This file was created by scanning the printed publication.
Errors identified by the software have been corrected;
however, some errors may remain.
Past, Present, and Potential Utilization of
Pinyon-Juniper Species
Peter F. Ffolliott
Gerald J. Gottfried
William H. Kruse
Abstract-Pinyon-juniper species in the Interior West are a sizeable wood fiber resource for products that can be made from smaller,
irregular stems, and those that capitalize on the unique physical
and chemical characteristics of the speci~s. However, large-scale
utilization of these species is largely influenced by management
programs implemented to improve the range condition, hydrologic
behavior, and wildlife habitat conditions of the woodlands. The past,
present, and potential utilization of pinyon-juniper species is presented in this paper, specifically solid wood, chemical, and specialty
pinyon products.
The pinyon-juniper woodlands, consisting of approximately 47 million acres in the Western United States
(Evans 1988), and covering over a quarter of the land area
of Nevada and New Mexico, are a sizeable wood fiber
resource. One estimate indicates that approximately 17.6
million acres of pinyon-juniper woodlands occur in the
Great Basin area, mainly Nevada and parts of Utah, California, and Idaho (Tueller and others 1979). Pinyon-juniper
andjuniper woodlands cover 9 million acres in Nevada and
contain almost 4.4 billion ft 3 oftotal wood volume (Born and
others 1992). Approximately 52 percent of this volume is
singleleaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla) and 46 percent is
juniper (mainly Utahjuniper (Juniperus osteosperma). The
average acre of Nevada woodland contains 6.5 cords (464
ft 3 ) of pinyon-juniper volume. Approximately 9 million
acres of pinyon-juniper occur in Utah (Van Hooser and
Green 1983). The net volume of pinyon andjuniper in Utah
and Nevada is estimated at over 10.3 billion ft3 (O'Brien,
This proceedings).
Pinyon -j uni per species in the Interior West are primarily
used for firewood, posts, and pinyon nuts. These trees,
however, are potentially useful for the manufacture of wood
products that can be made from smaller, irregular stems,
and those that can use the unique physical and chemical
characteristics of these species. Past, present, and potential uses of pinyon-juniper species are presented in this
paper, specifically solid wood, chemical, and other pinyon
products. Past and present utilization practices are re-
In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard, comps. 1999. Proceedings:
ecology and management of pinyon-juniper communities within the Interior
West; 1997 September 15-18; Provo, UT. Proc. RMRS-P-9. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research
Station.
Peter F. Ffolliott is Professor, School of Renewable Natural Resources,
University of Arizona, Tucson. Gerald J. Gottfried is Research Forester and
William H. Kruse is Range Scientist (retired), USDA Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Research Station, Flagstaff, AZ.
254
viewed, followed by a discussion of potential future uses of
pinyon-juniper species.
Solid Wood Products
Solid wood products are those made of wood in its natural
structural form. Pinyon-juniper species are used in their
natural form for firewood and posts. The wood is also sawn
into railroad ties and mine timbers. In addition, the wood
may be reconstructed with adhesives to obtain products
such as veneer, particleboard, and cement board.
Firewood
Pinyon-juniper species have been used longer and more
extensively for firewood than any other product (Barger
and Ffolliott 1972; Born and others 1992; Ffolliott and
Clary 1986). In the Interior West, this wood remains the
main fuel in some rural localities, while the popularity of
wood-burning fireplaces contributes to its urban demand.
