An Assessment of Biomass Harvesting on Small Woodlots in New Hampshire June 1984
New Hampshire Division of Forest and Lands with the Cooperative Extension Service University of New Hampshire
B31 Robert J. Berti, Project Leader AN ASSESSMENT OF BIOMASS HARVESTING ON SMALL WOODLOTS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE
Prepared By
Robert J. Berti FORECO, Forest Resource Consultants Rumney, New Hampshire 03266
Project Leader and Consultant for the New Hampshire Biomass Project
Prepared for
New Hampshire Department of Resources and Economic Development, Division of Forests and Lands • and Cooperative Extension Service University of New Hampshire
June 1984
The New Ham~hirc Cooperative Extension Senicc·, progr..un' and policic-; arc con'L~tcnt \\ith peninent Federal and Slate laws and regulations on non-
Abstract ...... i Acknowledgements ...... ii Project Summary ...... iv Foreword ...... 1 I Situation ...... 2 II Goals and Objectives ...... 2 III Procedures ...... 3 IV Findings ...... 4 A. Silvicultural ...... 4 B. Economics ...... 4 C. Estimating Biomass Yield ...... 5 D. Logging and Equipment ...... 5 V Discussion ...... 8 A. Opportunities for Biomass Harvesting ...... 8 B. Equipment ...... 11 C. Estimating Biomass Yield ...... 12 D. Training and Supervision ...... 13 E. Producer Considerations ...... 13 F. Annual Growth of the Resource ...... 16 VI Conclusions ...... 20 VII Recommendations ...... 21
APPENDIX
A. Descriptions of Study Areas & Logging Systems ...... 23 B. Stand Data ...... 34 C. Labor and Productivity Chart ...... 36 D. Stand Characteristics of 21 Study Areas ...... 37 E. Basal Area: Green Weight Table ...... 38 F. Comparison of Fuel Consumption in 13 Study Areas ...... 39 G. Damage Assessment ...... 40 H. Average Annual Growth ...... 41 I. Marking Layout and Supervision ...... 42 J. Biomass Harvesting Demonstrations ...... 43 K. Review of the Literature ...... 44
ABSTRACT
A 400 acre study of biomass harvesting was conducted on twenty-one woodlots from 4 to 39 acres in size. A mix of equipment was evaluated in different terrain and stand conditions. Landowner and silvicultural ob jectives varied; most woodlots required only a partial, or selective harvest although three clearcuts were in cluded for comparison.
Silvicultural objectives were met on all sites, and residual damage was less than with traditional harvesting. Equipment, job layout and supervision were examined in detail.
Average yields from thinnings were 35 tons per acre. From the data obtained estimates of the available biomass resource in the southern two-thirds of the state were made.
The project demonstrated that mechanized, biomass harvesting on small woodlots, is both economically and silviculturally feasible and desirable.
NOTE:
The use of trade, firm, or corporate names in this publication is for the information and conve nience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by any of the cooperating agencies of any product or service to the exclusion of others which may be suitable. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Cooperation was the keystone of this project. Many individuals, agencies and organizations, both public and private, contributed to the success of the New Hampshire Biomass Assessment. The following people and their organizations deserve special thanks:
* University of New Hampshire, Cooperative Extension Service David Buxton, who helped evaluate equipment and assisted · in the preparation of field demonstrations. Nicholas Engalichev, whose timely comments and suggestions helped guide the project. * Department of Resources and Economic Development, Division of Forests and Lands Tom Miner, who made the project a reality by providing members of his staff for assistance and the initial timber stands to operate. Robert Nelson and Philip Verrier who provided time and patience. * University of New Hampshire Dr. James Barrett, who provided assistance in developing the biomass yield table. Carl Johnson, Jr., whose special efforts at the computer gave the project its useful biomass for mula. * New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game Henry Laramie, who provided technical assistance in wildlife habitat improvement. * Hawkensen Enterprises Lloyd Hawkensen, whose visionary ability helped to conceive the project and provided timely assistance in market development. * Connecticut Valley Chipping Corporation Jamie Damman, who helped to move the chips when markets were poor. * Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests Paul Bofinger and Bruce Hovland, who provided guidance, advice and two excellent woodlots to experiment on. Marcy Lyman, whose nutrient loss study is an important part of this project. * New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association John Herrington, past executive director; and Charles Levesque, present executive director; who recommended private landowners whose timberland was used in the study, and who gave their helpful thoughts and comments. * Wagner Woodlands Norm Beane and Frosty Sobetzer, who provided two woodlots to experiment on. * The Markets - S.D. Warren, Westbrook, Maine - Concord Steam, Concord, New Hampshire - The Balsams, Dixville Notch, New Hampshire - Groveton Paper, Groveton, New Hampshire who often agreed to buy chips even when market conditions were poor.
ii The Contractors Daniel Keniston, Woodstock, New Hampshire William Crowley, Loudon, New Hampshire James Walker, Epsom, New Hampshire who somehow survived the project and without whose time and patience the study would not have been possible. Special Note of Thanks:
Arthur Dodge, Program Leader, Forestry and CFM Supervisor, Cooperative Extension Service Theodore Natti, State Forester, Division of Forests and Lands whose continued guidance and unselfish assistance throughout the project were greatly appreciated.
David Schumann, U.S. Forest Service, Northeastern Area, State and Private Forestry Jan Van Loon, Connecticut Valley Chipping Corporation Howard Nowell, New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game, who reviewed and edited the final report.
Jane Difley, who made the final report a reality!
Staff at Foreco Kenneth Sutherland, Jr., and Peter Everts who assisted in so many ways. Ronald Klemarczyk, who provided special assistance in supervision, layout, and map making and received the 5 a.m. phone calls. Sarah, Kim and Anne, who answered the phone calls, did the typing and added the figures.
iii PROJECT SUMMARY
The New Hampshire Division of Forests and Lands and the New Hampshire Governor's Council on Energy submitted a proposal to the USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry seeking funding to support a cooperative demonstration project to document the potential for selective forest harvesting on small woodlots using mechanized biomass* harvesting technology. The project was to assess the economic viability and silvicultural effectiveness of mechanized and integrated harvesting technology for the benefit of private, non-industrial landowners, professional foresters, and loggers; and to encourage markets for resulting wood products. An ad-hoc technical committee was established to assist in preparing the work plan, meeting funding re quirements, coordinating activities, and preparing the necessary reports. This field study documented operations on over four hundred acres, comprising twenty-one woodlots of less than forty acres. At the same time current literature on nutrient losses from whole tree harvesting was reviewed. The results show that whole tree harvesting and chipping, when properly practiced, are not only feasible, but desirable. Woodland owners, loggers, foresters and planners can benefit from the project's findings.
Forest Owners
Of the 4. 7 million acres of commercial forest land in the state, two-thirds are held by 90,000 private, non industrial forest owners. Biomass operations achieved a number of owner objectives, even on small woodlots. Forest improvements - especially thinning pole timber stands - were possible without financial investment or government subsidy. Converting forest land to field, clearcutting for replanting, and creating wildlife openings were also accomplished without cash outlay. Damage to those trees left to grow was less than with traditional harvesting, and there was little or no un sightly slash. Traditional logging operations may leave as much as 50 tons per acre of residue that could be chipped. State park officials were pleased with the aesthetics of an operation on heavily used recreational land. Whole tree harvesting and chipping could be a great tool for promoting forest management to landowners skeptical of traditional harvesting.
Foresters
Proper silvicultural techniques top the list of the forester's concerns, and biomass harvesting allows economic thinning of valuable pole timber stands. On the lots studied, integrated harvesting was practiced to maximize the return to the owner. Sawlogs, boltwood, pulpwood, and firewood, whenever economically possible, were extracted before chipping the remaining material. The forester's knowledge of chip markets was found to be essential. Whole tree logging operations appear to be one of the most useful and important silvicultural techniques available to the forest manager to release and upgrade many stands which are from 30 to 50 years old. These forests will produce the quality timber of the future. Foresters needed about 40 hours of training in the operation and layout of whole tree harvesting jobs. Skid road layout by the forester is crucial, and must be adapted to the particular equipment used at each site. Pro per layout, along with supervision of the logging, resulted in damage of less than seven percent to the residual trees. Haul roads must accommodate chip vans, and allow for their entry and exit.
*"Biomass" in this paper refers to the above ground portion of trees (stem, leaves, branches, twigs); biomass harvesting is used interchangeably here with "whole tree harvesting and chipping."
iv Several methods of estimating weight yields were tested. Basal area seems to be the best indicator of yield. A table was derived to estimate weight from the basal area of standing trees. When the standing basal area to be removed is between 35 to 60 square feet per acre the following formula is useful for approximating the volume to be removed:
Y = 21. 789 + .65248(x)
where Y = green tons per acre X = stand basal area in square feet R2 = .87
The long term impacts of whole tree harvesting on site productivity is uncertain. A review of the literature on nutrient loss conducted by the Society For The Protection of New Hampshire Forests during the field pro ject indicates that nutrient losses from whole tree harvesting are greater than those from stem-only harvests, but the significance of the loss to long term productivity is unclear and debatable. Costs for the management by a forester vary considerably; however, marking paint costs were $0.07 to $0.16/ton, and supervision costs were $0.40 to $0.75/ton.
Loggers
Whole tree harvesting equipment requires from $75,000 to more than $250,000 of capital investment by the logging operator. It is important to have the right mix of machinery to achieve full efficiency and productivi ty. Feller bunchers are the key in making whole tree harvesting and chipping profitable; in stands with average diameters under ten inches, a feller buncher is critical to making a job economically feasible. Feller bunchers also minimized residual damage, since they placed bunches near skid trails, thus restricting skidders to working only on or very near the trails. Directional and locational placement of cut stems by feller bun chers also contributed to reduction of logging damage. The geographic features of the sites operated (rocky, sandy, steep, flat, wet) and the type of timber cut (volume, size, softwood, hardwood) influenced the type, efficiency, mix, and method of operation of the equipment used. Overall damage to residual stems for all study sites averaged 6. 7 percent of basal area and varied from 1.6 percent to 11 percent. The choice of a chipper is another important equipment decision a contractor makes for a whole tree harvesting operation. If a chipper is not adequate for the volume, tree size and species harvested, unwar ranted delays and inefficiency will develop in the operation. If the chipper capacity is exceeded too often, down time will plague the operation. As with foresters, training woods crews was important in achieving efficiency and minimizing damage. Knowledge of chip markets is vital to the logging contractor to effectively market the product. Transporta tion was available, but profitability was limited when chips were hauled beyond 35 to 40 miles. Fuel con sumption of the harvesting equipment averaged 0.66 gallons per ton of chips. Costs vary considerably; however, costs to fell, skid and chip were approximately $12/ton. This price does not include trucking to the various markets ($2 per loaded mile) or stumpage payments ($0.35 to $1/ton). Landing size was determined by several variables including terrain, turning radius of chip vans, present road layout, number of forest products to be produced, number of skidders on the operation, loading of pro ducts on trucks, and planning for Murphy's Law. Landings on study sites varied from .1 acres to .75 acres.
v Planners
Based on this project and experience with other operations, the project leader estimates 3 million tons of available wood fiber grow annually in the southern two-thirds of New Hampshire. An estimated additional 55 million tons of standing timber are available on a portion of these forests that could currently be removed in improvement or harvest cuts. These "fuelwood reserves" are in addition to the wood that is growing for other purposes. The feasibility of biomass harvesting and the availability of fiber provides the base for developing wood fuel installations. Wood is a local energy resource that creates local jobs and keeps money recycling locally. Wood chips could replace at least 2 million barrels of oil annually in southern New Hampshire. Production of these chips could directly employ 400 to 500 people. Biomass harvesting is an investment in forest improvement, as well as a source of local energy. Upgrading pole timber stands with whole tree harvesting and chipping may reduce the need for government subsidies and eliminate out-of-pocket costs for improvements that will yield high quality timber in the future.
Markets
The supply of fiber and the ability to extract chips are available in New Hampshire. Strong, reliable nearby markets remain the key to achieving the full potential of biomass harvesting, resulting in the creation of jobs, forest improvements, local energy production, and achievement of landowner objectives. Commercial conversions to wood-fueled heating systems and installations of wood chip burners in new facilities will help make this possible. A coordinated program is needed to bring the benefits of this technology and its benefits to the attention of landowners, foresters, loggers, planners, and concerned citizens.
MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Train forest resource managers and operators B. Develop weight yield data C. Educate woodland owners D. Inform public and private decision makers E. Study nutrient loss F. Improve markets through promotion of wood energy
vi FOREWORD
On May 19, 1980 the New Hampshire Division of Forests and Lands and the New Hampshire Governor's Council on Energy submitted a proposal to the USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry, seeking funding to support a cooperative demonstration project to document the potential for selective forest harvesting on small woodlots using mechanized biomass harvesting technology. The work was to be performed under the direction of a project leader reporting to the Division of Forests and Lands and the Cooperative Extension Service. The project was to assess the economic viability and silvicultural effectiveness of mechanized and integrated harvesting technology for the benefit of private, nonindustrial landowners, professional foresters, and loggers; and to encourage markets for resulting wood products. On September 1, 1980 the application for federal assistance was approved and $60,000 of funding was pro vided by the Department of Energy and administered by the USDA Forest Service. The three and one-half year project terminated on December 31, 1983. Due to market conditions, the closing date was amended to May 31, 1984, but funding levels remained unchanged. To assist the project leader, an ad-hoc technical committee was established. This committee assisted in preparing the work plan, meeting funding requirements, coordinating activities, and preparing the necessary reports. Committee members also carried out the tasks assigned to the organizations they represented. This committee included, but was not limited to representatives from the following:
Connecticut Valley Chipping Corporation Hawkensen Enterprises New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game New Hampshire Division of Forests and Lands New Hampshire Governor's Council on Energy New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests University of N.H., Cooperative Extension Service University of N.H., Department of Forest Resources United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, I SITUATION
Whole tree (or biomass*) harvesting and chipping offer a method for producing energy chips, and an op portunity to accomplish silvicultural goals that are otherwise uneconomical. Biomass harvesting operations are common on large industrial holdings in the Northeast, but the suitability of mechanized whole tree systems on private, non-industrial lands has been uncertain. This study was designed to demonstrate the economic and silvicultural feasibility of whole tree harvesting in New Hampshire on ownerships from four to thirty-nine acres. Fossil fuels are relatively expensive in New Hampshire, and the state is at or near the "end of the pipeline." Energy users strive to conserve, and to use alternative energy sources such as wood. The dramatic rise in the residential use of wood is well documented. Many forest industries have also converted to wood fuel, using mill residues or whole tree chips. Other commercial, public, and industrial facilities could use wood chips if assured a stable supply. Of the 4. 7 million acres of commercial forest land in the state, two-thirds are held by 90,000 private, non industrial forest owners. Many of these acres are overstocked with poor quality trees and need silvicultural treatment to release potential crop trees. This silvicultural treatment could be accomplished with biomass harvesting. Since a ton of green, whole tree chips is equal in fuel potential to one barrel (42 gallons) of #2 fuel oil or a half ton of bituminous coal, the forests of New Hampshire are a tremendous energy resource. Traditional logging operations may leave as much as 50 tons per acre of residue that could be chipped. This project was designed to encourage the use of this vast untapped energy resource. Concern about the long term impacts of biomass harvesting were recognized. While the field study was in progress, the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests undertook a review of current literature on nutrient losses associated with whole tree harvesting. The resulting report is in Appendix K.
Il GOALSANDOBJECTIVES
The goals of this study were: • to determine if it is economically feasible to use whole tree harvesting as a silvicultural tool on small woodlots in New Hampshire • to increase utilization of forest products through an expanded market for wood chips • to prove the availability of chips • to improve management of the state's forest resource
Objectives leading toward those goals were: 1. to document the logistics of biomass harvesting on small woodlots 2. to document the silvicultural potential of biomass harvesting 3. to create public awareness of mechanized biomass harvesting 4. to provide information on biomass harvesting and the resource that is available to landowners, loggers, foresters, legislators, members of the forest industries, and others.
*"Biomass" in this paper refers to the above ground portion of trees (stem, leaves, branches, twigs); biomass harvesting is used interchangeably here with "whole tree harvesting and chipping."
2 ID PROCEDURES
Twenty-one sites were chosen for integrated biomass operations. Additional data was selected from other operations for specific information. A total of 600 acres of timberland was used in the study. Each site was inventoried first. The forest inventory techniques utilized in the study differed slightly from traditional prac tices in the Northeast. Of special interest was the component of each stand to be removed in the harvest. The extent of removals was determined by using silvicultural guidelines developed by the United States Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station whenever they could be applied to the species composition in the stand being thinned. To analyze this closely, the timber was marked prior to sampling. This allowed for a more complete inventory. The following information was gathered using variable plot sampling (10 BAF1 optical prism): 1. tree species 2. tree diameter2 to the nearest inch (4.5 feet from the ground) 3. total tree height to the nearest foot 4. merchantable tree height to the nearest foot (conventional products) 5. tree category a. removed b. residual 6. product a. sawlog b. pulpwood c. chips - entire tree or top
This process allowed information on each stand to be analyzed in the following categories: TOTAL ST AND CUT TREES RESIDUAL TREES 1. total ht. 3. total ht. 5. total ht. 2. merch. ht. 4. merch. ht. 6. merch. ht.
Slope, aspect, soil types, ground conditions, past land use and site characteristics were also recorded. Both total and merchantable heights were measured. It was unknown if either had any advantage over the other in predicting or measuring biomass yield. The INVENT data processing program at the University of New Hampshire was used to obtain tabular analyses of: basal area per acre (square feet) sawlog volume per acre (thousand board feet, mbt) pulpwood volume per acre (cords) mean stand diameter (inches) average tree height (feet)
All data were stored on magnetic tape. During logging the products removed were scaled (measured) and/ or weighed at the landing. Tops of sawlogs and pulpwood/firewood were chipped. In most instances the tops were chipped with branches at tached, except in circumstances when some of the branches were reduced in size to reduce damage to the residual stand. Branches removed from saw logs and/ or pulpwood were not chipped. Machine hours, worker hours, number of hitches, fuel consumption, and skidding distances were also recorded during the operation.
1 basal area factor 2 diameter breast height or "DBH"
3 Following logging, residual damage was measured in eleven stands. Using a 10 BAF prism, trees within the sample were examined for damage to roots, bole, or crown. Damage was classified as slight if no log .de~ada tion was experienced. Moderate damage indicated possible log quality degradation. Severe damage md1cated definite log and/ or vigor degradation. Each tree was also classified as a crop or "spacing" tree. A total of 327 acres were sampled. Slopes varied from 0 to 51 percent; residual basal area varied from 60 to 138 square feet per acre. The twenty-one sites were chosen to test various mixes of equipment, mechanization, and worker organiza tion in accomplishing varying silvicultural objectives economically. Summaries of the sites, equipment, silvicultural objectives and logging systems are in Appendix A.
IV FINDINGS
A. SILVICULTURAL
Biomass harvesting accomplished prescribed silvicultural objectives on all of the sites studied. In many cases damage to the residual trees was less than with traditional harvesting methods. Many of the trees cut were of poor quality, leaving residual stands of mostly crop trees of potential value. Many of these operations would have been impractical with traditional harvesting methods. Thus, thinning that would otherwise have gone undone was accomplished. In addition to improvement cuts, biomass harvesting was used in conversions to agricultural use, and to reclaim a site with poor stocking. Further site preparation for regeneration was unnecessary, and the land owners were able to achieve long term objectives. Protection of a white pine understory at the Blair #1 Lot was accomplished by cutting large crowns into smaller sections to avoid damage in skidding. Wildlife habitat at the Hay Wildlife Area was improved as part of the study. Overmature aspen and heavi ly weeviled pine were chipped in this operation. These species have little commercial value, other than for chip wood.
B. ECONOMICS
There are many pole-sized stands in New Hampshire in need of thinning, weeding or other cultural im provements. Present markets and traditional logging systems do not allow economic thinning of these stands. Biomass harvesting offers a way to achieve silvicultural objectives in many stands where a traditional opera tion would be uneconomical (Leadbeater, Montgomery, Bear Brook #1, Hay Memorial Forest). In stands such as Blair State Forest #1, Livermore, and the Hopkinton Town Forest, sufficient sawlog material was produced to make the operation profitable on those alone. Chips were an added bonus. In most cases the use of a feller buncher (rather than a chainsaw) increased the profitability of an operation. At Mast Yard #6, however, the total yield was such that the chainsaw felling operation realized a small pro fit. A market for red pine sawlogs was partly responsible for the profit. However, in most stands with a mean stand diameter of less than 10 inches DBH, with little or no sawlog volume, a mechanized operation (with a feller buncher) is economically necessary. Some operations, such as Mast Yard #3, were not profitable. The skidder in this operation could not pro duce enough volume per hour, and the chip market was 100 miles away. Closer markets or higher chip prices and a feller buncher would have solved the problem. Because the wood was small and scattered, the production rates for a half-day operation at the Hay Wildlife Area w,ere lower than for other operations. Even so, the operation was economical.
4 On fourteen operations fuel consumption was recorded for each piece of equipment. Excluding the wildlife improvement plot, where fuel use was excessive because of the number of small trees cut, total fuel consump tion ranged from 0.56 gallons/ton to 0.82 gallons/ton of chips. Skidders averaged 0.24 gallons/ton; feller bunchers averaged 0.13 gallons/ton; chippers 0.29 gallons/ton. Average for the overall operation was 0.66 gallons/ton (see Appendix F). Fuel for transportation to various markets was not included.
C. ESTIMATING BIOMASS YIELD
Several stand variables were tested as indicators of per acre weight including: trees per acre, average tree height, percent basal area of conifers, mean stand diameter, cubic foot volume, board foot volume, and the coefficient of variation for board foot volume. Basal area per acre was found the best predictor of weight. Based on information obtained in the project, the following regression equation was established: y = 21. 789 + .65248(x) where y = green tons per acre x = stand basal area per acre (ft2) R2 = .87
Average error expressed as a percent of mean weight was 12 percent. This equation can be used to estimate the yield of a biomass operation.
D. LOGGING AND EQUIPMENT
1. Logistics
This project tested several types of equipment, in different combinations on varying sites. The results are summarized below. The use of a feller buncher in a mechanized operation increased worker efficiency by 75 to 88 percent over a conventional chainsaw felling/ cable skidder operation. Feller bunchers are essential in stands with average merchantable diameters of ten inches DBH or less and where few log quality trees are produced. The feller buncher reduces damage to the residual stand and increases productivity. Damage to the residual stems ranged from 1.6 percent to 11 percent with an average of 6. 7 percent (see Ap pendix G). Sixty percent of the damaged trees were considered crop trees, 40 percent "spacing" trees. Of significant interest, however, was the extent of damage to the crop trees: 75 percent was classified as slight 18 percent was classified as moderate 7 percent was classified as severe
Damage was higher in stands where steeper slopes, rockier ground conditions, and chainsaw felling occurred either alone or in combination. The training and experience of the woodworkers influenced the efficiency of the operations and the condi tion of the residual stand. Most workers adapted quickly to the required techniques. In Mast Yard #1 the stand was marked according to proper silvicultural technique, but insufficient time was given to layout of skid trails. Within the first day and a half of operation, it was clear that damage to the residual stand was unacceptable. This problem was resolved when skid trails were laid out on the ground by the forester before the logger began cutting. Damage to the residual stand was decreased by 75 percent. Planned skid trail layout also facilitated record keeping and spacing of residual trees. Straight skid trails helped minimize damage; where turns were necessary they were as gradual as possible. Removing large bran ches and cutting larger trees in two before skidding also reduced damage.
