DOCSLIB.ORG

Managing Hardwood-Softwood Mixtures for Future Forests in Eastern North America: Assessing Suitability to Projected Climate Change

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Managing Hardwood-Softwood Mixtures for Future Forests in Eastern North America: Assessing Suitability to Projected Climate Change J. For. 115(3):190-201 RESEARCH ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.2016-024 silviculture Managing Hardwood-Softwood Mixtures for Future Forests in Eastern North America: Assessing Suitability to Projected Climate Change John M. Kabrick, Kenneth L. Clark, Anthony W. D’Amato, Daniel C. Dey, Laura S. Kenefic, Christel C. Kern, Benjamin O. Knapp, David A. MacLean, Patricia Raymond, and Justin D. Waskiewicz Despite growing interest in management strategies for climate change adaptation, there are few methods for assessing 1998). In temperate forests of eastern North the ability of stands to endure or adapt to projected future climates. We developed a means for assigning climate America, naturally occurring mixedwoods “Compatibility” and “Adaptability” scores to stands for assessing the suitability of tree species for projected climate are found in the pine-oak (Pinus-Quercus), scenarios. We used these scores to determine whether mixed hardwood-softwood stands or “mixedwoods” were better hemlock-hardwood (Tsuga-hardwood), and suited to projected future climates than pure hardwood or pure softwood stands. We also examined the quantity of spruce-fir-hardwood (Picea-Abies-hardwood) aboveground carbon (C) sequestered in the overstory of these mixtures. In the four different mixedwood types that types (Table 1; Figure 1 ). Mixedwoods can we examined, we found that Pinus echinata-Quercus mixtures in the Ozark Highlands had greater Compatibility scores occur as isolated stands within hardwood- or than hardwood stands and greater Adaptability scores than pure Pinus echinata stands; however, these mixtures did softwood-dominated landscapes or they can not store more aboveground overstory C than pure stands. For Pinus strobus-Quercus rubra, Picea-Abies-hardwood, and comprise a large proportion of a forest land- Tsuga canadensis-hardwood mixtures, scores indicated that there were no advantages or disadvantages related to scape. climate compatibility. Those mixtures generally had greater Adaptability scores than their pure softwood analogs but Mixedwood stands are often structur- stored less aboveground overstory C. Despite the many benefits of maintaining mixedwoods, regenerating and/or ally complex and vertically stratified because recruiting the softwood component of these mixtures remains a persistent silvicultural challenge. individual species of hardwoods and soft- woods have differing shade tolerances, Keywords: hardwood-softwood mixtures, climate change adaptation, forest management, aboveground growth rates, longevities, phenology, and overstory carbon crown and root structure (Kelty et al. 1992, Pre´vost 2008, Pretzsch 2014). Moreover, species within mixedwoods often employ “ ixedwoods” are stands contain- rouche et al. 2013, Leak et al. 2014), we use differing regeneration and growth strategies. ing hardwoods and softwoods. the term to describe stands in which neither Because of this structural and compositional M Although variations in the defi- component comprises more than approxi- complexity (Kelty et al. 1992), there has nition occur (e.g., Sauvageau 1995, La- mately 75–80% of the composition (Helms long been interest in the benefits of mixed- Received July 27, 2016; accepted December 12, 2016; published online January 19, 2017. Affiliations: John Kabrick ([email protected]), USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Columbia, MO. Kenneth L. Clark ([email protected]), USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station. Anthony W. D’Amato ([email protected]), University of Vermont. Daniel C. Dey ([email protected]), USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station. Laura S. Kenefic (lkenefi[email protected]), USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station. Christel C. Kern ([email protected]), USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station. Benjamin O. Knapp ([email protected]), University of Missouri. David A. MacLean ([email protected]), University of New Brunswick. Patricia Raymond ([email protected]), Gouvernement du Que´bec, Ministe`re des Foreˆts, de la Faune et des Parcs, Direction de la Recherche Forestie`re. Justin D. Waskiewicz ([email protected]), University of Vermont. Acknowledgments: We express our appreciation to Maria Janowiak and Louis Iverson for their comments and feedback about our approach and methods for assessing climate compatibility and adaptability described in this article. We thank Rachel Knapp for preparing the spruce-fir-hardwood data from the Penobscot Experimental Forest and Kenneth Laustsen (Maine Forest Service) for his assistance with spruce-fir-hardwood assessment. We also thank two anonymous reviewers and the associate editor for helpful suggestions. We are appreciative of Thomas L. Schmidt and John C. Brissette, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, for supporting this research. 190 Journal of Forestry • May 2017 Table 1. Summary of selected mixedwood types in eastern North America. Common Mixedwood type Hardwood component Softwood component Approximate Extent disturbances Stand structure Shortleaf pine-oak Quercus alba, Quercus coccinea, Pinus echinata Ͼ1 million ha in Ozark and Frequent surface fire; Range from complex Quercus falcata, Quercus southern Appalachian historical and vertical structure rubra, Quercus stellata, regions on well-drained current logging; to open Quercus velutina acidic soils historical grazing; woodlands with drought; minor increasing fire wind and ice frequency Pitch pine-oak Quercus alba, Quercus coccinea, Pinus rigida, Pinus echinata, Ͼ1 million ha in New Frequent surface fire; Range from complex Quercus falcata, Quercus Pinus pungens, Pinus England, Mid-Atlantic, and historical logging; vertical structure ilicifolia, Quercus rubra, virginiana Appalachian regions and historical grazing; to open Quercus stellata, Quercus excessively well drained drought; minor woodlands with velutina sandy soils wind and ice increasing fire frequency White pine-red oak Quercus rubra, Quercus alba, Pinus strobus, Tsuga 0.5 million ha in New England Historical Two-storied, closed Quercus velutina, Betula canadensis on coarse-textured soils agricultural canopy stands alleghaniensis, Betula lenta, derived from granite and abandonment, with white pine Acer rubrum, Fraxinus gneiss or residuum from logging, wind, and occurring as americana sandstone and shale occasional surface emergent stratum fire over hardwood canopy Spruce-fir-hardwoods Betula papyrifera, Betula Picea rubens, Abies Ͼ10 million ha in the Historical and Range from complex alleghaniensis, Acer rubrum, balsamea, Picea glauca, Northeastern United States, current logging, vertical and Acer saccharum, Populus Tsuga canadensis, Thuja Quebec, and New periodic spruce horizontal spp., Fagus grandifolia occidentalis, Pinus strobus Brunswick on shallow, budworm structure to rocky, or acid soils derived outbreaks, single- or two- from glacial till hurricanes, minor storied stands wind and ice, with few to many rarely fire residuals over a dense canopy, depending on type and scale of disturbance Hemlock-hardwoods Acer saccharum, Betula Tsuga canadensis, Abies 0.5 million ha in western Great Infrequent, Complex vertical alleghaniensis, Betula balsamea, Picea glauca, Lakes, southeastern Canada, moderate-severity and horizontal papyrifera, Acer rubrum, Pinus strobus, Thuja New England, and north wind disturbance; structure Fraxinus americana, occidentalis central Appalachian regions historical logging; Fraxinus nigra, Ostrya on mesic sites with well- minor wind and virginiana, Prunus drained medium or coarse- ice pensylvanica, Prunus textured soils serotina, Quercus rubra, Tilia americana wood stands because of their potential to management practices affect the rate of car- D’Amato et al. 2011). By integrating species produce a greater timber volume or biomass bon accumulation (carbon sequestration) or with differing morphology and growth pat- (Waldrop 1989, Waskiewicz et al. 2013), to the amount of carbon stored in live trees and terns, mixed-species stands can theoretically provide more diverse or unique habitats deadwood (e.g., Hoover and Stout 2007, use growing space more completely than sin- (Comeau 1996, Jung et al. 1999, Girard et al. 2004), and to be more resistant or re- silient to contemporary insect outbreaks and Management and Policy Implications diseases (Su et al. 1996, Campbell et al. Forest management agencies are increasingly interested in establishing desired future conditions that are 2008) than pure stands. Correspondingly, mixedwood stands may be well suited for compatible with projected changes in climate. Maintaining, conserving, or restoring tree species