SMC Quarterly News
www.standmgt.org
Stand Management Cooperative
College of Forest Resources, University of Washington
3rd Quarter 2007
From the Director
The school year has just finished, the field season has been completed and
the database is being updated and will be ready by the end of June. Please
contact Randy Collier (rcollier@u.washington.edu) to get the updated CD if
you are qualified under the data policy in the SMC By-laws. We are looking
forward to a very productive summer season. Between the SMC, Precision
Forestry Cooperative, the Corkery Family Chair, and other grants we will
Dave Briggs, SMC Director
have a number of students working in the field this summer. Paul Footen and
Royce Andersen who were on the 2006 summer crew have returned as both
are starting their Masters programs. They will be joined by Kim Littke, another new Masters student, Alice Drury and Melanie Welch both of whom
are seniors. Randy Collier will be working with Kim gathering detailed site
characterizations at the three GGTIV installations planted in 2005. The other
crew members will be visiting a variety of installations for vegetation and
habitat surveys, soil sampling, moth surveys, stem mapping, acoustic testing of
trees, etc. Cindy Flint completed her Masters thesis “Leaching of nitrogen
from the rooting zone of Douglas-fir forests following urea fertilization and
potential impacts on water quality of the Hood Canal” and will be developing
an article for journal submission; her thesis is available at http://
soilslab.cfr.washington.edu/publications/.
inside:
From the Director
This is our first issue that will be distributed only in electronic form. By
1
eliminating the print form we eliminate printing and mailing costs, the mailing
Progress on the Tree to Log to
Product Non-destructive Testing
Study
5
cost limit on size, and the print shop queue. In this issue you will find a
First Growth Measurements on
the GGTIV Installations
7
testing study, a report summarizing the first growth measurements on the
Abstracts and Publications
13
three GGTIV installations planted in 2005, and information concerning the
Meetings
14
summary of the SMC Spring Meeting, an update on the Non-destructive
SMC Fall Meeting.
SMC Spring Meeting
The meeting began on April 26 with 60 attendees from 20 organizations. Policy
Committee Chair Gene McCaul opened the meeting and stressed the importance of the strategic planning process that has produced a draft strategic plan
document that would be discussed during the meeting.
Director Dave Briggs reviewed a handout summarizing accomplishments thus
far in 2007. Cumulative funding since the SMC was founded in 1985 has reached
$17.1 million. The 06/07 field work is nearly finished and includes first measurements of the 2005 GGTIV installations and work on the non-destructive testing
study. External funds received thus far include $40,000 from NCASI for continued work at Fall River, $70,600 per year for the next three years supporting the
BC Ministry of Forests Research Branch for work on the BC installation, funds
from the Corkery Family Foundation to support summer field crew work, and
Gessel Scholarship funding of graduate students. Three publications are or soon
will be in print and several are in review. The Strategic Planning Committee met
in February and developed a document that was discussed in the meeting. . The
SMC also has a Visiting Scholar, Johannes Breidenbach from Germany and a Post
Doc, Brian Strahm.
The Strategic Planning Committee met on February 27, 2007 and developed a
strategic plan document which was sent in advance of the meeting. The
mission and vision statements were reviewed. The mission statement remains as
follows
“The mission of the Stand Management Cooperative is to provide a continuing source
of high-quality information on the long-term effects of silvicultural treatments and
treatment regimes on stand and tree growth and development and on wood and
product quality.”
After much discussion the following vision statement was adopted
“To be the preeminent provider of silvicultural research information and analysis in the
Pacific Northwest…
•
Through the ongoing development of quality silvicultural and wood quality
research information, by
•
Providing leadership and promotion of collaborative research synthesis
throughout the region for the purposes of
•
Furthering global competitiveness of the forest products sector and improving
environmental benefits to society.”
A set of draft goals were reviewed and modified with the following six adopted:
2
1. Define and design research to understand the short and long term
effects of silvicultural treatments on timber (growth and yield, wood
quality, etc.) and environmental (habitat, carbon, water, etc.) values of
forests.
2. Create, maintain and monitor appropriate field installations with consistent field measurement protocols, and develop a corresponding database
management system to implement the research needs defined by
objective 1.
3. Conduct analyses and develop models to synthesize and integrate the
information into products that can support decision making.
4. Conduct technology transfer to assist in the implementation of knowledge gained from the research.
5. Foster opportunities for training future professionals.
6. Develop opportunities for collaboration with other organizations and
individuals and opportunities to leverage SMC research programs.
