted Fern Osmonde de Clayton POSMcia Panicum spp Poaceae GPANspp Parmelia spp Parmeliaceae LPARspp Peltigera spp Peltigeraceae LPELspp

Phegopteris connectilis ((Michx.) Watt) Thelypteridaceae Northern Beech Fern Phegoptere vulgaire PPHEcon Appendix English common Scientific name Family name French common name OPLcode Picea glauca ((Moench) Voss) Pinaceae White Spruce Epinette blanche WPICgla Picea mariana ((Miller) B.S.P.) Pinaceae Black Spruce Epinette noire WPICmar

Plnus banksiana (Lamb.) Pinaceae Jack Pine Pin gris WPINban 15 Pinus resinosa (Sol. ex Aiton) Pinaceae Red Pine Pin rouge WPINres Pinus strobus (L.) Pinaceae Eastern White Pine Pin blanc WPINstr Pleurozium schreberi ((Brid.) Mitt.) Hylocomiaceae Shreber's Moss Hypne de Schreber BPLEsch Poaspp Poaceae GPOAspp Polygala paucifolia (Willd.) Polygalaceae Gay Wings Polygala paucifolie HPOLpau Polygala spp Poiygalaceae Polygala Polygala HPOLspp Polygonum spp Polygonaceae Bindweed HPOLMsp

Polytrichum Polytrichaceae juniperinum (Hedw.) Juniper Haircap Moss BPOLjun Common Haircap Polytrichum commune (Hedw.) Polytrichaceae Moss Polytric BPOLcom Populus balsamlfera (L) Salicaceae Balsam Poplar Peuplier baumier WPOPbaB Populus grandidentata (Michx.) Salicaceae Large-tooth Aspen Peupller a grandes dents WPOPgra Populus spp Salicaceae Aspen Peuplier WPOPspp Populus tremuloldes (Michx.) Salicaceae Trembling Aspen Peuplier faux-tremble WPOPtre Potentilla norvegica (L.) Rosaceae Cinquefoil Potentille de Norvege HPOTnor Three-toothed Potentilla trldentata (Sol. ex Aiton) Rosaceae Cinquefoil Potentille tridentee HPOTtri Prunus pensylvanica (L. f.) Rosaceae Pin Cherry Cerisier de Pennsylvanie WPRUpen Prunus virginiana (L.) Rosaceae Choke Cherry Cerisier de Virginie WPRUviV

Pteridium aquilinum ((L.) Kuhn) Dennstaedtiaceae Eastern Bracken-fern Fougere d'aigle commune PPTEaqL Ptilium crista-castrensis ((Hedw.) De Not.) Hypnaceae Feather Moss Hypne plumeuse BPTIcri Pyrola spp Pyrolaceae Pyrola Pyrole HPYRspp Quercus robur (L.) Fagaceae Penduculate Oak Chene pedoncule WQUErob Electrified Cat-tail Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus ((Hedw.) Warnst.) Hylocomiaceae Moss Hypne triquetre BRHYtri Ribes spp Grossulariaceae Currant Gadellier WRIBspp Rosa acicularis (Undl.) Rosaceae Prickly Rose Rosier aciculalre WROSacS Appendix English common Scientific name Family name French common name OPL code Rubus pubescens (Raf.) Rosaceae Dwarf Raspberry Ronce pubescente HRUBpub Salixspp Salicaceae WSALspp