diversity and achieving emerging management objectives enhancing carbon stocks are often identified as important climate mitigation strategies. Mixed hardwood- related to climate change mitigation and/or softwood stands or “mixedwoods” are often structurally and compositionally diverse because of the differing adaptation (D’Amato et al. 2011, Gauthier shade tolerances, growth rates, longevities, phenology, and crown and root structures of the constituent species. et al. 2014). There has long been interest in the benefits of mixedwoods because of their potential to produce a greater timber Forests remove carbon dioxide from the volume or biomass, to provide more diverse habitats, and to be more resistant or resilient to contemporary pests atmosphere and convert it to biomass, and pathogens than pure stands. They also may be better suited for projected climates although assessing this thereby providing opportunities for mitigat- has remained a challenge.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Properties of Western Larch and Their Relation to Uses of the Wood
    TECHNICAL BULLETIN NO. 285 MARCH, 1932 PROPERTIES OF WESTERN LARCH AND THEIR RELATION TO USES OF THE WOOD BY R. P. A. JOHNSON Engineer, Forest Products Laboratory AND M. I. BRADNER In Charge^ Office of Forest Products y Region I Branch of Research, Forest Service UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, D. C. TECHNICAL BULLETIN NO. 285 MARCH, 1932 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE WASHINGTON, D. C. PROPERTIES OF WESTERN LARCH AND THEIR RELATION TO USES OF THE WOOD By R. P. A. JOHNSON, Engineer, Forest Products Laboratory^^ and M. I. BRADNER, in Charge, Office of Forest Products, Region 1, Branch of Research, Forest Service * CONTENTS Page Page Introduction 1 Mechanical and physical properties—Con. The larch-fir mixture 2 Resistance to decay, weathering, and Character and range of the western larch insects 39 forest __ 4 Reaction to preservative treatment 42 Occurrence 4 Heat and insulating properties 42 Character 4 Permeability by liquids 42 Size of stand 7 Tendency to impart odor or ñavor___:. _. 43 Cut and supply 9 Tendency to leach or exude extractives. _ 43 Merchandising practices 10 Chemical properties 43 distribution lO Fire resistance ., 43 Percentage of cut going into various lum- Characteristic defects of western larch 44 ber items 12 Natural defects 44 Descriptive properties of western larch 13 Seasoning defects 46 General description of the wood 13 Manufacturing defects 47 Heartwood content of lumber 13 Grades and their characteristics 47 Growth rings 14 Grade yield and production 48 Summer-wood content 14 Heartwood content 50 Figure. 14 Width of rings 50 How to distinguish western larch from other Grade descriptions .
    [Show full text]
  • Douglasfirdouglasfirfacts About
    DouglasFirDouglasFirfacts about Douglas Fir, a distinctive North American tree growing in all states from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, is probably used for more Beams and Stringers as well as Posts and Timber grades include lumber and lumber product purposes than any other individual species Select Structural, Construction, Standard and Utility. Light Framing grown on the American Continent. lumber is divided into Select Structural, Construction, Standard, The total Douglas Fir sawtimber stand in the Western Woods Region is Utility, Economy, 1500f Industrial, and 1200f Industrial grades, estimated at 609 billion board feet. Douglas Fir lumber is used for all giving the user a broad selection from which to choose. purposes to which lumber is normally put - for residential building, light Factory lumber is graded according to the rules for all species, and and heavy construction, woodwork, boxes and crates, industrial usage, separated into Factory Select, No. 1 Shop, No. 2 Shop and No. 3 poles, ties and in the manufacture of specialty products. It is one of the Shop in 5/4 and thicker and into Inch Factory Select and No. 1 and volume woods of the Western Woods Region. No. 2 Shop in 4/4. Distribution Botanical Classification In the Western Douglas Fir is manufactured by a large number of Western Woods Douglas Fir was discovered and classified by botanist David Douglas in Woods Region, Region sawmills and is widely distributed throughout the United 1826. Botanically, it is not a true fir but a species distinct in itself known Douglas Fir trees States and foreign countries. Obtainable in straight car lots, it can as Pseudotsuga taxifolia.