5 a1ot.11'-SS 1111-R"e.si\NG 5i1J0'1 M~e.,..s ' a i ae.11-11.011.ooK s111-1e. p11-RK ti,LLE.NS\O'HN N.\'t
~ E.OGE Of SiANO IHE1LAN0 JI. E.OGE Of SLOPE -\I I l MA\~ s~\0 ROAO ------' c•'c••L Sl 6 Relatively short skidding distances (such as 425 feet at Bear Brook #3) made high production rates possi ble. Grapple skidders caused more damage than cable skidders. The large size of the hitches made by the grapple was the main cause of the damage. Smaller hitches (three or four trees per hitch) reduced residual damage dramatically. The grapple skidders yarded more weight per hitch and more weight per hour than cable skidders Skid trails and haul roads aligned parallel to public roads with gentle curves helped maintain aesthetics. Skeptical park officials were pleased with the appearance of the biomass harvesting at Bear Brook State Park (see Figure 1). The size and location of the yard varied depending on the size of the harvesting operation, the need for stockpiling material, and the complexity of product utilization. Yard size varied from one-tenth of an acre for a small operation to three-quarters of an acre for multi-product sorting. In slopes greater than 25 percent specialized expensive equipment, such as the "TimbCo" feller buncher, was needed. Specialized equipment is also required in stands that are predominantly hardwood with an average diameter larger than 10 inches DBH, and in snow over two feet deep. 2. Equipment A. MELROE BOBCAT The Melroe Bobcat was used in five project areas. Production averaged 15 tons per hour. Slopes in excess of 22 percent, snow depth over two feet, and rocky terrain limited this machine's operation. In wet areas the Bobcat caused compaction where it turned. The Bobcat was quick and maneuverable, and sheared trees up to 15 inches on the stump. The compact ness of the machine and its maneuverability allowed for thinning dense stands with little residual damage. B. MORBELL The Mor bell feller buncher is maneuverable enough to tum in its own radius. It can shear softwoods up to 13 inches on the stump. With chains it can perform in rocky and stony terrain on slopes up to 25 percent. Snow limitations were not judged; with new modifications the machine should work in depths of two feet. The feller buncher thins dense stands with little damage to residual trees. The capacity of the Morbell is 12 to 14 tons per hour when used for thinning. C. JOHN DEERE 450-C Track-driven feller bunchers are slower than rubber tired machines. However, they can work in steeper, rockier terrain, and in deeper snow. Track machines are less maneuverable than rubber tired machines, so greater care is necessary to minimize residual damage. Production rates of the John Deere 450 were lower than those of the Bobcat or Morbell. d. TIMBCO FELLER BUNCHER The TimbCo was the only large track vehicle used in the biomass project. Market and weather conditions hindered the completion of the TimbCo operation, but the data collected indicates the machine is a viable tool for thinning steep slopes (50 percent or greater). The TimbCo successfully removed hardwoods up to 16 inches on the stump. Production was estimated at 250 to 300 tons per day. The machine requires a ten-foot wide skid trail; but the platform, shear and boom rotate within the radius of the tracks, a unique feature that helps minimize damage to the residual stand. 7 E. MORBARK MODEL 12 CHIPPER The Morbark Model 12 Chipper was used on three locations. This machine, and machines of similar design, are most useful where the majority of wood to be chipped is less than ten inches in diameter. The machine produced about two van loads (approximately 50 tons) per day. The average chipping time per van load was approximately two hours. Therefore, this machine worked about four hours a day. It is possible that the Model 12 could produce 75 tons per day, but volumes in excess of this are beyond its capabilities. A machine of this size allows the contractor to work in a very small area; two of the landings in the study were 2/10 of an acre or less. F. MORBARK MODELS 550, 20; TRELAN MODEL 18; PRECISION MODEL 55 The majority of operations used one of the chippers above. These machines produce an average of four loads per day (100 tons), although one contractor produced 17 loads in one day using the Morbark Model 20. These machines are capable of handling higher volumes per day, however, the production of the other equip ment (skidders, shears) limits the amount of wood that can be chipped. The average time to chip a van load was between 30 and 45 minutes with these chippers. Therefore, an average daily output of six to eight vans is possible. However, not all of the contractors could bring this volume of fiber to the chipper. Two feller bunchers and two skidders are needed to meet the production capacity of these chippers. The dense hardwoods, such as beech, maple, oak and birch tax the capacity of these machines. Hard woods with large crowns and diameters greater than 12 inches can cause significant down time. G. MORBARK MODEL 22 CHIPPER The Morbark Model 22 is rated to produce in excess of eight van loads per day (300-400 tons); 12 to 15 loads is not uncommon. On the two locations where this chipper was used in New Hampshire, the maximum production was seven loads due to the production capacities of the other equipment used on the job. In addi tion, the machine can handle hardwoods larger than twelve inches in diameter and with large crowns. V DISCUSSION A. OPPORTUNITIES FOR BIOMASS HARVESTING 1. Timber Stand Improvement Biomass harvesting has a number of applications. The most important is commercially thinning valuable pole timber stands (30 to 50 years old). The trees in these generally dense stands are usually too small to harvest economically with conventional methods, and markets for the small and/or low grade material are in adequate, especially for softwoods. Many of the pole timber stands in New Hampshire are growing on better than average sites owned by private, nonindustrial owners. Costly timber stand improvement practices have failed to upgrade significant amounts of this forest. Biomass harvesting and chipping offer an opportunity to upgrade these stands and may provide a return to the landowner. 8 Most of the demonstration areas were in stands where only a partial cut was made. Generally, poor quali ty, low-vigor trees were removed. In most of the stands, mean stand diameter (MSD) was increaseel. This was true to a greater extent in natural stands than in plantations, mainly because plantations tend to have a more uniform diameter distribution. In plantations the MSD was increased an average of 5.8 percent (2 to 11 per cent.). In natural stands the MSD was increased an average of 13 percent (9 to 20 percent). With careful layout of the skid trails, adequate training of woods crews, and proper forestry supervision, biomass harvesting can achieve silvicultural objectives with minimal damage to the forest floor or the residual stand. Whole tree logging operations appear to be one of the most useful and important silvicultural techniques available to the forest manager to release and upgrade many stands which are from 30 to 50 years old. These forests will produce the quality timber of the future. THE MAST YARD BEFORE THE MAST YARD AFTER 9 2. Recreation Areas Recreational use of forests in the Northeast is heavy. Areas adjacent to roads, streams, rivers and lakes tend to be good timber growing sites, as well as attractive for recreation. Harvesting near these areas has been limited because of the perceived unsightliness of logging residues and suspected resource damage. Biomass harvesting at Bear Brook State Park pleased park officials because of the absence of slash. This is one of the most heavily used recreational facilities in the state. Biomass harvesting may reduce the conflict be tween recreational and timber growing uses of the forest. 3. Site Conversion Site clearing to convert forest to field is again occurring in New Hampshire. The cost to cut and dispose of the material on an acre of land can be as high as $1,200. With biomass harvesting, 60 to 100 tons per acre of fiber may be removed. Windrowing and burning are then unnecessary. The income from an operation could return enough money to the landowner to pay for removing stumps and buying seed. Obviously, a market for chips must be available, and the site must have trees of sufficient size and volume to justify a biomass operation. 4. Stand Establishment Closely related to site conversion is clearcutting poor forest stands to establish a more valuable stand of trees. Abandoned farmland and woodlands "high-graded" in past logging may have too few trees of crop quality to justify long term management. On good sites, starting a new forest may be the best solution. Removing the present stand and planting, or allowing natural regeneration, provides the landowner an op portunity to maximize the potential of the site and achieve ownership objectives. Three stands were harvested in this study for stand conversion. 5. Wildlife Habitat Too often wildlife habitat is the forgotten cousin of forest management. Creating or enhancing habitat has had no direct economic benefit to the landowner. Biomass harvesting may change that. Creating small clearings in the forest, releasing favored food sources, and encouraging certain tree species enhance wildlife habitat. A ten-acre wildlife cut, at Hay Memorial Forest, was part of this project. Additional cost studies are needed, but the use of biomass harvesting as a tool in wildlife management appears economically feasible. More importantly, wildlife habitat improvements can be incorporated in planning biomass operations to achieve silvicultural, economic and habitat objectives. 6. Watershed Improvement Watershed improvements were not a part of this project; however, biomass harvesting within watersheds was observed. The objective of watershed management is to increase water volume without reducing water quality. The manager achieves this by creating openings in the forest to reduce transpiration losses and to pre vent interception of rain by the forest canopy. Biomass harvesting assures that slash does not add impurities to the water or intercept rain. The overstocked plantations on many watersheds can be thinned economically with biomass harvesting. The Massachusetts Metropolitan District Commission has been a leader in this activity, using biomass harvesting and chipping to thin red pine plantations at Quabbin Reservoir. 10 B. EQUIPMENT Essential to a successful logging operation is the proper blend of equipment. With the proper balance comes maximum efficiency from the equipment and high productivity for each worker. Whole tree harvesting operations require a significant amount of planning. Terrain, the size of the tract, the size of the trees, and the volume of material to be harvested will affect the size and type of equipment to be used. 1. Feller Bunchers Although chippers determine the blend of equipment in a biomass operation and can represent the highest capital investment in a whole tree operation, the feller buncher is the key to a successful mechanized harvesting operation, and the proper selection of this equipment is the key to adequate balance. Items such as the density of stands to be operated, the size of trees to be sheared, the terrain to be worked in, and the species composition are important factors to consider in the decision of which machine to purchase. The removal of whole trees can increase the potential for damage to the residual stand. Feller bunchers greatly reduce this potential. Damage to crowns and stems during felling is less in mechanized operations since the tree is not allowed to fall free, but is directed and placed in skid trails or in-locations generally free of residual crop trees. A feller buncher is important in making whole tree operations economical and in keeping damage to a minimum. The feller buncher gathers the trees for a hitch and lays them in one spot near the skid trail. This limits the travel of the skidder to the skid roads, reducing damage to residual trees. A FELLER BUNCHER SHEARS OFF A SMALL PINE DURING THINNING 11 2. Chippers The choice of a chipper is another important equipment decision a contractor makes for a whole tree harvesting operation. Chippers are extremely expensive and can represent one-half of the total capital output for an operation, excluding tractors and vans. The significant factors in choosing a chipper are: • size of material to be chipped • volume per day to be processed • present equipment to compliment (skidders, shears, etc.) • species composition of forest If a chipper is not adequate for the volume, tree size and species harvested, unwarranted delays and ineffi ciency will develop in the operation. A chipper too small to handle the flow (capacity) of the material to be processed will create a bottleneck. If the chipper capacity is exceeded too often, down time will plague the operation. In this study most of the chippers experienced significant idle time. Contractors did not stockpile material ahead for the chipper, usually because of limited yarding space. Markets that changed weekly further discouraged stockpiling. A CHIPPER IN ACTION C. ESTIMATING BIOMASS YIELD In estimating biomass yields, only the trees removed were weighed. The Basal Area: Weight Table (Appen dix E) gives the most accurate results when considering stands or removals in the range of 35 to 60 square feet of basal area per acre. When the basal area exceeds 60 square feet per acre, the table underestimates weight per acre. 12 When the basal area exceeds 60 square feet per acre, the following steps can be used in conjunction with the table to estimate weight: 1. Divide the measured basal area by 2. 