Schizachne purpurascens ((Torr.) Swallen) Poaceae False Melic Grass Schizachne pourpre GSCHpuP 16 Scirpus cespitosus (L.) Cyperaceae Cespitose Bulrush Scirpe gazonnant SSCIceC Scirpus cyperinus ((L.) Kunth) Cyperaceae Wool-grass Scirpe souchet SSCIcyp Scirpus spp Cyperaceae Scirpe SSCIspp Solidag uliginosa (Nutt.) Asteraceae Marsh Goldenrod Verge d'or des marais . HSOLuli . Solidago canadensis (L) Asteraceae Canada Goldenrod Verge d'or du Canada HSOLcan Solidago hispida (Muhlenb.) Asteraceae Hairy Goldenrod Verge d'or hispide HSOLhis Solidago nemoraiis (Aiton) Asteraceae Gray Goldenrod HSOLnem Sorbus spp Rosaceae Mountain Ash Sorbier WSORspp Sphagnumspp Sphagnaceae Peat Moss Sphaigne BSPHspp Streptopus roseus (Michx.) Liliaceae Rose Twisted-stalk Streptope rose HSTRros Taraxacum officinale (G. Weber) Asteraceae Common Dandelion Pissenlit officinal HTARoff Taxus canadensis (Marshall) Taxaceae American Yew If du Canada WTAXcan Thuidium delicatulum ((Hedw.) Schimp. in B.S.G.) Thuidiaceae Common Fern Moss Mousse fougere BTHUdel Trientalis borealis (Raf.) Primulaceae Star-flower Trientale boreale HTRIboB Trifolium spp Fabaceae Clover Trefle HTRIFsp Typha latifolia (L.) Typhaceae Broad-leaved Cattail Quenouille a feuilles larges HTYPIat

Vaccinium angustifolium (Aiton) Ericaceae Low Sweet Blueberry Airelle a feuilles etroites WVACang

Vaccinium myrtilloides (Michx.) Ericaceae Velvet-leaf Blueberry Airelle fausse-myrtilie WVACmyr Vaccinium vitis-idaea (L.) Ericaceae Rock Cranberry Airelle vigne-d'ida WVACviM Waldsteinia fragarioides ((Michx.) Tratt.) Rosaceae Barren Strawberry Waldsteine faux-fraisier HWALfra Viburnum edule ((Michx.) Raf.) Caprifoiiaceae Squashberry Virone comestible WVIBedu Viola adunca (Sm.) Violaceae Hooked-spur Violet Violette a eperon crochu HVIOadu Viola spp Violaceae Violet Violette HVIOspp Appendix 17 Average structural value for all 27 sites, .

> 10m < 1 .5 m 1.5-10m

1.5-10m < 1.5m > 10m

mosses mosses

< 1 .5 m

nam e class

Broadleaves Broadleaves Broadleaves Conifers Conifers Conifers Herbs Feather Pioneer Dicranum Site Shrubs Shrubsl.S-lOm Grasses Sphagnum Site J1A 1 0 0 0 0 8 35 6 0 71 4 3 0 0 0 JIB 1 0 0 0 0 1 43 31 0 15 1 20 0 0 6 J1C 1 0 0 6 0 0 34 42 5 5 1 38 0 0 1 J2A 2 0 0 0 0 63 23 2 0 2 2 25 0 0 3 J2B 2 0 0 0 0 0 33 15 13 11 1 80 0 0 4 J2C 2 0 0 0 0 0 26 38 1 26 2 38 0 0 4 J3A 3 0 0 0 10 20 20 2 0 49 18 2 0 0 0 J3B 3 0 0 0 21 0 40 24 0 6 1 30 0 0 3 J3C 3# 0 0 0 0 28 33 57 0 3 1 27 0 0 1 MIA 1 0 0 0 3 28 36 23 0 12 1 53 0 0 0 M1B 1 0 0 8 0 0 25 56 5 9 1 55 0 0 1 MIC 1 0 0 0 2 3 8 25 0 18 1 80 0 0 0 M2A 2 1 0 0 6 23 25 19 0 1 31 41 0 0 0 M2B 2 0 0 0 0 18 25 26 0 13 1 75 0 0 2 M2C 2 0 0 0 0 16 23 21 0 20 1 83 0 0 0 MSA 3 0 0 0 6 28 55 10 0 53 1 23 0 0 1 MSB 3 0 0 0 0 10 43 32 15 13 1 19 0 0 0 M3C 3 0 0 0 0 23 35 13 1 19 3 14 0 0 1 Eddyl 1 2 7 9 4 3 34 24 2 32 1 6 0 1 0 Wells 1 1 2 0 5 8 0 23 2 33 1 19 0 0 0 Superiorl 1 0 0 0 4 3 27 35 3 25 3 73 0 0 0 Superior2 2 0 2 0 2 0 20 34 2 39 2 69 1 0 0 Superiors 2 0 0 2 53 27 24 86 0 24 1 47 0 0 0 Nimitz 2 0 0 0 58 30 31 31 0 30 1 50 0 0 0 Eddy4 2 3 7 8 21 9 14 79 9 27 0 8 0 1 6 Eddy2 2 0 0 0 10 12 21 17 0 13 0 51 0 0 0 Eddv3 3 4 6 0 22 35 20 70 2 12 12 33 0 0 1 Appendix 18