In Nevada, the demand for firewood peaked in 1982 but
remained fairly constant through 1989 (Born and others
1992). Harvesting is done by commercial operators for sale
in population centers like Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, and Los Angeles, and by individuals
for personal use. Commercial tribal woodyards exist on
several reservations (for example, Uintah and Ouray Ute
Reservation in Utah) to provide employment and to generate income. Use of designated harvesting areas is an effective method to initiate sustainable management on tribal
woodlands (Miller 1997). Wagstaff (1987) reported that
most ofthe cutting permits for Federal lands were issued to
private individuals. Surveys in New Mexico (McLain 1989)
indicated that 41 out of 400 households harvested firewood
while 25 out of 400 households in Utah conducted harvests
(McLain 1997). In Albuquerque, as late as 1940, annual
commercial firewood sales were estimated to exceed 6,500
tons (Space 1940). Demands remain high, almost 107,000
cords of pinyon (P. edulis) and assortedjuniper species were
harvested for firewood in New Mexico in 1986 (McLain
1989). The use of firewood appears lower in the Great Basin
area. Public land records in Nevada indicate that 12,096
cords were sold in 1989. Although the harvest of forest
species, such as lodgepole pine (P. contorta) and aspen
(Populus tremuloides), and horticultural fruitwood, such as
peach (Prunus persica), meets much of Utah's firewood
demands, approximately 4,628 cords of juniper and pinyon
were harvested for firewood in 1992 (McLain 1997).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-9. 1999
Heat content, ignition, and burning characteristics are
important firewood characteristics. Heat content,which is
directly proportional to wood density, is the most important
characteristic of wood used as fuel, while ignition, flaming
characteristics, and fragrance are important attributes of
fireplace wood (Barger and Ffolliott 1972). Based on these
criteria, pinyon and juniper species make excellent firewood. There has been some interest in using pinyon and
j uni per chi ps for commercial energy prod uction (Henderson
and Baughman 1987); however, the interest in biomass
fuels has fluctuated.
Firewood is commonly marketed haphazardly, with small
independent operators working intermittently. Product
quality and quantity sold as a cord unit are often questionable. The few commercial woodyards in the region can
experience difficulty locating dependable sources and obtaining consistent quality. In the past, most firewood for
the Utah Wasatch Front region came from salvaging dead
material in chained and cleared areas. These sources are
now depleted and cutters are cutting more live trees and
travelling further to harvest them (Wagstaff 1987). Commercial firewood cutters in southern Utah dislike harvesting multi-stemmedjunipers and prefer to cut other species.
Harvesting juniper is labor intensive per unit of wood
because of the small multiple stems, and because windblown soil lodged in the rough bark and the high wood
density cause significant wear on saws. Transporting firewood to market areas is critical to the economic efficiency
of marketing (LeBaron and Johnson 1965; Sowles 1966).
Transportation costs are highest for small and irregular
shipments. Intense competition keeps wholesale prices and
profits low (Schmidt 1995), resulting in a high turnover
among firewood operators.
The average wholesale price for firewood delivered to
brokers within the Four Corner States, Southern California, and Nevada ranged from $50 to $100 for pinyon and
$45 to $110 for juniper; the hjghest prices paid were in
Southern California (Schmidt 1995). In Utah and Nevada,
wholesale prices for pinyon firewood are $50 to $60 and for
juniper are $45 to $55. Species preferences varies throughout the Interior West. Pinyon is preferred in Salt Lake City
and is sold for $10 to $15 more a ton than juniper, while
juniper is preferred in the Las Vegas area (Wagstaff 1987).
In the Southwest, pinyon is the preferred species in New
Mexico, while junipers are preferred in Arizona. Firewood
generally is purchased in the spring and summer and is
split and dried before selling to distributors. However, air
pollution and resulting "no-burn days" in major urban
centers, such as Salt Lake City and Phoenix, and recent
restrictions on the construction of new wood-burning residential fireplaces, such as in the Phoenix area, may impact
the regional demand for firewood.
Posts
Juniper species have been used historically for posts,
because of their outstanding natural durability. Many
posts were cut for personal use and for sale by commercial
enterprises during the settlement period and growth ofthe
livestock and farming industries. Posts are classified as
line or corner posts depending on size; more than a third of
the posts in Nevada are the larger corner posts (Born and
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-9. 1999
others 1992). Juniper is used as stub posts in power and
telephone line construction and for highway guardrails,
although increased use of steel posts and preservativetreated pine and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) has
curtailed these uses. The annual cut of juniper posts in the
late 1960s was approximately 300,000 (LeBaron 1968).
Federal agencies in Nevada sold almost 38,000 posts in
1989 (Born and others 1992). Minimum specifications for
juniper posts are based on a minimum serviceability of 80
percent after 40 years (Meagher 1940). Tests indicate that
ajuniper post could last over 50 years (Barger and Ffolliott
1972). Heartwood diameter is the limiting criterion.
Pinyon is not favored for posts because it seldom grows in
a suitable form and is not a durable wood. Under normal
conditions, untreated pinyon posts seldom remain in service beyond 5 years. Some pinyon is harvested for home
construction, corrals, and fences. Navajos still use it for
hogan poles and roof beams (Lanner 1981).