2. Find the weight corresponding to the halved basal area in the biomass weight table. 3. Multiply the weight by 2. Example Measured Basal Area: 120 sq. feet per acre 1. 120 sq. ft./ A ~ 2 = 60 sq. ft./ A 2. 60 sq. ft./ A = 61 tons/A (from the table) 3. (61 tons/A) (2) = 122 tons/A If basal areas exceed 130 square feet per acre the same process is used, but 3 is used instead of 2 in the first and last steps. This is a rule of thumb only! The weights determined for above ground fiber are lower than estimates from previous studies. In this study branches and limbs from sawlogs and pulpwood were not chipped, and therefore not included in the estimated weights. This is comparable to conditions in commercial operations, and therefore may be more realistic than higher estimates. It should be noted that there are no species distinctions in the weight table. The data were derived from a variety of stands with different species compositions. D. TRAINING AND SUPERVISION Although not a major objective in the original proposal, training and supervision of forest managers is a crucial part of mechanized biomass harvesting operations. Proper layout of landing areas and skid roads re quires additional time of the forester. Proper alignment of skid trails and the way these skid trails are tied into the main landing area are the most significant items in assuring minimal residual stand damage. Twenty to forty hours of training, depending on the individual's experience, is adequate to acquaint the forester with proper skid-trail layout and marking for biomass operations to minimize damage and maximize production. The forester must also understand the dynamics of the equipment being used and the markets available. Without knowledge and experience in these aspects of whole tree operations, silvicultural and economic goals may not be met. One question raised by the foresters was the amount of time required to mark and supervise a stand for thinning. As part of the project, detailed records were kept on the marking and supervision of some opera tions (see Appendix I). Marking and road layout varied from 22.8 to 36 tons per hour with an average of 29 tons per hour. Supervision ranged from 39.3 to 60.3 tons per hour with an average of 42 tons per hour. On the average for each gallon of paint used, 130 tons of fiber was marked. Travel time to and from the job was not included. Appendix I shows that lot size determined the cost per unit of production. E. PRODUCER CONSIDERATIONS 1. Economics Logging contractors, like forest managers, needed time to adjust to the complexity of biomass harvesting. Knowledge of existing markets is of vital importance for a successful whole tree harvesting operation. Unlike saw log market conditionsi where the contractor can generally switch from one sawmill to another, transition 13 from one whole tree chip market to another is not easy, and in many instances may be impossible. The need for additional markets to allow the contractor to produce chips on a continual basis cannot be overstressed. Presently there is an abundance of whole tree chips in the region. Whole tree, mechanized operations require a minimum capital investment of $75,000 to produce 50 tons per day. A new mechanized system to produce 125 tons per day would cost $250,000 for a moderate-sized chipper, a feller buncher, and at least one grapple skidder. Costs vary considerably; however, costs to fell, skid and chip were approximately $12/ton. This price does not include trucking to the various markets ($2 per loaded mile), stumpage payments ($0.35 to $1/ton), marking paint ($0.07 to $0.16/ton}, or supervision costs ($0.40 to $0.75/ton). 2. Skid Road Layout The layout of the skid road system is the most important factor in limiting damage to the residual stand in a biomass harvest. In a managed woodlot, the skid roads should be laid out so that they are useable throughout the life of the stand. GRAPPLE SKIDDER HAULING LOAD Topography is a major influence on skid road layout. Other considerations are stand density, the type of feller buncher used, and the orientation of the landing and chipper to the road system. Depending on topography, a biomass harvest will have at least one main skid road to serve a lateral road system. The more varied the terrain, the more main skid roads and lateral road systems are needed. Lateral roads feed into the main skid road and usually run parallel to each other anywhere from 45 to 70 feet apart, depending upon stand density. Denser stands require closer roads to minimize the feller buncher travel within the stand. The lateral roads should enter the main skid road at an obtuse angle to prevent excess damage to the trees along the skid road as well as to prevent breakage of the whole trees being skidded out. Usually, only one or two "bump trees" were needed at each intersection. 14 With the exception of the trails for the TimbCo feller buncher, which ran straight up and down the slopes, lateral roads ran parallel to the contour. Although the roads parallel to the contour allowed the fell er bunchers to operate effectively, trees on the downhill side sustained some damage from skidding. Unless the landing was large, as in the integrated operations, most main roads in the chipping-only opera tions fed directly to the chipper. This required some skid roads to circle the landing in order to enter the land ing with the stems facing the chipper in the proper direction. Skid road layout required additional forester time as all roads were marked with paint (rather than flags which are difficult to follow when operating) to make their location easier for the fell er buncher operator to find and clear, especially at intersections where proper layout is critical. However, this time can be considered well spent as it helps minimize damage to the residual stand and almost eliminates all future needs for skid road layout. 3. Landing Size Whole tree harvesting and chipping systems are complex, and several variables determine landing size. Among these variables are: terrain, turning radius of chip vans, present road layout, number of forest pro ducts to be produced, number of skidders on the operation, loading of products on trucks, and planning for Murphy's Law. In addition, personnel safety, the freedom of each landing operation to function without in terference from another operation, room to stockpile products, and space to allow all operations to function together safely are important characteristics. In several study areas a number of products were produced. The Hopkinton Town Forest had a breakout of seven products; the N.H.T.O.A. (Leadbeater) Lot had five products; the Livermore State Forest seven products; Bear Brook #5 four products; and Franconia Timber Company six products. Three Caterpillar 518 skidders, one John Deere 544 articulated front-end loader and a Morbark Model 18 chipper were used in most of these areas. Most hitches were taken to the Husky loader where the yardman cut out logs and pulpwood. The loader then sorted logs and pulp to one location and tops and other chip material to another location. The John Deere front-end loader would then bring logs and pulp to their appropriate location for loading, and chippable material to the chipper. This system may require three-quarters of an acre. Figure 2 il lustrates a recommended landing for the mode of operation employed. 120' ao' / SKID ROAD / so' .. TRUCK ROAD ... _ . - I -- - LOG DECKING --~ I t1,,, 160 1 100' ~ BS8 CHIPPING SORTING 200' FIGURE 2. LANDING CONFIGURATION 15 Landing size can be reduced if the chip vans are not required to turn within the landing area. Two possible alternatives are: one, a landing area located on an existing road where the trailers can turn on the existing road; or two, a landing located on an interior road system where a loop is utilized rather than a turn. In some operations where only one or two products are produced, yard space can be reduced to as small as 114 of an acre. Finally, landing size can be reduced to an extremely small area, when high production levels are not re quired and chip vans can be loaded from existing roadways without requiring the van to turn around. At two Bear Brook locations, #2 and #3, the crew consisted of two people, a Morbark Model 12 chipper, a John Deere 450 fell er buncher, and a Clark cable skidder. The average daily production was about 50 tons per day with limited sawlog production. On one location the contractor was able to back his trailer in from the main highway, and on the other the van was turned using a loop arrangement on an existing road system. Bear Brook #2 required a landing area of about 5,000 square feet, and Bear Brook #3 2,000 square feet. 4. Damage Damage to residual stems from whole tree operations can be minimal. Proper layout and alignment of skid trails can reduce damage significantly. Damage to residual stems will occur during any removal operation; the extent of the damage will be proportional to the amount of preparation and supervision an operation receives. Also the experience and attitude of the contractor will reduce the amount of damage in whole tree operations. Damage is affected more by operational conditions than density. The steeper and rockier the terrain, the greater the damage. 5. Transportation Generally contractors have acquired or contracted a fleet of tractors and vans to assure uniform flow of materials from landing to market. The major problems for the producer and hauler when they are separate entities is a constant supply of fiber to transport. Weather, equipment breakdown, market interruptions, stand characteristics and operational problems make an average daily quota difficult to achieve. A producer must also address the distance to markets. Many of the contractors in the study were shipping chips to markets up to 100 miles away. This occurred because local markets, within a 35 to 40 mile trucking distance, could not always purchase the volume of wood the contractor produced. Because chips are a low value product, a contractor should attempt to keep the trucking distance within a 35 to 40 mile radius. Finally, chip vans need a better road system for off-the-road hauling. Turning radius, grades, and road surface material need to be designed to allow vans to operate freely without interruptions to the harvesting operation. Contractors and land managers unfamiliar with tractor trailer hauling need to familiarize themselves with the associated problems. F. ANNUAL GROWTH OF THE RESOURCE One of the objectives of the study was to estimate annual volume growth (tons). This information should enable planners to assess the impact of proposed energy plants fueled on whole tree chips. Although an ade quate supply of material is available at the present, the supply IO and 20 years hence should be considered now. To obtain this information, data on commercial forest land and stand size classes in the state are impor tant. Growth data from this and other studies (see Appendix H) can be used to project growth, suggesting the potential of biomass fuel in the future. Annual growth estimates are considered equivalent to the amount of material that can be harvested each year without degrading the resource. The average annual growth from seven New Hampshire stands (Appen dix H) was 3.37 tons per acre. 16 Using an 80-year rotation (the time from seedling to harvest), the annual amount of chip material pro duced each year is 2.0 tons/acre/year. This estimate is based on the following rationale. During the first 25 years all fiber growth is considered biomass. In the next 35 years half of the fiber growth is considered biomass, the other half either pulpwood or sawlogs. In the remaining 20 years, three quarters of the fiber is pulpwood and sawlogs and a quarter is biomass. Whole tree chips available during an 80-year rotation: 25 years@ 3.37 tons/acre/year = 84.25 tons 35 years@ 3.37 tons/acre/year = 58.98 tons 2 20 years@ 3.37 tons/acre/year = 18.65 tons 4 Average over 80 years 160.075 = 2.00 tons/acre/year 80 It should be noted that 2.0 tons/acre/year is a conservative average for an 80-year period, based on several timber types. The average annual growth in a red pine plantation, by contrast, averaged 4.72 tons/acre/year. An estimate of the number of acres of forest land is needed to make this per acre growth meaningful. Ac cording to the Forest Resources of New Hampshire (USDA Forest Service, NE-43) there are 3.170 million acres of commercial forest land in New Hampshire's seven southern counties and Grafton County•. Slope, ground conditions, timber size, access, legal restrictions, site productivity, and landowner attitudes make much of the land unavailable for whole tree harvesting. Determining the amount of land available is a study in itself, but for this discussion half the commercial forest land, or 1.585 million acres, will be considered available (see Table 1). Of the available acres, about 32 percent or approximately 510,000 acres are in pole timber. These are the stands in which whole tree harvesting has the greatest potential; these stands are in the greatest need of timber stand improvement. Annually, then, pole timber stands available for whole tree harvest are producing 1.02 million tons of chip material. In addition, a reservoir of some 35 tons per acre (a total of 17.85 million tons for the 510,000 acres) is available immediately from initial thinning in these stands when 25 to 35 percent of the basal area is removed. The available land not in pole timber (1.075 million acres) has or will have the potential to produce whole tree chips, too. Assuming 35 tons per acre in an initial harvest on these acres, an additional 37.675 million tons are available. Table l, Estimated Acreage, Growth and Fuelwood Reserve, summarizes the calculations for these estimates. •while this data is from 1973, little change has occurred to alter the numbers significantly. 