DCA scatter plot of six sites in the south-west corner of the study area.

J3A -

Wells

Axis 1. eigenvalue: 0.50 Appendix 19 Diversity indices for each of the 27 sites. Average Expected number Site Site Shannon Simpson number of of species. Rare Stand age Name class index (H') index (C) species faction method. Juvenile J1A 1 1.340 0.366 10.8 16.4 JIB 1 1.970 0.225 15.5 20.4 J1C 1 1.635 • 0.293 15.5 23.0 J2A 2 1.453 0.315 9.8 17.8 J2B 2 1.468 0.358 13.0 18.8 J2C 2 1.695 0.252 13.5 16.7 J3A 3 1.531 0.279 10.0 14.8 J3B 3 1.307 0.385 10.0 15.9 J3C 3 1.395 0.336 12.3 18.4 Midrotation MIA 1 1.493 0.298 11.0 17.5 M1B 1 1.558 0.277 12.8 19.7 MIC 1 1.408 0.402 13.8 19.3 M2A 2 1.513 0.286 10.3 15.8 M2B 2 1.535 0.323 13.0 20.1 M2C ' 2 1.418 0.336 11.0 16.5 M3A 3 1.493 0.304 13.5 19.7 M3B 3 1.620 0.291 12.0 20.0 M3C 3 1.603 0.276 11.8 17.9 Mature Superiorl 1 1.761 0.261 14.2 20.0 Eddyl 1 2.106 0.206 17.5 18.7 Wells 1 1.852 0.243 13.8 20.9 Superior2 2 1.788 0.237 12.3 18.3 Superiors 2 1.367 0.395 . 11.7 19.9 Nimitz 2 1.884 0.223 15.5 23.3 Eddy2 2 1.623 0.288 10.8 19.4 Eddy4 2 1.771 0.246 12.8 21.5 Eddy3 3 1.886 0.207 13.8 21.5 Appendix 20 Total coverage of vascular plants excluding conifers over time, full-tree harvesting followed by trenching, herbicide sprayed and unsprayed.

Eddy3 (12.3)

No spray Spray a u 50

Year

Superiors (15.9)

No spray Spray

94 95 96 97 98 99 Year

Weils (18.3)

No spray Si > 100 Spray Appendix 21 Selected competing species that are sensitive to glyphosate spray. Graphs based on development at Wells (18.3). Herbicide applied 1995.