Harvesting posts in pinyon-juniper stands is a selective
operation. Stems must be relatively small, slender, and
straight. Young- and intermediate-aged stands are best for
locating harvestable stems. Suitable posts are not found in
stands that have been selectively cut or "high-graded" for
posts in the past. Split posts are superior to round posts,
since there is less sapwood in contact with the soil and less
chance for the post to loosen as the sapwood rots. Commercial post cutting and selling is a part-time job for people
involved in farming or ranching. A few larger post and pole
yards in the region attempt to stock and sell juniper posts
on a continuing basis. Born and others (1992) suggested
that harvesting more valuable posts should be integrated
with firewood harvesting in the same area to maximize
returns.
Sawn Products
Pinyon-juniper species are not widely utilized for sawn
products because of their small size and poor growth form.
Other problems are related to high wood density and grit,
which causes saw wear, and resin buildup in the equipment. Only 14,800 acres of pinyon-juniper sawtimber have
been identified in Utah (Van Hooser and Green 1983). Less
than 2,000 fum of pinyon timber was harvested in Utah in
1992; this was less than 0.5 percent of the total amount
harvested for saw logs, house logs, or other prod ucts (Keegan
and others 1995). However, railroad ties and mine timber
have been cut from pinyon by small mills in the past,
principally for use by the mining industry. Pinyon railroad
ties are tougher and more resistant to breakage than ties
cut from other softwood species in the region.
Juniper species have been cut into rough lumber by small
mills. The lumber was usually specially ordered for use in
furniture or novelty items, the latter including book ends,
lamp basis,jewelry boxes, and small chests (Voorhies 1977;
Swan 1995). These products capitalize on the unique fragrance, color, and grain patterns of juniper.
Veneer
Juniper species in the Interior West are physically similar to eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana) in many
respects and, therefore, are considered for similar uses
255
such as veneer and particleboard. USDA Forest Service
tests indicated that Utah (J. osteosperma) and alligator
juniper (J. deppeana) can be satisfactorily rotary cut or
sliced into veneer sheets (Englerth and others 1953). Cutting characteristics and surface quality compared
favorably with eastern redcedar. However, the veneers cut
from Utah and alligator junipers are inadequate substitutes because of the deeper, more striking color, and more
pronounced and lasting fragrance of eastern redcedar.
Veneers from the westernjuniper species could be satisfactory for less demanding uses in furniture and paneling
products. Questions of marketing veneers cutfromjunipers
in the region remain.
Particleboard
The wood of almost any species can be used to manufacture particleboard, although softwoods and low-density
hardwoods are favored. Pinyon could provide excellent
material for particleboard, although ponderosa pine (P.
ponderosa) is cheaper, often more abundant, and has the
same characteristics. Particleboard made from singleleaf
pinyon and Utah juniper logs was tested at the Forest
Prod ucts Laboratory a t Madison, Wisconsin (M urphy 1987).
The Laboratory indicated that pinyon or juniper panels
were inferior to those made from other western softwoods,
but that it would be possible to make a urea-bonded panel
that was satisfactory, based on strength and stability, for
interior use. Additional tests at a laboratory in Germany
indicated that panels made from chipped material, including bark, met the physical property levels for commercial
panels.
Juniper species offer better opportunities for particleboard with distinctive qualities because of their specific
gravity, texture, color, and fragrance (Ffolliott 1977). Alligator and Rocky Mountain juniper (J. scopulorum) bolts
were converted into flakes 1 inch long, 0.015 inch thick, and
random widths in a limited test (USDA Forest Service
1966). The flakes were then bonded with 8 percent urea
resin into a single-layer medium-density particleboard.
Strength and shrinkage characteristics of these boards
were similar to those of a comparable ponderosa pine
particleboard. The tests indicated that satisfactory particleboard can be manufactured from alligator and Rocky
Mountain juniper. Markets for this product have not been
adequately developed.
Cement Board
Tests of pinyon andjuniperwoods have determined their
potential for use in cement board (Murphy 1987). This
product is composed of cement, wood fiber, and water, and
is fire resistant, relatively unaffected by water, and can be
worked like particleboard. Cement board has a number of
uses including exterior siding, air conditioning and utility
ducts, and all-weather foundations for basements.