17 TRAILER VAN BEING UNLOADED 18 TABLE 1 Estimated Acreage, Growth and Fuelwood Reserve in Tons ACRES Total number of commercial forest acres (8 counties) 3.170 million "Available" acres (.50 of total) 1.585 million *Pole timber acres "available" .510 million *Other acres "available" 1.075 million 1.585 million GROWTH Growth/acre/year of chips 2.0 tons A. Available pole timber growth 1.020 million (2 tons x .510 million acres) B. Available growth on other acres 2.150 million (2 tons x 1.075 million acres) C. Total available growth/year 3.170 million PRESENT RESERVE Reserve per acre 35.0 tons Reserve on available pole timber acres 17 .850 million (35 tons x .50 million acres) Reserve on other available acres 37.625 million (35 tons x 1.075 million acres) TOTAL CHIP RESERVE 55.475 million 19 VI CONCLUSIONS A national priority for the last decade has been to decrease the United States' dependence on foreign oil. State and local governments plus private industry are continually looking for alternative energy sources, not only to reduce dependency on oil, but also to reduce costs. It is feasible to meet these goals in the Northeast by using woody biomass as a fuel. In New Hampshire there is a reservoir of fiber, most of which is presently either left in the woods as slash, or in young pole-size stands. Many of these pole-size stands are the future forests, but their full potential can only be realized if some woodland improvement can be done to insure maximum growth is placed on the crop trees. Whole tree mechanized harvesting is a viable and beneficial silvicultural tool. Its application to thinning these potentially valuable pole-size stands cannot be over-emphasized. This method of harvesting can also be used in other forest and land management applications such as, watershed management, wildlife improve ment, site conversion, replanting, and recreation. Whole tree operations can also be integrated into existing harvesting systems, while complimenting product utilization. Expensive and, at times questionable, cost-share programs have not always achieved the results foresters have desired. Only the development of markets able to accept large volumes of fiber on a continual basis can solve the problem. In essence, the existence of a large, low-grade fiber base exists without the marketplace to use it. The creation of jobs is always a goal of government, especially for semi-skilled workers. There are many young people who desire employment in a woods environment, but all too often find opportunities limited in the field. Wood chips as fuel could be a solution to some of these problems. Already many facilities, large and small, in the United States are burning wood. The New Hampshire Biomass Study has shown that mechanized biomass harvesting operations are a feasible silvicultural tool. A review of the data shows an ample supply of fuel in our forests. This fuel, through careful forest management practices, need not come from the present or future supply of more valuable forest products. Good planning techniques, using the skills, knowledge and ability of both public and private individuals,can assure excessive demand is not created. Reasonable care can assure that adequate supplies are available at competitive prices. Certainly all oil and outside energy sources cannot be replaced by wood, but in southern New Hampshire a goal of displacing fossil fuels with a minimum of two million tons of wood chips annually should be considered. This goal would replace two million barrels of fuel oil. Besides the replacement of oil or some other non-renewable fuel, the improvement to our forest would be a major accomplishment. As noted before, timely and proper silvicultural improvement will aid the forest and the general economy 20 and 40 years from now. Finally the creation of new jobs cannot be overemphasized. A mechanized operation capable of producing an average of 20,000 tons per year will employ at least three people, not including truck drivers, foremen, and supervisory personnel. If two million tons of chips are produced annually, an additional direct employment of between 400 and 500 people is possible. In addition, the Chamber of Commerce estimates that 68 non manufacturing jobs are created for every 100 industrial jobs*. Monies generated through using wood as a fuel are subsequently recycled within the state or region. The dollars that were spent to purchase oil or coal could stay within the borders of the region and benefit the area directly. The fiber is there; the need is there; the technology to bum the fiber is there. A program to sell biomass harvesting is not there! With this in mind, the following recommendations are made. *Chamber of Commerce of the United States, 1973. What new jobs mean to a community. Prepared and distributed by Center for Leadership Dev., Chamber of Commerce of United States, Washington, D.C. 20 FELLER BUNCHER THINNING HARDWOOD FOREST VII RECOMMENDATIONS A. Training forest resource managers is recommended as part of a continuing education program. This program should be a joint effort of federal, state and private groups. Workshops consisting of both classroom and field experience would best achieve this goal. The application of biomass harvesting in day-to day management decisions should be considered. The design and layout of an operation should be included in the workshop. B. Additional data collection of weight yields from various harvesting operations is needed to provide bet ter estimates of expected yields from a variety of timber types and age classes. C. A program to educate woodland owners to the total benefit of whole tree operations is suggested. This could include, but not be limited to: financial gains, stand improvement, and nutrient loss. D. Legislators and other decision makers should be informed of the potential of biomass as a fuel. Issues such as economic benefit to the state, fossil fuel replacement, woodland improvement, and employment benefits should be addressed. E. An ongoing program for contractors is needed. Information on the complexities of investing in whole tree harvesting equipment should be provided. The advantages and pitfalls of mechanized harvesting and on site chipping should be addressed. F. No clearly defined adverse effects on nutrient loss can be attributed to whole tree removal on average or above average sites. However, available information on nutrient loss, when only a portion of the forest is removed, is limited. Continued study of this important concern is recommended. G. The stands treated in this project should be monitored to document the growth and silvicultural impacts of harvesting over time. 21 H. In order for mechanized, whole tree operations to have significant impact on our forests, markets for whole chips must be improved. Most existing markets are beyond a profitable trucking radius (40 to 50 miles). I. A comprehensive data base of the potential total forest fuel resources and annual forest weight in crements (growth) is needed for state and regional planning agencies. J. If demand is to increase, industrial users, whether private or public, must be both educated and en couraged to explore and use wood chips as an alternative energy source. An effort of those agencies and in dividuals involved in providing the direction needed to move a statewide and regional program forward is highly recommended. Available within the state and region are information, data, expertise, and ongoing facilities to demonstrate the application of wood as fuel. To promote biomass harvesting and to implement the other recommendations, an ad hoc committee should be formed. This group should include agencies and individuals from both private and public sectors in the following areas: A. Resource Base B. Available technology on wood fuel systems C. Conversion systems (retrofitting) D. Delivery systems and schedules E. Economic benefits (savings from fossil fuel replacement) F. Emission control benefits G. Financial requirements and assistance H. Ecosystem monitoring This group can provide continuity and coordination to assure that the findings of this study are utilized and expanded to benefit New Hampshire's forests and its owners. 22 APPENDIX A Descriptions of the Study Areas and Logging Systems MASTYARD#l Lot Location: Mast Yard State Forest, Concord and Hopkinton Acreage: 13.6 Age: 40 years Species: Red pine plantation History: Thinned twice Ground Conditions: Soils sandy, well drained. Topography flat, generally free of stones. Silvicultural Objectives: Reduce basal area by thinning out smaller trees and poor quality trees. Logging System: Chainsaw felling 2 Caterpillar 518 cable skidders Morback Model 550 chipper Comments: This site was chosen because of the larger diameter and height of the trees compared to other stands. Approximately 31 percent of the basal area (46 sq. ft./ acre) was removed. Trees were utilized to a seven inch top diameter for sawlogs. No market was available for pulpwood. About 54 percent of the total weight of wood removed was sawlogs, 46 percent chips. The logging crew was experienced, but had not previously been involved in whole tree chipping. MASTYARD#l Lot Location: Mast Yard State Forest, Concord and Hopkinton Acreage: 5.7 Age: 42 years Species: White pine, natural and planted History: The natural white pine outgrew the planted, some weevil damage in larger diameter trees. Stand had never been thinned. Ground Conditions: Soils sandy, well drained. Topography flat, generally free of stones. Silvicultural Objectives: Remove poor quality trees and reduce the basal area to an acceptable level, allowing crop trees room to grow. Logging System: Same as Mast Yard # 1 Comments: The natural pine with large branches and weevil damage were removed in logging. A portion of the smaller, planted trees were also cut. The basal area was reduced from 181 sq. ft./acre to 110 sq. ft./acre. 23 MASTYARD#J Lot Location: Mast Yard State Forest, Concord and Hopkinton Acreage: 38.6 Age: 45 years Species: White pine plantation History: Chemically thinned in the past; sections were pruned. Ground Conditions: Soils sandy, well drained. Topography flat, generally free of stones. Sllvicultural Objectives: Reduction of stocking level, release of pruned crop trees, removal of poor quality and low vigor trees. Logging System: Chainsaw felling 3 Caterpillar grapple skidders 1 John Deere 540 loader Morback Model 550 chipper Comments: This stand is an excellent pine plantation, and although thinned before, it had a high basal area (158 sq. ft.). Almost 42 percent of the basal area (66 sq. ft./acre) was removed. Traditional commercial methods for thinning the stand were not economical. MASTYARD#4 Lot Location: Mast Yard State Forest, Concord and Hopkinton Acreage: 8.0 Age: 45 years Species: White pine plantation History: Some chemical thinning and some pruning. Ground Conditions: Soils sandy, well drained. Topography flat, generally free of stones. SUvicultural Objectives: Remove large, poor quality trees. Release better quality co-dominant and some intermediate stems. Logging System: In addition to the equipment used in Mast Yard #1 - #3, a non-directional shear was tested on a portion of the stand. Comments: Since the shear's use was for trial purposes only, and the operators were inexperienced, no production data was recorded. 24 MASTYARD#5 Lot Location: Mast Yard State Forest, Concord and Hopkinton Acreage: 10.5 Age: 45 years Species: White pine plantation History: Lightly thinned in sections, some of it chemically. Ground Conditions: Soils sandy, well drained. Topography flat, generally free of stones. Silvicultural Objectives: Thin stand, release pruned trees, remove low vigor, poor quality trees. Logging System: 1 Melroe Bobcat feller buncher 1 John Deere grapple skidder 1 Tirnberjack grapple skidder 1 Trelan Model 18 chipper Comments: This was the first test of a mechanized system, using a feller buncher and grapple skidder. The contractor was a land clearer who had done few marked timber sales. HOPKINTON TOWN FOREST (GOULD FOREST) Lot Location: Hopkinton Town Forest, Hopkinton Acreage: 38 Age: 32-90 years Species: Area #1 - White pine plantation Area #2 - Mixed pine, hemlock and hardwood History: Pine planted about 45 years ago. Mixed type cut heavily 60 years ago. Ground Conditions: Flat to gently rolling, 0 to 9 percent slope. Sandy soil, no rocks. Silvicultural Objectives: Area #1 - Thin plantation, remove about 1/3 of basal area. Area #2 - Remove portion of overstory and most of understory to establish white pine in understory. Logging System: 1 Morbell feller buncher 3 Caterpillar 518 cable skidders 1 John Deere front-end loader 1 Husky Model log loader Comments: The production and stand data for the two areas were combined on this lot. Most of the poor quality understory was removed; the quality overstory remains. Seven different forest products were removed in this integrated operation. 