Dantonia spicata

No spray Spray

Assessment Year

Diervilla lonicera

No spray Spray

Assessment Year

Pteridium aquilinum

No spray & 20 Spray

Assessment Year

Vaccinium angustifolium

No spray Spray

Assessment Year Appendix 22 Species that have been encountered in the bladed plots. Genus Species Family OPL-code 1 Abies balsamea Pinaceae WABIbal Anaphalis margaritacea Asteraceae HSOLruR Apocynum androsaemifolium Apocynaceae HFRAspp Aster macrophyllus Asteraceae WSALspp Carex adusta Cyperaceae LCLAspp Carex houghtoniana Cyperaceae SCXhoug Carex spp Cyperaceae BPOLjun Cladina & Cladonia spp Cladoniaceae HANAmar Coptis trifolia Ranunculaceae HWALfra Cornus canadensis Cornaceae PPTEaqL Danthonia spicata Poaceae HASTmac Dicranum polysetum Dicranaceae WPOPtre Dicranum spp Dicranaceae WDIEIon Diervilla lonicera Caprifoliaceae BDICspp Epigaea repens Ericaceae WGAUpro Fragaria spp Rosaceae HCORcan Gaultheria procumbens Ericaceae WEPIrep Hieracium spp Asteraceae WVACang Linnaea borealis Caprifoliaceae WLINboL Luzula spp Juncaceae BPOLcom Maianthemum canadense Uliaceae WRUBide Oryzopsis asperifolia Poaceae WPRUpen Panicum spp Poaceae HCOPtri Pinus banksiana Pinaceae GDANspi Pinus resinosa Pinaceae WPINres Polytrichum commune Polytrichaceae HVIOspp Polytrichum juniperinum Polytrichaceae SCX_spp Populus tremuloides Salicaceae SCXadus Prunus pensylvanica Rosaceae GORYasp Pteridium aquilinum Dennstaedtiaceae GPANspp Rubus idaeus Rosaceae SLUZspp Salix spp Salicaceae HAPOanA Solidago canadensis Asteraceae BDICpol Solidago hispida Asteraceae HSOLcan Trifolium spp Fabaceae HTRFsp Vaccinium angustifolium Ericaceae HM Alcan Viola spp Violaceae WPINban Waldsteinia fragarioides Rosaceae HHEspp ^Ontario plant list code (OMNR. 1997) Appendix

Percentage of each life form

before and year 5 after harvesting 23

& J? J?" & a* > # (f J? & .<# x< &

&

(the post-harvest numbers are based on average of all treatments) Appendix 24 The ten most frequent species at each of the nine mature sites (ctrls) before harvesting. Supl Sup2 Sup3 Nimitz Eddyl Eddy2 Eddy3 Eddy4 Wells 1 BPLEsch BPLEsch BPLEsch BPLEsch HCORcan BPLEsch WVACang HCORcan HMAIcan 2 GORYasp GORYasp HCORcan HMAIcan PATHfil WPINban LCLAran BDICspp WDIEIon 3 WPINban WPINban HMAIcan WUNboL HMAIcan BDICpol BPLEsch PPTEaqL PPTEaqL 4 WVACang BDICpol WVACang WPINban WPINban HCORcan HMAIcan WVACmyr WGAUpro 5 BDICpol WUNboL WUNboL HCORcan HCOPtri WPICmar WGAUpro BPLEsch WVACang 6 HMAIcan WVACang WEPIrep WVACang BDICspp HMAIcan BDICpol BDICpol GORYasp 7 WUNboL HMAIcan GORYasp GORYasp HCLIbor LCLAspp GORYasp WDIEIon HFRAspp 8 WVACmyr WEPIrep LCLAran WPICmar BPLEsch WVACang WCOMper LCLAran BPLEsch 9 WCOMper HCORcan WLEDgro WLEDgro WDIEIon WLEDgro WEPIrep HMAIcan HASTmac 10 HTRIboB WVACmyr WVACmyr WSALspp HASTmac WDIEIon WPINban WVACang BPOLcom Appendix 25 Development of total plant coverage overtime and volume growth of the planted jack pine seedlings.

Total coverage of all strata of vasaiar plants eod confers at VlfeHs (183)

--A--H/oon} rospr. --X--Et/cori) spray —A—FT/O, rospr —x —Flyti, spray —A—FT/tr, rospr —X—FT/tr, spray ---A---H/tr, rospr —X--- "Fl/tr, spray

Qxwrih of average seeding at VfeOs (sibedass 1)

- • A - - EL/ccn) rospr. --x--H/cm) spray —A—FT/W, rospr —X—FT/bl, spray —A—FF/b; rospr —x —Fl/tr,qaay -•-A--H/tr,rospr -••x---H/tr, spray

Year after plaiting