Specific objectives and timelines within each of these goals were reviewed. The
Strategic Planning Committee will incorporate suggestions into a new draft for
discussion at the Fall Meeting.
The subject of merging the Stand Management and Precision Forestry Cooperatives has been suggested by individuals from both cooperatives. After discussion,
it was agreed that this should also consider relationships with the Center for
Intensive Plantation Silviculture. This will also be discussed at the May 24 Precision Forestry Cooperative Executive Board meeting and, if that group agrees, a
joint committee should be formed to investigate this idea further.
Silviculture Project Report: Eric Turnblom reviewed the 06/07 field season in
which a total of 47 installations (462 plots) were visited. This includes 12 Type I
installations (164 plots) with full measurements and 4 installations (5 plots) with
partial measurements and foliage samples from 12 plots. Five Type II installations
(20 plots) received full measurements, one installation (1 plot) with partial
measurement and 4 installations (19 plots) destructively sampled for the tree to
product acoustic study. Seven Type III installations (48 plots) received full
measurements, six (22 plots) received partial measurements and 5 plots were
thinned. The three 2005 GGTIV installations (66 plots) received their first
measurement and the three 2006 GGTIV’s had survival surveys. Five carry-over
study installations (10) plots were measured, and two contract installations (56
plots) were measured. Procedures for continued monitoring of the GGTIV’s
were reviewed. Eric noted several publications that are now in print and briefly
summarized previous TAC meetings. He announced that the Tree List Generator
Graphical User Interface is available.
3
Modeling Project Report: Greg Johnson announced that he was stepping down
as Modeling Project Leader and that Dave Marshall will take his place. Dave
reviewed the recent accomplishments and status of ORGANON and the young
stand model. He also reviewed some ideas for future work that lay the groundwork for a future TAC meeting.
Nutrition Project Report: Rob Harrison summarized the latest information from
the carry-over study which warrants continued monitoring as some interesting
results are now beginning to emerge. There was discussion to expand this study
to some other sites with different treatment levels and it was agreed that this
could, and will be done. Rob reviewed the current status of the proposal for new
fertilization trials. A draft has been circulated, comments are being incorporated,
and a budget is under development. The updated proposal will be sent for
further review and discussion.
Wood Quality Project Report: Because of the field demands of the bear damage
and non-destructive testing studies, the TAC did not meet as was planned at the
Fall 2006 meeting; a meeting later this Spring is now in early planning. All of the
woods and log yard work, veneer milling and sawmilling for the AGENDA 2020
project “Non-destructive evaluation of wood quality in standing Douglas-fir trees and
logs” has been completed. The veneer was shipped to USFPL in early January and
testing is compete. The lumber will be planed on May 1-2 and shipped to USFPL
for testing. The bear damage study was also completed. Reports on both were
presented in the technical session.
Technical Session: The afternoon of April 26 and morning of April 27 were
devoted to research presentations and progress reports; these can be found on
the SMC website under the SMC Spring Meeting Agenda link.
www.cfr.washington.edu/research.smc/.
Fall Meeting
The SMC Fall Meeting has been scheduled for September 17-18 at Oregon State
University at the Willamette Room which is located in The Valley Library. A
block of rooms is being held under “Stand” at the Salbasgeon Suites and Conference Center, 800-965-8808, (https://www.salbasgeon.com/properties.html).
The agenda, field trip itinerary and registration costs are being developed and
will be posted on the web as updates become available (http://
www.cfr.washington.edu/research.smc/). Please contact Megan O’Shea
(moshea@u.washington.edu) if you have any questions.
4
Non-destructive Testing Study Update
Wood logs and cookies at Installation 805.
All field, milling, and veneer testing has been completed and lumber testing
is nearly finished on the AGENDA 2020 project “Non-destructive evaluation of wood quality in standing Douglas-fir trees and logs”. Collaborators
include the University of Washington College of Forest Resources (SMC
and PFC), USDA Forest Service, PNW Research Station, USDA Forest
Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Fibre-Gen, New Zealand, Green
Diamond Resource Company, Port Blakely Tree Farms, Washington Department
of Natural Resources, and Weyerhaeuser Company. Milling was done at the
Weyerhaeuser veneer mill in Foster, OR. and at the South Union Sawmill in Elma,
WA. The tables summarize statistics on the Type II installations
sampled and the quantities of material processed for the
veneer and lumber phases of this study. The discrepancy
between the gross and net number of trees for the veneer
study reflects weather related problems that prevented delivery of logs from the veneer trees at the Viola site in time for
the peeling.