Chemical Products
Chemical products include those made by chemically
treating or altering wood fiber and products derived from
256
the chemical constituents or extractives of wood. Charcoal
manufacture through carbonization and pulping are examples of chemical alteration of wood. Chemical constituents including turpentine, rosin, and a variety of oils can be
obtained through distillation of wood and foliage and
solvent extraction processes, or through processing oleoresins collected from living trees. Chemical utilization offers
advantages for pinyon-juniper species, since stem size and
form are not critical.
Charcoal
All of the pinyon-juniper species are suitable raw material for charcoal. All wood is about 50 percent carbon. As a
consequence, the yields of charcoal from various wood
species are proportional to the density of the wood. Denser
species are preferred, since charcoal yield per unit of wood
volume will be greater. Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), a
frequent associate of pinyon-juniper species in the Interior
West, is well suited to the production of lump charcoal,
since it is a heavy wood and will produce corresponding
heavy lump charcoal (Barger and Ffolliott 1972; Voorhies
1977). Although the lighter pinyon and juniper woods
produce a lighter, less desirable lump product, pinyon and
juniper charcoals were used as a smelter fuel in the early
mining operations throughout the region (Lanner 1981).
Well-made charcoal contains approximately one-halfthe
volume and one-third the weight of the wood from which it
is made (USDA Forest Service 1961). Using an average
conversion value of 32 percent, calculated charcoal recovery per cord of wood for pinyon is 710 lb, for Utahjuniper is
715 lb, and for alligator juniper is 635 lb. Actual yields of
charcoal depend on the efficiency of the converting equipment and process used. Yields of 32 percent from pinyon
and 36 percent from Utah juniper were obtained in a sheet
metal kiln in Utah (Johnson 1965), while an average charcoal yield of 30 percent was obtained from pinyon and
juniper in a block kiln in Colorado (Troxell and Johnson
1964).
The lighter lump charcoal produced from pinyon and
juniper has a disadvantage in the market. A Utah study of
charcoal potential for these species concluded that the best
opportunities were in producing, bagging, and selling lump
charcoal. This conclusion was based on a lack of competition among producers of bagged lump charcoal in the
region, higher profit-to-cost ratios, and an assumption that
consumers recognize the inherent advantages oflump charcoal. The same study pointed out the disadvantage of
selling lump charcoal to briquetting plants, who incorporate their own charcoal production facilities into the operation and commonly buy outside charcoal at marginal prices.
Pulping
The physical and chemical properties of alligator juniper
wood, its sulfate pulping characteristics, and sulfate pulp
properties have been evaluated (Martin 1961). The evaluation indicated a relatively high lignin content, low pentosan content, and high extractives content, which are
detrimental to the yield and quality of pulp.
The wood pulped satisfactorily but produced low yields
that required nearly twice the quantity of bleach chemical
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-9. 1999
than is commonly required for bleachable pulps. The
strength of the pulp produced was intermediate between
hardwood and softwood sulfate pulps. The pulp was too
difficult to bleach for white paper stock, too weak for
unbleached high-grade bag and wrapping paper, and too
soft for corrugating board medium. Juniper sulfate pulp is
probably best suited in blends with other softwood pulps
(Martin 1961).
Pinyon has been experimentally pulped with satisfactory
results (Barger and Ffolliott 1972). Brightness and bleaching characteristics are similar to those of ponderosa pine.
However, because ofthe shorter fiber lengths, pulp strength
is below the average for softwood pulps. One test found that
pinyon and juniper could be used to make good quality
Kraft-paper (Murphy 1987).
Information on mechanical pulp from these species is
limited. However, high lignin and ex-tractive levels could be
a bonus for improving wet-strength properties and durability for packaging or paper overlays (Laufenberg, T. 1997
personal correspondence).
Pinyon-juniper stands offer some opportunity for pulpwood production since they can contain suitable material
and occupy large, continuous areas. Although the growth
form and debarking characteristics of pinyon are particularly adaptable to pulpwood processing, the economic feasibility of pulping pinyon-juniper species in the region is
questionable. Environmental concerns related to the pulp
industry must also be considered.