    [Show full text]
  • Sylvania Wilderness for More Information, Contacatn: DERSON LAKE BIG DONAHUE LAKE Florence to Big Bateau Lake 34 Rods 36
    2 DAMON LAKE Watersmeet 3.5 miles 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 Sylvania 30 29 PIT LAKE Wilderness CUTTERS POND 28 ROSS LAKE ALBINO LAKE and Recreation RAVEN LAKE PORCUPINE LAKE HATTIE LAKE 35 Area BIG AFRICAN LAKE 36 31 32 RECORD LAKE 33 PARTRIDGE LAKE GOG-535 MAUD LAKE 34 DOYLE LAKE 35 36 31 32 33 BIG AFRICAN LAKE SNAP JACK LAKE CLEAR LAKE Sylvania RICKLES LAKE Entrance TRAIL LAKE Station HELEN LAKE Clark Lake Campground KERR LAKE WOLF DEER-1 LONG LAKE COYOTE LITTLE TRAIL LAKE 2 WEST BEAR LAKE DEER-2 1 EAST BEAR LAKE PILOT LAKE 6 5 KATHERINE LAKE PORCUPINE-2 4 HIGH LAKE 3 2 HILLTOP LAKE PORCUPINE-1 RACCOON 1 JENNINGS LAKE 6 5 GOG-535 4 BOBCAT LYNX-2 THOUSAND ISLAND LAKE ASH-1 LYNX-1 ASH-2 JAY LAKE ERMINE-2 ERMINE-1 BALSAM-1 COREY LAKE 6320 LILUIS LAKE BALSAM-2 MINK-1 MOUNTAIN LAKE CHICKADEE LAKE LOUISE LAKE MINK-2 BEAR-2 CEDAR-2 PINE-1 CHIPMUNK BEAR-1 11 CEDAR-1 BEAVER-1 12 PINE-2 7 SQUIRREL-2 8 CLARK LAKE 9 DOROTHY LAKEELSIE LAKE 10 SQUIRREL-1 BEAVER-2 LITTLE DUCK LAKE BIRCH 12 CROOKED LAKE FOX-1 7 MAPLE-2 11 8 MAPLE-1 9 FOX-2 MULE LAKE SISKIN LAKE BADGER-1 BADGER-2 DAISY LAKE FISHER-1 9 FISHER-2 3 5 - G HAY LAKE O DEVILS HEAD LAKE G PERCH-1 GERMAIN LAKE TRAPPER LAKE 14 13 PERCH-2 INDIAN LAKE 18 17 16 15 14 MALLARD-1 13 18 17 16 DREAM LAKE MALLARD-2 WHITEFISH LAKE EAST BAY LAKE PIKE-1 LOON LAKE PIKE-2 OSPREY-2 DUCK LAKE 23 BASS LOON 24 OSPREY-1 19 LOIS LAKE 20 DEER ISLAND LAKE 6320 21 22 EAGLE-2 23 24 19 20 Mic EAGLE-1 21 higan MOSS LAKE MAMIE LAKE Wilderness Campsites Wisc FISHER LAKE onsin Boat Landing JOHNSTON SPRINGS Portage Lengths
    [Show full text]
  • 4-H Wood Science Leader Guide Glossary of Woodworking Terms
    4-H Wood Science Leader Guide Glossary of Woodworking Terms A. General Terms B. Terms Used in the Lumber Industry d—the abbreviation for “penny” in designating nail boards—Lumber less than 2 inches in nominal size; for example, 8d nails are 8 penny nails, 2½” long. thickness and 1 inch and wider in width. fiber—A general term used for any long, narrow cell of board foot—A measurement of wood. A piece of wood wood or bark, other than vessels. that is 1 foot long by 1 foot wide by 1 inch thick. It can also be other sizes that have the same total amount grain direction—The direction of the annual rings of wood. For example, a piece of wood 2 feet long, showing on the face and sides of a piece of lumber. 6 inches wide, and 1 inch thick; or a piece 1 foot long, hardwood—Wood from a broad leaved tree and 6 inches wide, and 2 inches thick would also be 1 board characterized by the presence of vessels. (Examples: foot. To get the number of board feet in a piece of oak, maple, ash, and birch.) lumber, measure your lumber and multiply Length (in feet) x Width (in feet) x Thickness (in inches). The heartwood—The older, harder, nonliving portion of formula is written: wood. It is usually darker, less permeable, and more durable than sapwood. T” x W’ x L’ T” x W’ x L’ = Board feet or = Board feet 12 kiln dried—Wood seasoned in a humidity and temperature controlled oven to minimize shrinkage T” x W’ x L’ or = Board feet and warping.