25 N.H.T.O.A. (LEADBEATER) Lot Location: Hopkinton Acreage: 13.5 Age: 70 years Species: Mixed hardwood, large scattered white pine History: Chestnut blight removed that species about 80 years ago. There was con siderable blowdown from the 1938 hurricane. Ground Conditions: 3 to 15 percent slope, generally free of stones and ledge, dry. Silvicultural Objectives: Remove portion of white pine; weed and thin the hardwoods. Logging System: 1 Morbell feller buncher 3 Caterpillar 518 grapple skidders 1 John Deere front-end loader 1 Husky log loader Comments: The contractor conducted an integrated operation utilizing sawlogs, firewood and chips. MASTYARD#6 Lot Location: Mast Yard State Forest, Concord and Hopkinton Acreage: 8.8 Age: 48 years Species: Red pine plantation History: Thinned twice Ground Conditions: Flat, smooth; sandy soil. Silvicultural Objectives: Release crop trees, establish white pine understory. Logging System: Chainsaw felling 2 Caterpillar 518 cable skidders 1 John Deere model front-end loader 1 Morback Model 550 chipper Comments: Mast Yard #6 and #7 are part of the same red pine plantation. Conven tional equipment was used on Mast Yard #6; a mechanized system was employed on #7. The skidding distances were slightly shorter on #6. Damage to the residual stand was minimal. This crew was experienced in biomass operations and required little supervision. 26 MASTYARD#7 Lot Location: Mast Yard State Forest, Concord and Hopkinton Acreage: 11 Age: 48 years Species: Red pine plantation History: Thinned twice Ground Conditions: Flat, smooth and sandy. Silvicultural Objectives: Release crop trees, establish white pine understory. Logging System: 1 Melroe Bobcat 2 Model 518 grapple skidders 1 Morback Model #20 chipper Comments: There was less damage to the residual stand with this mechanized system than in stand #6. The feller buncher worked one and a half days before the grapple skidders arrived, and maintained a stockpile of trees to be yarded. LIVERMORE STATE FOREST Lot Location: Campton-Holderness Acreage: 24 Age: even aged, 90 + years. Species: White pine overstory; red oak, hemlock, white birch understory. History: Thinned once, limited timber stand improvements in 1966. Ground Conditions: Sandy, well drained soils; slope varies 5-25 percent. Silvicultural Objectives: Remove low vigor and poor quality trees, especially from the understory. Eventually reproduce pine in a shelterwood cut. Logging System: Chainsaw felling 3 Caterpillar Model 518 cable skidders 1 John Deere model front-end loader 1 Barko model loader 1 Morback Model 550 chipper Comments: This operation removed softwood sawlogs, hardwood pulp, white birch bolts, firewood and chips. 27 BLAIR STATE FOREST #1 Lot Location: Campton Acreage: 16.2 Age: Overstory 80-90 years, understory 10 years Species: Red oak, some white pine in the canopy and understory. History: Some white pine removed previously. Ground Conditions: Flat and smooth. Silvicultural Objectives: Remove oak infected with strommlar canker; leave best trees for final cut; leave white pine to reseed; protect white pine in understory. Logging System: Chainsaw felling 2 Caterpillar 518 cable skidders 1 Model 550 chipper Comments: Damage to understory trees was minimized by not skidding large crowns. Crowns were yarded in areas without significant reproduction. BLAIR STATE FOREST #2 Lot Location: Campton Acreage: 9.0 Age: 50 years Species: White pine plantation History: Never thinned, limited amount of timber stand improvement, some pruning of crop trees. Ground Conditions: Flat to about 18 percent slope. Silvicultural Objectives: Improve stand quality, reduce density, regenerate pine. Logging System: Chainsaw felling 2 Caterpillar 518 cable skidders 1 Morback Model 550 chipper Comments: This stand was adjacent to Blair #1, so the contractor had no moving costs for equipment. The crew was experienced and required limited supervi sion. There was little damage to residual trees, even though harvesting oc curred in mid-May when the bark is easily damaged. 28 FRANCONIA TIMBER COMPANY (FfC) Lot Location: Dorchester Acreage: 21.5 Age: 80 years Species: White pine, red spruce, balsam fir, red maple. History: Abandoned farm; light intermediate cut 30 years ago, heavier cut six years ago. Ground Conditions: Good site, poorly drained. Silvicultural Objectives: Conversion, replant with white pine. Logging System: Chainsaw felling 3 Caterpillar 518 cable skidders 1 Morback Model 550 chipper Comments: All trees greater than two inches in diameter were cut. Since the majority of the logging residue was removed in skidding, no further site preparation was necessary prior to planting. The owner plans further conversion on similar sites. HAY MEMORIAL FOREST Lot Location: Newbury Acreage: 15.0 Age: 45 years Species: Mixed hardwood, pole sized History: Blowdown during the 1938 hurricane leaving a few large remnants; ice, snow and insect damage. Ground Conditions: \ Sloping, rocky terrain (3 to 15 percent slope) Silvicultural Objectives: Weed and thin; remove trees of poor form and vigor; release crop trees. Logging System: 1 Melroe Bobcat 3 Caterpillar Model 518 grapple skidders 1 Morback Model #20 chipper Comments: This stand is a pole-sized hardwood forest, representative of many of the young hardwood forests in the state. 29 HAY MEMORIAL FOREST - WILDLIFE AREA Lot Location: Newbury Acreage: 10 Age: variable, 5 to 50 years Species: White pine, patches of aspen, red maple, hemlock, apple trees, grey birch. History: Abandoned field and orchard. Ground Conditions: Rock-free, flat Silvicultural Objectives: Diversify wildlife habitat; increase berry production, release apple trees, en courage aspen suckers, clear drainage way. Logging System: 1 Melroe Bobcat 3 Caterpillar Model 518 grapple skidders 1 Morback Model #20 chipper Comments: Seven patches were cleared or expanded, totalling 2.5 acres. The patches were irregular to create habitat with a variety of food and shelter, com plimenting the surrounding forest types and diversifying wildlife oppor tunities. BEAR BROOK#l Lot Location: Bear Brook State Forest, Allenstown Acreage: 17.3 Age: 47 years Species: Red pine plantation History: Thinned fifteen years ago. Ground Conditions: Slope is flat to moderate (3 - 15 percent), free of stone and ledge. Silvicultural Objectives: Reduce stocking in two operations within a five year period. Maintain aesthetics. Logging System: 1 Melroe Bobcat 1 John Deere Model 540 grapple skidder 1 Timberjack 1 Morback Model #2 chipper Comments: This operation was undertaken partially to monitor the effect of slope on the operation of a Bobcat fell er buncher. 30 BEAR BROOK #2 Lot Location: Bear Brook State Forest, Allenstown Acreage: 10.5 Age: 47 years Species: Red pine plantation History: Thinned 10 to 15 years ago. Ground Conditions: Free of rock, slope 0 to 18 percent. Silvicultural Objectives: Release dominant and co-dominant crop trees with minimal logging damage. Logging System: 2 Chainsaws 1 Morback Model 12 chipper 1 John Deere Model 450 bulldozer with feller buncher 1 Clark Ranger cable skidder, Model 644B Comments: This is the same plantation as Bear Brook #1. This operation tested the capability of the bulldozer/feller buncher, and the small chipper. BEAR BROOK#3 Lot Location: Bear Brook State Forest, Allenstown Acreage: 16 Age: 48 years Species: Red and white pine plantation History: Chemically thinned. Ground Conditions: Slope 0 to 27 percent, mostly less than 10 percent. Silvicultural Objectives: Release crop trees, reduce basal area, comparison of harvesting systems. Logging System: 2 Chainsaws 1 John Deere 450 Bulldozer with shear 1 Clark 644-B cable skidder 1 Morback Model 12 chipper Comments: Bear Brook #3-#5 were used for public demonstrations for legislators, loggers, foresters and other interested people. 31 BEAR BROOK#4 Lot Location: Bear Brook State Forest, Allenstown Acreage: 28 Age: Stand A. 50 years Stand B. 55 years Stand C. 55 years Species: Stand A. White pine plantation/pole-size hardwoods Stand B. Mixed pole-size hardwoods Stand C. Mixed white pine, pole-size hardwoods History: Stand A. Planted about 50 years ago, some firewood in hardwood area Stand B. Logged heavily about 60 years ago followed by fire; considerable gypsy moth damage in white oak and aspen Stand C. Same as for Stand B Ground Conditions: Stand A. Flat to moderately steep, 0 to 31 percent Stand B. Steep to very steep, 15 to 51 percent, some rock Stand C. Moderately steep to steep, 15 to 38 percent SiJvicultural Objectives: Stand A. Remove heavily weeviled white pine and defoliated hardwoods. Stand B. Remove defoliated hardwoods and low quality trees. Stand C. Remove most of the white pine, and all defoliated hardwoods. Logging System: Morbell fell er bunch er TimbCo feller buncher Caterpillar Model 518 cable skidders Morbark Model 22 chipper Comments: The principal objectives in these three study areas were to study the effec tiveness of the TimbCo feller buncher in thinning densely stocked, pole-size stands, and to assess how well the machine operates on steep ground. The Morbell feller buncher was used in one area of the white pine plantation (Stand A). 32 BEAR BROOK#5 Lot Location: Bear Brook State Forest, Allenstown Acreage: 18 Age: 55 years Species: Red and white oak, aspen, and red maple. History: Severely defoliated by gypsy moth in 1981 and 1982. Ground Conditions: Slope 0 to 30 percent, free of rock, portions wet. Silvicultural Objectives: Salvage dying trees, thin and release quality hardwoods. Logging System: 1 Melroe Bobcat fell er buncher 2 Caterpillar 518 grapple skidders 1 Morbark Model 20 chipper Comments: An unusual rainy season and the wetness of the site halted this job. MONTGOMERY (NHTOA) Lot Location: Bradford Acreage: 4.1 Age: 38 years Species: White pine. History: Old field converted to white pine. Never logged or thinned. Ground Conditions: Flat, no stones Silvicultural Objectives: Site conversion Logging System: 1 Morbell feller buncher 2 Caterpillar 518 grapple skidders 1 Precision Model 58 chipper Comments: The landowner wanted this four-acre site converted to a field. 33 1 APPENDIXB STAND DATA LOTNAME/ Mast Yard Mat Yard Mast Yard Mast Yard Mast Yard Gould Leadbesler Masi Yard Mal Yard lliermOft NUMBER #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Fonst (N.H.T.O.A.) #6 #7 FORFST W.P. Mind Mixed Mind TYPE R.P.P. Nat. Stnd W.P.P. W.P.P. W.P.P. Sft/Hdwd Hardwood R.P.P. R.P.P. Sft/Hdwd ACREAGE 13.6 5.7 38.6 8.0 10.5 36.5 13.5 8.8 11.0 24.0 BASAL AREA/ ACRE TOTAL 145.0 180.8 158.5 138.3 146.7 169.3 98.9 160.0 159.0 162.0 Trees Cut 46.2 71.l 66.1 42.5 35.8 61.9 34.8 48.0 49.0 67.0 Residual 98.8 109.7 92.4 98.3 110.9 107.4 64.1 112.0 110.0 95.0 TREES/ACRE TOTAL 228.5 451.S 456.8 324.2 396.8 347.5 210.4 291.0 285.0 243.0 Trees Cut 78.0 147.1 231.8 87.4 111.l 156.5 94.7 113.0 113.0 126.0 Residual 150.5 303.9 225.0 235.9 285.6 191.0 115.7 165.0 172.0 117.0 MEAN STAND DIAMETER TOTAL 10.8 8.5 8.0 8.8 8.2 9.8 9.3 10.0 10.1 11.0 Trees Cut 10.4 9.4 7.2 9.3 7.7 9.4 8.2 8.3 8.9 9.8 Residual 11.0 8.1 8.3 8.7 8.4 9.9 10.1 11.1 10.8 12.2 AVERAGE TREE HEIGHT TOTAL 64.8 65.0 52.9 51.2 53.4 55.7 62.3 64.7 59.2 68.0 Trees Cut 63.5 • • • • • 58.5 64.7 59.2 62.0 Residual 65.4 • • • • • 64.6 64.7 60.1 72.0 TONS HARVESTED/ ACRE Saw logs/ Cordwood 33.4 22.5 8.5 12.1 12.3 21.11 20.37 16.9 6.62 26.2 Chips 28.7 34.5 38.6 34.9 36.2 36.77 21.36 34.5 43.81 45.5 TOTAL 62.1 57.0 47.1 47.0 48.5 57.88 41.37 51.4 50.43 71.7 34 APPENDIX B STAND DATA WTNAME/ Blair Blair S.P.N.H.F. Bar Brook Bear Brook Bear Brook Bear Brook Bear Brook Moa11omery NUMBER #1 #2 F.T.C. Hay Forest #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 NHTOA FOREST Sp. Mx Hdwd Mx.Hd. Mbed TYPE Oak/W.P. W.P.P. C. cut R.P.P. R.P.P. W.R.P. W.P.P. Hdw. W.P.P. ACREAGE 16.2 9.0 21.5 17.3 18.0 4.0 BASAL AREA/ ACRE TOTAL 55.0 148.0 75.7 86.8 149.0 187.0 186.0 114.0 110.0 181.0 Trees Cut 40.0 45.0 37.8 36.0 42.0 57.0 38.0 43.0 181.0 Residual 15.0 103.0 54.0 113.0 145.0 129.0 76.0 67.0 0.0 TREES/ACRE TOTAL 160.0 298.0 75.7 512.0 56.0 60.4 56.2 52.6 48.6 Trees Cut 99.0 140.0 176.0 53.0 57.2 50.2 45.4 48.6 Residual 61.0 158.0 336.0 57.0 61.6 61.4 58.2 0.0 MEAN STAND DIAMETER TOTAL 10.2 9.5 8.2 7.8 7.3 7.8 9.1 8.1 7.4 8.4 Trees Cut 10.2 7.7 7.4 6.2 6.6 7.8 7.3 6.0 8.4 Residual 12.3 10.9 8.3 7.9 8.3 9.8 8.8 9.2 0.0 AVERAGE TREE HEIGHT TOTAL 56.0 60.0 53.2 260.0 51.6 562.0 415.0 306.0 370.0 480.0 Trees Cut 56.0 51.0 110.0 48.6 181.0 172.0 132.0 225.0 480.0 Residual 61.0 63.0 150.0 52.4 381.0 243.0 174.0 145.0 0.0 TONS HARVESTED/ ACRE Sawlogs/ Cordwood 22.2 4.4 22.3 2.77 0.0 0.0 1.37 3.22 0.0 47.6 Chips 16.1 49.2 69.7 38.94 59.4 62.37 59.15 49.10 0.0 97.5 TOTAL 38.3 53.6 91.0 41.71 59.4 62.37 60.52 53.72 44.80 145 .1 35 APPENDIX C