Extractive-Based Products
Appreciable quantities of extraneous chemical, called
extractives, are found in pinyon-juniper species. These
extractives occur mainly within cell cavities and intercellular structures such as resin ducts (Voorhies 1977). Some
extractives are obtained from the sap or gum by tapping
living trees, while others are obtained from chipped or
shredded wood by solvent or steam distillation.
Pinyon wood contains large quantities of oleoresin or
gum. Resin is collected by tapping the living trees in a
manner similar to that used in southern pine species.
Properties of the pinyon gum determine its potential use.
The resin collected in an early Arizona study contained 20
percent volatile constituents or gum turpentine and 80
percent rosin (Deaver and Haskell 1955). Products obtained from laboratory analyses of pinyon resin include
spirit, linseed oil, and tung oil varnishes, ester gum, and
zinc resinate (Westgate 1943). Murphy (1987) reported
tha t the branches and needles of pinyon and Utah j uni per
contain four times the resin of Douglas-fir. American Indians traditionally use pinyon pitch for a number of purposes.
The Zunis of western New Mexico use it as an antiseptic, a
pottery glaze, and burn it during religious ceremonies
(Miller and Albert 1993).
Juniper woods contain large quantities of oily, fragrant
extractives that are rich in cedrol and associated essential
oils. Eastern and southern juniper species are exploited
commercially for the prod uction of cedarwood oil marketed
for a variety of pharmaceuticals, perfumes, polishes, and
insecticides (Barger and Ffolliott 1972; Voorhies 1977).
However, the physical and chemical properties ofthejuniper species in the Interior West are largely unknown.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-9. 1999
Foliage of juniper species contains fragrant, oily extractives potentially valuable as essential oils. Northern whitecedar (Thuja occidentalis) and eastern red cedar in the
eastern United States have been commercially used for leaf
oils (Bender 1963). While the physical and chemical
properties of the leaf oils of Interior West junipers are
unknown, the main components, as in most conifers, should
be the terpene and sequiterpene series.
Other Pinyon Products _ _ _ __
Pinyon has been historically a source of edible nuts and
Christmas trees. Pinyon species produce nut crops at intervals of 4 to 7 years (Barger and Ffolliott 1972). Pinyon nuts
are harvested commercially or by individuals for personal
use. Nut crops are more frequent from trees where the
species flourishes and are less frequent near the fringe of
the type. Because of the staggered nature of the annual
crops among sites, locally "good crops" usually occur somewhere almost every year. Nut yields from the better stands
have been estimated to reach 300 lb/acre in a good crop year
(Hamilton 1965). Crop variability is shown by data from
woodlands administered by the USDI Bureau of Land
Management in Nevada (Born and others 1992). Commercial harvesters collected about 115,000 Ib of nuts in 1984, a
peak year, while less than 3,000 Ib were collected in 1989,
a drought year. This variability is a problem for nut brokers
and processors who prefer a constant supply to meet production and market demands. The price of pinyon nuts in
the Southwest fluctuates between years and within a year
depending on availability (Tanner and Grieser 1993). However, proper storage and handling of nuts and stable nut
prices during bumper years would help sustain the nut
market (Tanner and Grieser 1993).
Pinyon nuts are a popular woodland product throughout
the West, which may justify increased investment in processing and shipping. Bags of unshelled Nevada pinyon
nuts were sold in an Arizona supermarket chain during the
winter of 1995. This was a poor nut year in much of the
Southwest, and the bags of nuts sold out rapidly. Although
the profitability ofthis effort is unknown, the suppliers and
supermarket must have anticipated a profit. In November
1997, unshelled Nevada pinyon nuts were sold in bulk at
one rural southern California produce stand for $5.95 a
pound. Pinyon nuts have high dietary value and compare
favorably with pecans and other nuts in protein, fat, and
carbohydrates (Lanner 1981). Singleleaf pinyon nuts are
10 percent protein, 23 percent fat, and 54 percent carbohydrates. Commercial interests in New Mexico are attempting to increase the demand for pinyon nuts and to create
additional pinyon nut products and markets.
Pinyon nuts are an important food for American Indians.
The Washoe of Nevada, for example, have established
pinyon collection allotments in the Pine Nut Mountains
(Miller 1997).