    [Show full text]
  • Hardwood Trees
    Tree Identification Guide for Common Native Trees of Nova Scotia Before you Start! • To navigate through this presentation you must use the buttons at the bottom of your screen or select from the underlined choices. • The following presentation includes most of Nova Scotia’s commercial tree species. There are far too many other non-commercial species to cover in this presentation. Please refer to the books listed on the following page for more information. References • Trees of Nova Scotia – Gary Saunders • Native Trees of Canada –R.C. Rosie • Silvics of Forest Trees of the United States – US Department of Agriculture Main Menu Softwood Softwood Key Hardwood Hardwood Key Glossary Glossary of Terms Main Menu Alternate leaf arrangement - one of two kinds of arrangements of leaves along shoots of hardwoods; in this case the leaves appear at staggered intervals along the shoot. Bark - The outer covering of the trunk and branches of a tree, usually corky, papery or leathery. Bud - rounded or conical structures at tips of (terminal buds), or along (lateral or auxiliary buds) stems or branches, usually covered tightly in protective scales and containing a preformed shoot (with leaves), or a preformed inflorescence (with flowers). May or may not be on a stalk. Clear cut - a silvicultural system that removes an entire stand of trees from an area of one hectare or more, and greater that two tree heights in width, in a single harvesting operation. Compound leaf - a leaf divided into smaller leaflets. Cone - in botany, a reproductive structure bearing seeds (seed cone) or pollen (pollen cone) in conifers.
    [Show full text]
  • INDENTATION HARDNESS of WOOD J. Doyle1 and J. C. F. Walker School of Forestry, University of Canterbury Christchurch 1, New Zealand (Received March 1984)
    INDENTATION HARDNESS OF WOOD J. Doyle1 and J. C. F. Walker School of Forestry, University of Canterbury Christchurch 1, New Zealand (Received March 1984) ABSTRACT An historical background to hardness testing of wood is given, and the advantages and disadvantages of the methods used are reviewed. A new method, using a wedge indenter, is suggested and a rationale presented that includes discussion of the deformation patterns beneath indenting tools. Keywords: Ball, Brinell, cone, cylinder, hardness, Janka, Meyer, Monnin, wedge. INTRODUCTION Hardness testing of wood has made little progress since Janka (1 906). Although there have been many studies leading to a variety of tests, there are shortcomings with all of them. Furthermore, the various hardness values are not easily com- parable one to another and do not allow comparison with those for other materials, where testing procedures have a more rational basis. The wedge test that we advocate does allow for comparison with other materials while also taking account of wood anisotropy. Hardness implies the ability of a body to resist deformation. In a typical test a hard tool of known geometry is forced into the body, and the hardness is defined as the ratio of the applied force to the size of the indentation. This size depends on whether it is determined under load or on unloading. With elastic materials it is determined under load as there will be little or no permanent deformation, whereas with plastic materials the size of the permanent indentation is measured (Tabor 195 1). With wood there are difficulties in measuring the impression, especially for shallow indentations where the imprint is indistinct.