LABOR AND EQUIPMENT PRODUCTIVITY CHART Skid Worker Tons/ Lot Name Acres Distance Hours Hitch Skidder Shears Chipper (Feet) (Tons/hour) (Tons/hour) (Tons/hour) Mast Yard #1 13.6 1,000 2.36 2.79 5.82 • 30.00 Mast Yard #2 5.7 900 1.23 1.32 2.88 • 32.76 Mast Yard #3 38.6 775 1.67 1.01 3.87 • 32.10 Mast Yard #4 8.0 1,700 • Mast Yard #5 10.5 725 2.79* 1.24* 9.89* 15.43 13.10* Gould Forest 36.5 750 1.98 1.22 5.72 • 24.86 Leadbeater 13.5 1,200 1.85 1.32 5.76 • 24.03 Mast Yard #6 8.8 1,000 1.96 1.12 4.70 • 40.48 Mast Yard #7 11.0 1,250 3.69 2.33 10.27 18.49 18.39 Livermore 24.0 1,300 2.32 2.06 6.15 • 25.40 Blair #1 16.2 450 2.61 2.45 7.40 • 27.80 Blair #2 9.0 600 1.72 1.61 5.87 • 33.70 F.T.C. 21.5 275 1.99 1.77 5.66 • 30.60 Hay #1 15.0 600 3.34 2.99 11.36 9.92 22.90 Hay #2 10.0 1,400 2.94 6.37 9.56 15.30 Bear Brook #1 17.3 650 4.32 2.20* 14.99 14.07 40.27 Bear Brook #2 10.5 425 3.27 3.24 12.04 8.37 9.25 Bear Brook #3 16.0 450 3.73 3.35 11.97 10.94 10.50 Bear Brook #4 28.0 1,050 Bear Brook #5 9.5 1,500 3.72* * 11.50* 9.46 * 25.03* Montgomery 4.0 400 6.30 3.14* 17.30 21.70 26.01 * -No data available • - Not used 36 APPENDIX D STAND CHARACTERISTICS OF TWENTY-ONE STUDY AREAS Basal Area Mean Stand Average Tons Lot Name Timber Type Cut/Acre Diameter Tree Ht. Cut/ Acre (Sq. Ft.) (Inches) (Feet) Mast Yard #1 Red Pine Pit. 46 10.4 63.5 62.10 Mast Yard #2 White Pine Pit. 71 9.4 65.0 57.00 Mast Yard #3 White Pine Pit. 66 7.2 52.9 47.10 Mast Yard #4 White Pine Pit. 42 9.3 51.2 47.10 Mast Yard #5 White Pine Pit. 35 7.7 53.4 48.50 Gould Forest Pine Hemlock Hdwd. 62 9.4 55.7 57.88 Leadbeater Pine Hemlock Hdwd. 35 8.2 58.5 41.37 Mast Yard #6 Red Pine Pit. 47.8 8.3 64.7 51.40 Mast Yard #7 Red Pine Pit. 49 8.9 59.2 50.40 Livermore Pine Hemlock Hdwd. 67.6 9.9 62.0 71.70 Blair #1 Oak & White Pine 40 8.6 51.0 38.30 Blair #2 White Pine Plt. 45 7.7 51.0 53.60 F.T.C. Spruce/Mixed Hdwd. 75.7 8.2 53.2 92.00 Hay #1 Northern Hardwood 32.8 7.4 41.70 Hay #2 Mixed Sftw/Hdwd. Bear Brook #1 Red Pine Plt. 48.6 6.2 48.6 59.40 Bear Brook #2 Red Pine Pit. 42 6.6 53.0 62.37 Bear Brook #3 Red/White Pine Plt. 57.5 7.8 57.2 60.52 Bear Brook #4 Mixed Sftw/Hdwd. 38 7.3 50.2 53.70 Bear Brook #5 Hardwood 45.4 7.4 52.6 44.80 Montgomery White Pine Plt. 181 8.4 48.6 145.70 37 APPENDIX E BIOMASS TABLE BASAL AREA: GREEN WEIGHT TABLE Basal Area Green Wt. Basal Area Green Wt. Basal Area Green Wt. (sq.ft.lac.) (tons/ac.) (sq.ft.lac.) (tons/ac.) (sq.ft.lac.) (tons/ac.) 10 28.31 40 47.89 70 67.46 12 29.62 42 49.19 72 68.77 14 30.92 44 50.50 74 70.07 16 32.23 46 51.80 76 71.38 18 33.53 48 53.11 78 72.68 20 34.84 50 54.41 80 73.98 22 36.14 52 55. 72 82 75.29 24 37.45 54 57.02 84 76.60 26 38. 75 56 58.33 86 77.90 28 40.06 58 59.63 88 79.21 30 41.36 60 60.94 90 80.51 32 42.67 62 62.64 92 81.82 34 43.97 64 63.55 94 83.12 36 45.28 66 64.85 96 84.43 38 46.58 68 66.16 98 85.73 100 87.04 38 APPENDIX F COMPARISON OF FUEL CONSUMPTION IN THIRTEEN STUDY AREAS Loaders and Lot Name Skidders Feller Bunchers Chipper Total (Gallons/Ton) Hopkinton Town Forest .24 .10 .22 .56 Leadbeater .26 .13 .36 .75 Mast Yard #6 .24 .06 .32 .62 Mast Yard #7 .18 .15 .26 .59 Livermore .28 .14 .31 .73 Blair #1 .25 .38 .63 Franconia Timber Co. .33 .21 .28 .82 Hay #1 .35 .23 .22 .80 Hay #2 .38 .23 .35 .96 Bear Brook #1 .26 .18 .16 .60 Bear Brook #2 .11 .12 .36 .59 Bear Brook #3 .13 .09 .44 .67 Montgomery .22 .11 .22 .56 Average .24 .13 .29 .66 39 APPENDIX G DAMAGE ASSESSMENT Residual Damaged Percent Basal Area Basal Area Percent Lot Name Acres Timber Type Slope Per Acre Per Acre Damage ---(Square Feet)--- Mast Yard #1 38 White Pine 0-3 98 2 2 Plantation Hopkinton Town 36 Mixed Hardwood 0-8 117 12 10 Forest Softwood Montgomery 15 Pole Size 5 - 10 85 4 5 Hardwood Livermore State 34 Mixed Hardwood 0 - 38 83 7 8 Forest Softwood Hay Memorial 15 Pole Size 3 - 15 92 10 11 Forest Hardwood Bear Brook #1 17 Red Pine 0 - 12 138 3 2 Plantation Bear Brook #2 10 Red Pine 0 - 15 121 2 Plantation Bear Brook #4 28 Pole Size 5 - 14 66 7 11 Hardwood Bear Brook #5 18 Pole Size 35 - 51 60 2 4 Hardwood Leadbeater (1) so Natural White 0-7 116 7 6 Pine Heath (1) 22 Red Pine 3 - 8 118 7 6 Plantation TOTAL 283 40 APPENDIX H AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH Tons Per Acre Ave. Annual (1) Lot Name Acres Timber Type Removed Age Growth (tons/acre/year) Hay Memorial Forest 15.0 Northern 112.6(2) 43 2.62 Hardwood Montgomery 4.0 Natural 145.1(4) 38 3.82 White Pine Bear Brook #4 28.0 Pine 161.1 (2) 55 2.92 Hardwood Bear Brook #5 9.5 Hardwood 112.0(2) 50 2.24 Blair #2 9.0 White Pine 176.9(2) 45 3.93 Plantation Mast Yard #2 5.7 Natural 142.5(2) 42 3.30 White Pine Wagner W oodlands(3) 2.2 White Pine 88.5(2) 19 4.65 Plantation TOTAL 73.4 AVERAGE 3.37 (1) Total tons per acre = Average annual growth (tons/acre/year) age (2) Volume from partial cut (3) Data from other than project lots (4) Volume from clearcuts 41 APPENDIX I MARKING LAYOUT & SUPERVISION Total Tons Marking & Lot Name Acres Timber Type Removed Layout Supervision Paint Used (Tons/Hour) (Tons/Gal.) Mann(l) 65 Pole size 2,230 29.3 60.3 151 Hardwood Heath(l) 22 Red Pine 1,322 29.1 49.9 110 Plantation Leadbeater 50 Pole size 2,104 36.0 39.3 123 White Pine Ellsworth(!) 8 Pole size 225 25.6 41.5 112 White Pine Pitman (1) Data from other than project lots 42 APPENDIX J BIOMASS HARVESTING DEMONSTRATIONS 1. New Hampshire Timberland Owner's annual meeting at Bear Brook State Forest, May 8, 1981. 175 people attended. Demonstration of 48 acres of selectively thinned plantations and ongoing whole tree harvesting with Melroe Bobcat and grapple skidders. 2. Demonstration of Morbell logger, Alexandria, New Hampshire, (2 days). Thinned pole size hard wood stand with basal area of 122 square feet per acre. 3. New Hampshire Forest Field Day, Sunapee, New Hampshire, open to general public, October 3, 1982. Approximately 1,000 people shown ongoing mechanized whole tree operation. Demonstrated Morbell feller buncher, Melroe Bobcat, grapple skidders, and chipper. 4. Demonstration of mechanized whole tree operation at Bear Brook State Park on May 19, 1983. This demonstration included Morbell feller buncher, Melroe Bobcat, TimbCo feller buncher, and John Deere 450. The New Hampshire legislature was invited to the program and 125 legislators attended. 5. The same program at Bear Brook State Park was held for foresters and loggers on May 20, 1983. Besides field demonstrations a panel discussion was held in the afternoon. This program was part of the Granite State Division Society of American Foresters meeting. 150 people attended. 6. Same program at Bear Brook State Park was held for New Hampshire Timberland Owner's Associa tion and general public on May 21, 1983. 142 people attended. 7. Several groups and individuals asked to see or be given information on biomass harvesting. A por tion of this group included: A. New York Port Authority B. Province of Nova Scotia C. Province of New Brunswick D. Wagner Woodlands, Lyme, New Hampshire E. Temporary Commission of Tug Hill, New York F. Mr. David Scholdermier, Masters Thesis, University of New Hampshire G. Mr. Neil Huyler, USDA Forest Service, Burlington, Vermont H. Messers Reginald Bixby, David Provost, Frederick Bickford, Thomas Lumber, Tim Napper on equipment purchases I. Bio-Energy Systems, Hopkinton, New Hampshire J. David VanWei of Maine Audubon Society K. Presentations given: - Fuel Management and Utilization Seminar, USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry, Lansing, Michigan, November 12, 1982 - Wood Energy Workshop, USDA Forest Service, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, August 3-5, 1983 - American Pulpwood Association, Northeast Technical Meeting, Shelburne, New Hampshire, September 22, 1983 - Bio-Mass harvesting discussion, Society American Forester, G.S.D., Allenstown, New Hampshire, May 20, 1983 - Opportunities and Constraints of Whole-Tree Harvesting Conference, Maine Department of Conservation, Augusta, Maine, April 9, 1984 - C.O.N.E.G., Supply Task Force Member, Newark, New Jersey, March 26, 1984, and New York, New York, May 23, 1984 - Baker-Pemi Solid Waste District, Plymouth, New Hampshire, April 13, 1984 43 APPENDIX K THE EFFECTS OF WHOLE-TREE HARVESTING ON NUTRIENT SUPPLIES AND NUTRIENT CYCLES IN A FORESTED ECOSYSTEM: A Literature Review Prepared by Martha West Lyman for the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests January, 1982 44 INTRODUCTION The expanded use of and growing demand for forest products requires more efficient management of the forest resource. Intensive harvesting, whole-tree harvesting and complete-tree utilization are being incor porated into management plans as a means of increasing yield from the resource base. Whole tree harvesting, coupled with complete-tree utilization removes from a site not only tree stems, as in traditional harvests, but also branches, and, in some cases, foliage and roots. Because the technology of whole-tree harvesting and the practice of complete-tree utilization are rela1ively new, it has been difficult to assess their impacts on the forest ecosystem. Research efforts, however, are expanding in response to growing concern that the additional removal of branches and foliage may, in some cases, affect the long-term productivity of a site through a gradual deple tion of essential nutrients. The following literature review is designed to document the status of research on nutrient loss and to identify some of the mechanisms by which whole-tree harvesting may trigger nutrient loss in a forest ecosystem. 45 Plants require sixteen (16) or more different nutrients for the major biological processes (photosynthesis and respiration) which affect their productivity (growth and reproduction). Oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, phosphorus, calcium, potassium, sulfur and magnesium are the major nutrient elements necessary for plant growth. Other nutrients, such as iron, copper, manganese, molybdenum, boron, zinc and chlorine are required by plants, but are used in smaller quantities. While the productivity of different forest stands varies according to site-specific factors (soil type, soil age and depth, and climate); the overall productivity of the forest ecosystem is influenced primarily by the general pro cesses by which nutrients are supplied to, used by, stored in or lost from the system (nutrient cycling). (Borman and Likens, 1979; Duvigneaud and Denaeyer-DeSmet, 1970; Tamm, 1979.) Main sources of nutrients for the forest ecosystem include the atmosphere, biological processes and weathering processes. Atmosphere: Atmospheric gasses and precipitation contribute carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen (primarily from carbon dioxide (C02) and water (H20)), as well as sulfur, nitrogen, chlorine and phosphorus. Biological processes: Carbon and nitrogen are made available to plants, in large part, as a result of photosynthesis and nitrogen fixation. 1 Weathering processes: The mineralization of rock and soil material contribute magnesium, calcium and potassium to the system. (Bormann and Likens, 1979; Likens et al, 1977.) Research indicates that the main sources of nitrogen, calcium and sulfur in a northern hardwood forest are as follows: 2 Atmospheric Biological Weathering Precipitation/Gaseous Processes Processes Nitrogen 300Jo 700Jo Unknown Unknown Calcium 90Jo Unknown 91 OJo Sulfur 650Jo 31 OJo Unknown 4% Nutrients are taken up and used by living plants and animals and are accumulated and stored in living and dead plant tissues, the forest floor and the soil. (Borman and Likens, 1979; Pritchett, 1979; Clayton, 1979; Gosz et al, 1976.) The accumulation of nutrients in forest vegetation plays a significant role in regulating the nutrient cycle and in conserving nutrient supplies within the system. An estimated 40% of the annual input of potassium, nitrogen and calcium is stored in living and dead plant tissues within the system. Studies at the Hubbard Brook Ex perimental Forest reveal that 800Jo of the nitrogen entering the system is retained within the system and that 330Jo of the nitrogen required by plants is Mthdrawn from sources within the plant. (Bormann and Likens, 1979.) The two most important sites of nutrient accumulation are the above-ground, living, portion of the plant biomass3 and the forest floor. The following data4 collected at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, show the distribution of organic matter within a northern hardwood ecosystem. irransformation of atmospheric nitrogen to organic nitrogen. 2Figures are derived from data in Bormann and Likens, 1979. 3Biomass refers to the standing crop of organic matter. 4Fig1,Jres derived from data in Bormann and Likens, 1979. SIDEM. 