Pinyon Christmas trees are favored by residents of the
Interior West. These trees are harvested mostly from natural stands, although the species are also prod uced in commercial plantations (Barger and Ffolliott 1972). Recent
declines in the demand for pinyon Christmas trees in some
areas is partly due to a decreased supply of high-quality
trees because of previous harvesting in the more accessible
257
stands. Christmas tree cutting remains a popular recreational activity by the general public. Increasing use of
artificial Christmas trees has also contributed to the decline in demand. However, the demand for pinyon Christmas trees in the Salt Lake City area has remained high
with prices for pinyon being comparable to those for several
species of tree-farm grown trees (Born and others 1992).
Potential Futu re Uses
More intensive and multiresource management of the
pinyon-juniper woodlands in the Interior West depends on
the development of economically and technically viable tree
products. Increased demand for manufactured tree products might justify increased stumpage prices and investment in land management to improve.ecosystem conditions
and tree growth and yield from stands on the better sites.
A main reason for low levels of management of pinyonjuniper woodlands is due to the poor economic return for all
tree and non-tree products.
A group representing the forest products industry, local
land owners, and government and nonprofit agencies was
established to develop products and markets for western
juniper (J. occidentalis) areas of Oregon (Swan 1995). The
group has supported marketing tests of juniper for fencing,
decking, and landscape timbers as well as flooring, cabinets, furniture, interior paneling, and novelty items. Swan
(1997) stressed the importance of knowing the species'
characteristics, potential products, manufacturing capabilities, and existing and potential market conditions. Many
western juniper trees have relatively straight boles which
gives them an advantage over multi-stemmed juniper species. These western junipers can be cut for logs and sawn
and processed for a number of products. Different harvesting methods, including the use of mechanical delimbers,
have been evaluated to determine relative production and
affects on soils (Swan 1997).
However, a potential for new and expansion of existing
products exists in the Interior ·West. The use of chips and
raw fiber in particleboard, composite doors, and furniture
needs further study. New technologies and compounds for
binding chips and fiber should produce new product options. The decline in harvesting of forest tree species may
increase the use of woodlands species, primarily pinyon, in
the pulp and paper industry.
Chipping on-site, particularly of whole trees, would allow
for more efficient harvesting by mechanical equipment
(Henderson and Baughman 1987). The physical and economic feasibility of these methods would depend on the
type of equipment used, and on site (slope, rockiness, soil
conditions) and stand conditions (density, tree size, volume). Henderson and Baughman (1987) mentioned the
need to develop equipment that is specifically adapted to
terrain and operating conditions found in the woodlands.
Economic viability also would depend on the costs of transporting the chips.
A variety of mechanical equipment, ranging from large,
self-propelled machines to small, trailer mounted units,
could be developed for woodland use. Mechanical methods
should be used only after consideration of stand and site
conditions. Woodland sites are divided into high and low
categories based on their ability to grow wood products
258
(Born and others 1992); high-site woodlands, which usually
contain pinyon, occupy about 5.9 million acres in Nevada.
High-quality stands on good sites should be managed under
a silvicultural system that sustains the production of tree
and other woodland products and maintains woodland
health (Gottfried and Severson 1993). Mechanical methods
allow for harvesting some smaller trees left in harvested
stands and for treating marginal juniper stands. However,
the use of mechanical methods must not repeat the mistakes of the pinyon-juniper control program of the late
1950's through the early 1970's, which resulted in large
continuous openings that are detrimental to many wildlife
species and aesthetically displeasing. Openings should be
narrow enough to provide edge and encourage herbaceous
use by wildlife. Trees and groups of trees should be left in
treated areas to provide a savanna landscape, and adjacent
untreated areas should be sufficient for wildlife.
Sustainability of tree resources for the future must be
considered. Some woody material, including snags, should
be left for nutrient recycling, erosion control, wildlife shelter, and herbaceous plant and tree regeneration. Archeological sites would have to be identified and protected.
There is a growing demand for rustic furniture and
novelty items made from native woods. The potential exists
in many rural and American Indian communities to manufacture these items, provided dependable markets are developed. Observations in rural New Mexico indicate that
high quality items, especially furniture, command relatively high prices. Initial start-up would require some
training of wood workers and artisans, but the effort would
benefit the local economies.