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina's Forest Resources—2000 Update
    United States Department of South Carolina's Agriculture Forest Service Forest Resources—2000 Update Southern Research Station Roger C. Conner and Raymond M. Sheffield Resource Bulletin SRS–65 PIEDMONT NORTHERN COASTAL PLAIN SOUTHERN COASTAL PLAIN The Authors: Roger C. Conner is a Research Forester and Raymond M. Sheffield is a Supervisory Research Forester with the Forest Inventory and Analysis Research Work Unit, Southern Research Station, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Asheville, NC 28802. December 2001 Southern Research Station P.O. Box 2680 Asheville, NC 28802 Foreword This bulletin highlights the initial results of an annual inventory of South Carolina’s forest resources. Annual inventories of the Nation’s forests are mandated by the Agricultural Research Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998 (1998 Farm Bill). The current annual forest inventory program has several new features: (1) a nationally consistent, fixed-radius, four-point plot configuration; (2) a systematic national sampling design featuring a base grid derived by subdividing the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program grid into approximately 6,000-acre hexagons; (3) integration of the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) and Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) sampling designs; (4) annual measurement of a fixed proportion of permanent FIA/FHM plots in each State; (5) reporting of data or data summaries within 6 months of completion of a year’s sampling; (6) a default 5-year moving average estimator, with provisions for optional estimators based on techniques for updating information; and (7) State inventory reports every 5 years. For additional information, you may access the national FIA Web site at http://fia.fs.fed.us/.
    [Show full text]
  • Distinguishing Softwoods from Hardwoods
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Agriculture and Natural Resources Publications Cooperative Extension Service 12-2015 Distinguishing Softwoods from Hardwoods Terry Conners University of Kentucky, [email protected] Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits oy u. Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/anr_reports Part of the Agriculture Commons, and the Environmental Sciences Commons Repository Citation Conners, Terry, "Distinguishing Softwoods from Hardwoods" (2015). Agriculture and Natural Resources Publications. 105. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/anr_reports/105 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Cooperative Extension Service at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Agriculture and Natural Resources Publications by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND ENVIRONMENT, LEXINGTON, KY, 40546 FOR-125 PART IDENTIFYING WOOD—A Primer for Everyone 3 Distinguishing Softwoods from Hardwoods Terry Conners, Forestry What Hardwoods Look Like The most important distinction be- tween softwoods and hardwoods is that almost all hardwoods contain a type of cell called a vessel element.2 Vessel ele- ments are similar to segments of small pipes that run throughout the tree in the longitudinal direction, connecting the top of the tree with the root system. A collection of vessel elements joined end-to-end is known as a vessel. Vessels can be readily seen on the cross-sectional surface of any hardwood species, where they appear as holes (pores); hardwoods are hence frequently known colloqui- ally as porous woods (or porous species).
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5--Commercial Lumber
    Chapter 5 Commercial Lumber Kent A. McDonald and David E. Kretschmann n a broad sense, commercial lumber is any lumber Contents that is bought or sold in the normal channels of Hardwood Lumber 5–1 commerce. Commercial lumber may be found in a variety of forms, species, and types, and in various commer- Factory Lumber 5–2 cial establishments, both wholesale and retail. Most com- Dimension and Component Parts 5–2 mercial lumber is graded by standardized rules that make purchasing more or less uniform throughout the country. Finished Market Products 5–6 When sawn, a log yields lumber of varying quality. To Lumber Species 5–7 enable users to buy the quality that best suits their purposes, Softwood Lumber 5–7 lumber is graded into use categories, each having an appro- priate range in quality. Lumber Grades 5–7 Lumber Manufacture 5–10 Generally, the grade of a piece of lumber is based on the number, character, and location of features that may lower the Softwood Lumber Species 5–12 strength, durability, or utility value of the lumber. Among Softwood Lumber Grading 5–12 the more common visual features are knots, checks, pitch pockets, shake, and stain, some of which are a natural part of Purchase of Lumber 5–12 the tree. Some grades are free or practically free from these features. Other grades, which constitute the great bulk of Retail Yard Inventory 5–16 lumber, contain fairly numerous knots and other features. Important Purchase Considerations 5–17 With proper grading, lumber containing these features is entirely satisfactory for many uses.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Common Stains of Softwood Lumber