46 Total volume of organic matter (tons/acre) 188 Living (tons/acre) 73 (380Jo) Above-ground biomass 60 (820Jo) Below-ground biomass 13 (180Jo) Dead (tons/acre) 115 (620Jo) Above-ground deadwood 2 (20Jo) Below-ground deadwood 13 (llOJo) Forest floor 22 (190Jo) Mineral soil 78 (680Jo) The following chart5 identifies the distribution of several major nutrients within the same ecosystem: Calcium Potassium Nitrogen Phosphorus Above-ground biomass (tons/acre) .17 (46%) .07 (580Jo) .11 (l 60Jo) .01 (17%) Forest Floor (tons/acre) .17 (430Jo) .03 (250Jo) .51 (730Jo) .03 (500Jo) Below-ground biomass (tons/acre) .04 (11 OJo) .02 (170Jo) .08 (11 OJo) .02 (330Jo) Nutrients accumulated within the living biomass supply the individual plant with a portion of its nutrient re quirements and provide an internal regulation for the conservation of nutrients. For example, one-third of the nitrogen required by plants is supplied, during the spring, from internal reserves. Prior to leaf fall an equal amount is withdrawn from the leaves and stored, over the winter, in permanent plant tissues. (Bor mann and Likens, 1979.) The forest floor (including deadwood and litter) and decomposing organic material in the soil are major reservoirs of nutrients for the whole system. (Gosz et al, 1976.) An estimated 600Jo of the calcium, 50% of the potassium, 800Jo of the nitrogen and 800Jo of the phosphorus reserves are found in the forest floor and in the mineral soils. (Bormann and Likens, 1979.) The rate at which these nutrients are made available is influenced by a number of factors such as climate, nutritional requirements of the organisms and microbiological activi ty. (Gosz et al, 1976.) Nitrogen, for example, is both readily available to plants from nitrogen fixation by microorganisms in the deadwood on the forest floor and is gradually released through the decomposition of organic matter in the soil. (Bormann and Likens, 1979; Gosz et al, 1976.) Finally, nutrients are lost from the system through leaching (removal of elements by the movement of water through the ecosystem), removal of plant material (timber harvesting, animal grazing), soil erosion, and volatilization (a process by which the organic form of a nutrient element, particularly nitrogen, is transform ed to a gaseous form and released to the atmosphere). In an undisturbed forest ecosystem, leaching is the principal cause of nutrient loss. Quantities of nutrients that are lost from the system, however, vary. The cycling of many nutrients, such as calcium and nitrogen, is extremely efficient and little is lost from the system. Others, such as sodium and sulfur are leached in signifi cant quantities. The disruption of nutrient cycles and subsequent losses caused by conventional timber harvesting has been studied in relation to losses associated with leaching and soil erosion. (The Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study - Bormann and Likens, 1979; Likens et al, 1977; Tamm, 1974.) In an effort to determine the impacts of inten sive harvesting and whole-tree harvesting, however, research has begun to investigate nutrient losses associated with the removal of harvested material. Research efforts are focusing primarily on quantifying the direct nutrient loss from the removal of additional biomass and identifying any indirect nutrient losses associated with whole-tree harvesting operations. 47 An estimated 30-65% increase in biomass removal (from whole-tree harvesting operations as opposed to stem-only harvests) is accompanied by a 100-215% increase in nutrient removal. (Marion, 1979.) Whole-tree harvesting of hardwoods doubles the removal of nutrients from stem-only harvests. (Boyle et al, 1973; Boyle and Ek, 1972; Hornbeck and Kropelin, 1979.) The significance of direct nutrient loss from biomass removal, however, is not agreed upon. An early study on nutrient loss concluded that, especially on infertile sites, timber harvesting and, in particular, timber thin nings, would have a significant impact on the productivity of the site. (Rennie, 1955.) More recent research is not that conclusive. Some studies indicate that while stem-only harvests remove nutrients from the forest ecosystem at rates replenishable from other sources (atmospheric and mineralization), there is insufficient data to determine if whole-tree harvesting results in losses which exceed the system's natural replenishing 4. capacity. (Wells and Jorgensen, 1979.) Other studies have concluded that the direct nutrient loss from whole !\\ tree harvesting is not significant in terms of the total nutrient capital present in the soil. (Weetman and Web ber, 1971; Boyle and Ek, 1972; Hornbeck and Kropelin, 1979.) In contrast, however, is evidence that the amount of nutrients available to the plant material may be significantly less than the total nutrient capital in the soil. (Weetman and Webber, 1971; Malkonen, 1973 and 1979.) Kimmins (1977) has suggested the importance of determining what proportion of the available nutrient capital which is removed in the harvesting process. Indirect losses of nutrients from whole-tree harvesting are linked primarily to the dynamics of the forest floor and the organic portion of the soil. We know that in an undisturbed forest, the forest floor and the mineral soil contain the greatest portion of organic matter in the system; and, in turn, contain the most significant portion of the system's nutrient reserve. Depletion of the forest floor material from the additional removal of tops and branches in whole-tree harvesting, may require nutrients to be drawn directly from the mineral soils. In some cases, it is felt that the soils may not be able to supply the necessary nutrients for successive crops. (Wells and Jorgensen, 1979.) Further, logging residues from traditional harvesting operations are thought to be a major source of available nutrients (especially nitrogen) for the next crop. (Weetman and Webber, 1971; Malkonen, 1973 and 1979.) Recent studies indicate that nitrogen fixation is associated with decaying wood on the forest floor. (Davey and Sollum, 1979; Lausen et al, 1978; Roskoski, 1980.) 48 CONCLUSION Research has begun to quantify the loss of nutrients from the removal of branches and foliage, and to iden tify some of the mechanisms by which these losses occur. While it is clear that there are additional nutrient losses associated with whole-tree harvesting, it has not yet been determined what proportion of nutrients can be removed from the system without diminishing the long-term productivity of the site. Because of the complex interrelationships in a forest ecosystem, evaluation of potential impacts on the system requires consideration of site specific factors (soil type, topography and species composition) and manage ment and silvicultural practices (rotations and harvesting intensity). This latter point deserves special emphasis. Traditional silvicultural management for most forest species usually calls for tall straight trees with clear boles to the crown and, depending on the species, rotation ages of 50 to 100 years or more. With the concept of whole-tree harvesting, where all above-ground portions of the tree are chipped for fiber production, trees of all sizes, shapes (including bushy forms), and species can be us ed as fast as they can be grown, much like agricultural crops. Thus the rotation age is primarily critical insofar as the rate of removal of nutrients from the site can be replenished by natural means. Because each site is limited by overall natural fertility and restoration of necessary nutrients from precipitation, weathering of soil and rocks, and biological fixation after their removal in a harvesting, new concepts and tactics may be necessary to manage lands subjected to whole-tree harvesting. Research into the dynamics of the forest floor, nitrogen cycling, and nutrient budgets will further help in evaluating the impacts of whole tree harvesting on the forest ecosystem. Two important projects are under way in New England which will contribute to our understanding of the nutrient loss question: 1. Ecosystem Effects of Whole-Tree Harvesting in New England This study is being conducted in spruce fir stands in northern Maine, northern hardwoods in New Hampshire, and central hard woods in Connecticut. The Northeastern Forest Experiment Station is cooperating with a variety of government and private agencies such as the Cooperative Forestry Research Unit at the University of Maine; Great Northern Paper Company, Millinocket, Maine; James River Company, Berlin, NH; State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection and the Northeastern Forest Experiment Station (USFS). The study is designed to quantify nutrient loss from biomass removal and leaching; identify changes in the forest floor and deadwood follow ing harvesting; evaluate changes in nitrogen availability; study nutrient capital and develop a nutrient budget. 2. Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest. In addition to research in the areas of litter accumulation and decomposition and nitrogen cycling; the National Science Foundation is funding a study on the impacts of whole-tree harvesting on the forest ecosystem. Both projects should be completed by 1987. The Hubbard Brook Study is presently in the planning stages with cutting expected to begin in 1983. The components of the Ecosystem Effects study are at different stages. Some of the results (e.g. from the New Hampshire site, see Hornbeck and Kropelin, 1979) are incor porated into this review, while others (e.g. from the Connecticut site) are not expected for two years. 49 LITERATURE Aber, J.D., D.B. Botkin, and J.M. Melillo. 1978. Predicting the effects of different harvesting regimes on forest floor dynamics in northern hardwoods. Can. J. For. Res. 8:306-315. Aber, J.D., et al. 1979. Predicting the effects of different harvesting regimes on productivity and yield in northern hardwoods. Can. J. For. Res. 9:10-14. Bormann, F.H., and G.E. Likens. Pattern and Processes in a Forested Ecosystem. Springer-Verlag; New York. 1979. Boyle, J.R. and A.R. Ek. 1972. An evaluation of some effects of bole and branch pulpwood harvesting on plant macronutrients. Can. J. For. Res. 2:407-412. Boyle, J.R., J.J. Phillips, A.R. Ek. 1973. Whole-tree harvesting: nutrient budget evaluation. J. For. 71:760-762. Clayton, J.L. Nutrient supply to soil by rock weathering In Proceedings: Impact of Intensive Harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling. State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, School of Forestry. Syracuse, New York. 1979. Duvigneaud, P. and S. Denaeyer-DeSmet, 1973. Biological cycling of minerals in temperate deciduous forests. In D.E. Reichle (ed.) Analysis of Temperate Forest Ecosystems, p. 199-225. Springer-Verlag. New York. Gosz, J.R., G.E. Likens, and F.H. Bormann. 1976. Organic matter and nutrient dynamics of the forest floor in the Hubbard Brook Forest. Oecologia 22:305-320. Gosz, J.R., G.E. Likens, and F.H. Bormann. 1972. Inherent Content of Litter Fall on the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, New Hampshire. Ecology 53(5):769-784. Hornbeck, J.W., and W. Kropelin. Nutrient removal and leaching from a whole-tree harvest of northern hardwoods. In Proceedings: Impact of Intensive Harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling. State University of New York, Col lege of Environmental Science and Forestry, School of Forestry. Syracuse, New York. Kimmins, J.P. 1977. Evaluation of the consequences for the future tree productivity of the loss of nutrients in whole tree harvesting. Forest Ecology and Management I: 169-183. Larsen, M.J., M.F. Jurgensen and A.E. Harvey, 1978. Nitrogen fixation associated with wood decayed by some common fungi in western Montana. Can. J. For. Res. 8:341-345. Likens, G.E., F.H. Bormann, R.S. Pierce, J.S. Eaton and N.M. Johnson. Biogeochemistry of a Forested Ecosystem. Springer-Verlag. New York. 1977. Malkonen, E. 1973. The effect of complete tree utilization on nutrient reserves of forest sorts. In IUFRO Biomass Studies. pp 375-386. *Malkonen, E. 1976. Effect of whole-tree harvesting on soil fertility. Silva Tenn. 10: 157-164. *Malkonen, E. 1972. Effect of harvesting logging residue. Folia Forest. 157. Marion, G.M. 1979. Biomass and nutrient removal in long-rotation stands. In Proceedings: Impact of Intensive Harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling. State University of New York. Syracuse, New York. Ovington, J .D. 1962. Quantitative ecology and the woodland ecosystem concept. Adv. Ecol. Res. 1: 103-192. Pritchett, W.L. 1979. Soil as a reservoir: soil nutrient supplies and mobilization rates. In Proceedings: Impact of Intensive Harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling. State University of New York. Syracuse, New York. 50 Rennie, P.J. 1955. Uptake of nutrients by mature forest trees. Plant and Soil, 7:49-95. Tamm, C.O. 1979. Nutrient cycling and productivity of forest ecosystems. In Proceedings: Impact of Intensive Harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling. State University of New York, Syracuse, New York. Tamm, C.O., H. Holmen, B. Poporie, G. Wiklander. 1974. Leaching of plant nutrients from soils as a consequence of forestry operations. Ambia 3(6):211-221. Tamm, C.O. 1964. Determination of nutrient requirements of forest stands. Intern. Rev. of Forestry Research, 1:115-170. Weetman, G.F. and B. Webber. 1972. The influence of wood harvesting on the nutrient status of two spruce stands. Can. J. Forest. Res. 2:351-369. Wells, C.G. and J.R. Jorgensen. 1979. Effect of intensive harvesting on nutrient supply and sustained productivity. In Proceedings: Impact of Intensive Harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling. State University of New York. Syracuse, New York. White, E.H. 1974. Whole-tree harvesting depletes soil nutrients. Can. J. For. Res. 4:530-535. *Paper unavailable for review. Included in bibliography after review of abstract. 51