Management Implications _ _ __
The pinyon-juniper woodlands of the Interior West represent a vast resource of wood fiber, that is potentially useful
for many prod ucts. However, large-scale u tiliza tion of these
species is influenced by management programs implemented to improve woodland range conditions, hydrologic
behavior, and wildlife habitat conditions. Occurrence of
pinyon-juniper species is generally detrimental to forage
production (Clary and others 1974), but they protect naturallandscapes from excessive soil loss, provide habitat for
wildlife populations, and enhance aesthetic values.
Integrated resource management objectives for the pinyon-juniper woodlands must be achieved in conjunction
with ecologically sound land management. Environmental
concerns drive management programs for these woodlands
throughout the Interior West. Enhancement of species and
landscape diversity, in both spatial and temporal planes, is
a major concern. Utilization of pinyon-juniper species for
wood products must be carefully coordinated with the
management of other resources. Future utilization of pinyon-juniper species in the Interior West depends on market
availability and other economic considerations such as
efficient tree harvesting and wood processing operations.
References --------------------------------Barger, Roland L.; Ffolliott, Peter F. 1972. Physical characteristics and utilization potentials of major woodland tree species in
Arizona. Res. Pap. RM-83. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-9. 1999
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station: 80 p.
Bender, F. 1963. Cedar leaf oils. Pub. 1008. Ottawa, .Canada.
Canadian Department of Forestry: 1-16.
Born, J. David; Tymcio, Ronald P.; Casey, Osborne E. 1992.
Nevada forest resources. Res. Bull. INT-76. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 64 p.
Clary, Warren P.; Baker, Malchus B., Jr.; O'Connell, Paul F.;
Johnsen, Thomas N., Jr.; Campbell, Ralph E. 1974. Effects of
pinyon-juniper removal on natural resources products and uses
in Arizona. Res. Pap. RM-128. Fort Collins CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station: 28 p.
Deaver, Chester F.; Haskell, Horace S. 1955. Pinyon resources:
Distribution of pinyon (Pinus edulis), yield and resin potentialities, Navajo-Hopi Reservations, Arizona-Utah. Tucson,AZ: University of Arizona Press: 1-37
Englerth, George H.; Lutz, John F.; Mueller, Lincoln A. 1953.
Veneer cutting of western juniper. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, -Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 6 p.
Evans, Raymond A. 1988. Managing pinyon-juniper woodlands. Gen.
Tech. Rep. INT-249. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 34 p.
Ffolliott, Peter F. 1977. Product potential of pinyon-juniper woodlands: In: Aldon, Earl F.; Loring, Thomas J., tech. coords.
Ecology, uses, and management of pinyon-juniper woodlands.
Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-39. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station: 28-31.
Ffolliott, Peter F.; Clary, Warren P. 1986. Pinyon-juniper woodlands in the Southwest. In: Ffolliott, Peter F.; Swank, Wayne T.,
eds. Potentials of noncommercial forest biomass for energy.
Tech. Bull. 256. Tucson, AZ: Arizona Agricultural Experiment
Station: 3-10.
Gottfried, Gerald J.; Severson, Kieth E. 1993. Distribution and
multiresource management of pinon-juniper woodlands in the
southwestern United States. In: Aldon, E. F.; Shaw, D. W., tech.
coords. Managing pinon-juniper ecosystems for sustainability
and social needs. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-236. Fort Collins, CO:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 108-116.
Hamilton, Andrew. 1965. A matter of a pinyon. American Forests. 71: 60-61, 74.
Henderson, Donald E.; Baughman, Mike L. 1987. Whole tree
harvesting of the pinyon-juniper type: economic and institutional considerations. In: Everett, R.L., compiler; Proceedingspinyon-juniper conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 192-195.
Johnson, Walter H. 1965. Economic analysis of charcoal production from the pinyon-juniper type. Annual Project Report and
Work Plan, Project 638. Logan, UT: Utah Agricultural Experiment Station. (Unpublished).
Keegan, Charles E., III; Wichman, Daniel P.; Van Hooser, Dwane D.
1995. Utah's forest products industry: a descriptive analysis, 1992.
Res. Bull. INT-RB-83. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 21 p.
Lanner, Ronald M. 1981. The pinon pine: a natural and cultural
history. University of Nevada Press, Reno. 208 p.
LeBaron, Allen D. 1968. Estimating profits from sales of pinyonjuniper products. Resource Ser. 43. Logan, UT: Utah Agricultural Experiment Station. 28 p.