    SOME COMMON STAINS OF SOFTWOOD LUMBER Donald J. Miller Forest Research Laboratory Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon Lumber Grading Rules generally define stain as a discolor- ation that is different than the "natural color" of the rest of the board. It may be graded as light, medium or heavy stain according to the intensity of discoloration. Light stain may be barely perceptible and does not materially affect a natural fin- - ish. At the other extreme, heavy stain may obscure the wood grain and is unacceptable for a clear finish, but is suitable for painting. The Rules may differentiate between heartwood stain and sapwood stain. They also may note that where stain is permitted it does not affect the intended use of the piece. That is, stain degrades the appearance of the wood, but otherwise has no practical effect on its strength or utility. The most common and troublesome stains are the bluish-gray sap stains, and, to a lesser degree, the brown stains. The blue-gray sap stains are usually caused by wood-staining fungi growing in moist sapwood. Brown stains often are of nonfungal origin and may result from the darkening of materials which occur naturally in the wood. They generally are called "chem- ical" brown stains. Other less prevalent discolorations (pink, purplish, yellowing and tans), may occur in heartwood of living trees, or in old logs. They are likely to be an incipient stage of rot; i.e. "Firm Red Heart" is the incipient stage of red ring rot caused by the fungus F. pini. Occasionally we see samples of unusual staining which we cant identify.
    [Show full text]
  • Ottawa National Forest
    0614spj1 Ottawa National Forest United States Department of Agriculture Record of Decision Forest Service Eastern Region Final Environmental Impact Statement March 2006 To accompany the Land and Resource Management Plan Cover Photo: Burned Dam, Watersmeet Ranger District, Ottawa National Forest Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision Baraga, Gogebic, Houghton, Iron, Marquette, and Ontonagon Counties Responsible Official: Randy Moore, Regional Forester USDA Forest Service Eastern Region 626 E. Wisconsin Avenue Milwaukee, WI 53202 414-297-3428 For Further Information Contact: Ottawa National Forest Forest Supervisor E6248 US Hwy. 2 Ironwood, MI 49938 Phone: 906-932-1330 Fax: 906-932-0122 TTY: 906-932-0301 Table of Contents PREFACE......................................................................................................................................................I RECORD OF DECISION ........................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 1 THE OTTAWA NATIONAL FOREST .............................................................................................................. 2 A VISION OF THE FUTURE........................................................................................................................... 3 DECISION AND RATIONALE.................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wood-Frame House Construction
    WOOD-FRAME HOUSE CONSTRUCTION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE «FOREST SERVICB»AGRICULTURE HANDBOOK NO. 73 WOOD-FRAME HOUSE CONSTRUCTION By L. O. ANDERSON, Engineer Forest Products Laboratory — Forest Service U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agriculture Handbook No. 73 • Revised July 1970 Slightly revised April 1975 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washincfton, D.C. 20402 Price: $2.60 ACKNOWLEDGMENT Acknowledgment is made to the following members of the Forest Products Laboratory (FPL) for their contributions to this Handbook: John M. Black, for information on painting and finishing; Theodore C. Scheffer, for information on protection against termites and decay; and Herbert W. Eickner, for information on protection against fire. Acknowledgment is also made to Otto C. Heyer (retired) for his part as a co-author of the first edition and to other FPL staff members who have contributed valuable information for this revision. The wood industry has also contributed significantly to many sections of the publication. 11 CONTENTS Page Page Introduction 1 Chapter 6.—Wall Framing 31 Requirements 31 Chapter 1.—Location and Excavation 1 Platform Construction 31 Condition at Site 1 Balloon Construction 33 Placement of the House 3 Window and Door Framing 34 Height of Foundation Walls 3 End-wall Framing 36 Excavation 4 Interior Walls 38 Chapter 2.—Concrete and Masonry 5 Lath Nailers 39 Mixing and Pouring 5 Chapter 7.—Ceiling and Roof Framing 40 Footings 5 Ceiling Joists 40 Draintile 7 Flush Ceiling Framing 42
    [Show full text]