LeBaron, Allen D.; Johnson, Walter H. 1965. Utah wood and
California fireplaces. Utah Farm and Home Science. 26: 7-11.
Martin, J. S. 1961. Sulfate pulping of alligator juniper. Rep. 2219.
Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Forest Products Laboratory: 1-2.
McLain, William H. 1989. New Mexico's 1986 fuelwood harvest.
Res. Bull. INT-60. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 8 p.
McLain, William H. 1997. Utah's 1992 fuelwood harvest. Res. Bull.
INT-RB-89. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Research Station. 8 p.
Meagher, George S. 1940. Service life of untreated juniper and
cypress fence posts in Arizona. Res. Rep. 2: Tucson, AZ: U.S.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-9. 1999
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwestern Forest and Range Experiment Station: 1-9.
Miller, Ronald K 1997. Cultural uses of the "forgotten forest."
Journal of Forestry. 95: 24-28.
Miller, Ronald K; Albert, Steven K 1993. Zuni cultural relationships to pinon-juniper woodlands. In: Aldon, E. F.; Shaw, D. W.,
tech. coords. Managing pinon-juniper ecosystems for
sustainability and social needs. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-236. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 74-78.
Murphy, Patrick M. 1987. Specialty wood products from pinyonjuniper. In: Everett, RL., compiler; Proceedings-pinyon-juniper conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 166-167.
Schmidt, Lawrence A. 1995. Pinon-juniper fuelwood markets in
the Southwest. In: Shaw, D.W.; Aldon, E.F.; LoSapio, C., tech.
coords.; Desired future conditions for pinon-juniper ecosystems.
Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-258. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station: 214-218.
Sowles, Kenneth M. 1966. Fuelwood feasibility study for the
northern Rio Grande R C. & D. project area. Santa Fe, NM: New
Mexico State Forestry Department: 1-7.
Space, Jackson W. 1940. Woodland utilization study. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Region 3: 1-12.
Swan, Larry. 1995. Western juniper: an evolving case study in
commercialization, ecosystem, and community development.
In: Shaw, D.W.; Aldon, E.F.; LoSapio, C., tech. coords.; Desired
future conditions for pinon-juniper ecosystems. Gen. Tech. Rep.
RM-258. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station: 179-183.
Swan, Larry. 1997. Western juniper harvest system comparison
project: final report. Klamath County Economic Development
Association. 24 p. plus appendices. (Unpublished report).
Tanner, Ellis; Grieser, Don. 1993. Four generations trading pinon
nuts with Native Americans: changes needed for future pros perity. In: Aldon, E. F.; Shaw, D. W., tech. coords. Managing pinonjuniper ecosystems for sustainability and social needs. Gen.
Tech. Rep. RM-236. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station: 29-33.
Troxell, H. E.; Johnson, R J. 1964. Making charcoal from singleleaf
pinyon pine and Utah juniper. Gen. Servo Rep. 809. Fort Collins,
CO: Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station. 8 p.
Tueller, Paul T.; Beeson, C. Dwight; Tausch, Robin J.; West, Neal
E.; Rea, Kenneth H. 1979. Pinyon-juniper woodlands of the
Great Basin: distribution, flora, vegetal cover. Res. Paper
INT-229. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Research Station. 22 p.
USDA Forest Service. 1961. Charcoal production, marketing, and
use. Rep. 2213. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Forest Product Laboratory. 137 p.
USDA Forest Service. 1966. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station 1965 annual report. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station: 1-46.
Van Hooser, Dwane D.; Green, Alan W. 1983. Utah's forest resources, 1978. Resource Bull. INT-30. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 58 p.
Voorhies, Glenn. 1977. What is known and not known about
pinyon-juniper utilization. In: Aldon, Earl F.; Loring, Thomas
J., tech. coords. Ecology, uses, and management of pinyonjuniper woodlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-39. Fort Collins, CO:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 32-34.
Wagstaff, Fred J. 1987. Economics of managing pinyon-juniper
lands for woodland products. In: Everett, RL., compiler; Proceedings-pinyon-juniper conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Research Station: 168-172.
Westgate, Mark W. 1943. Briefnotes on pinyon resin and stick lac
from Arizona. Circ. 665: National Paint, Varnish, and Lacquer
Association: 190-198.
259