At present we are working on checking and integrating all of
the data, completing measurements from cookies cut from the
ends of each log, and developing some preliminary analyses.
Weyerhaeuser is taking strips from each of the cookies for xray densitometry and possible other basic tests of wood
properties in the
future. Presentations on this
project will be
given at the 15th
International
Bert Hasselberg and Bob Gonyea weighing
Symposium on
cookies at Installation 808.
Nondestructive
Testing of Wood in Duluth, MN on
September 10-12 and at the IUFRO
All Division 5 Conference in Taipei,
Taiwan on October 29-November 2.
5
South Union Sawmill in Elma, WA.
Non-destructive Testing Study Update
Inst #
803
805
807
808
SMCType II Installations for Tree to log to mill test on NDT tools
Name
Owner
Location
Age (2005) SI (King) QMD, in HT40, ft
50
140
14
126
Beeville Loop
Green Diamond
Shelton, WA
35
135
12
105
Pilchuck Bridge
WADNR
Mt Vernon, WA
Viola
Port Blakely
Estacada, OR
33
115
11
82
M21 Road
Weyerhaeuser
Salem, OR
48
88
13
102
Veneer
Trees
Wood Logs (35ft)
Mill Logs (17ft)
Veneer Blocks (8.5ft)
Veneer Sheets
Veneer from Weyerhaeuser veneer mill
in Foster, OR.
Number
Scribner Scale
Cubic Scale
Number
Total
# Full
# Half
Volume, cu.ft
Gross
114
236
23,170
4,035
695
Net
84
186
22,360
3,909
372
627
4,516
877
2,281
Lumber
Trees
Wood Logs (33ft)
Mill Logs (16ft)
Lumber
Lumber from South Union Sawmill in
Elma, WA.
6
Number
Number
Scribner Scale
Cubic Scale
Number
2x4
2x6
Dimension Volume
1x4
1x6
Board Volume
Total Volume
Gross
114
266
26,730
4,524
425
25,815
1,853
27,668
Net
114
246
26,120
4,382
318
443
1,318
25,290
133
143
1,823
27,112
First Growth Measurements on the Type IV
GGTIV Installations
Eric C. Turnblom, Silviculture Project Leader, SMC, University of
Washington and Keith Jayawickrama, Director, NWTIC, Oregon
State University
INTRODUCTION
Forest managers need information on the joint effects of tree spacing, expected
genetic gain level, fertilization, and vegetation control on growth, yield, and quality
of trees in coastal Douglas-fir plantations. In partial fulfillment of this need, the
NorthWest Tree Improvement Cooperative (NWTIC) and the Stand Management
Cooperative (SMC) have collaborated and jointly designed a large scale silvicultural experiment in the Grays Harbor breeding zone to meet the following
objectives: 1) provide information to guide managers currently applying combinations of genetics, spacing and vegetation control; 2) provide linkages with other
studies (such as Genetic Gain Trials, intensive vegetation management trials,
spacing trials (like SMC Type III), that will assist modeling; 3) compare realized
gains (per unit area basis) with predicted gains (individual tree basis); and 4)
compare estimates of growth, yield, and quality parameters for populations with
different expected growth potentials. For logistical reasons, three of six total
replications were planted in 2005, and three more in 2006. This report summarizes the preliminary findings from analyzing the three installations planted in 2005,
which are the only measurements available to date.
EXPERIMENTAL MATERIAL & METHODS
The experimental design controls three factors. The factors are expected genetic
gain having three levels: unimproved (woods run), moderate genetic gain, and elite
genetic gain; a spacing factor with three levels: 7 x 7, 10 x 10, and 15 x 15 ft; and a
vegetation control intensity factor with two levels: one herbicide application at
planting, multiple herbicide applications to keep 80% bare ground until crown
closure.
Seedlings were grown at the Sylvan-Vale nursery as Styro-15 plugs. At shipping,
100 trees of each genetic gain level were randomly sampled and measured for
caliper and total height. Seedlings were planted in mid-February 2005 and seedling selection rates, i.e., the proportion of seedlings planted compared to the final
inventory, was recorded for each gain level.
7
There are 22 plots at each research location, hypothetically arranged spatially as in
Figure 1. The Genetic Gain Trial plots in the experiment are arranged within an
installation in five blocks of three plots, where each block consists of one plot of
each level of genetic gain all at the 10 x 10 ft spacing. The Type IV Trial plots are
dispersed within an installation, having two plots in common with the Genetic
Gain Trial. Each installation is fenced around the perimeter of the entire unit.
Initial measurements were taken in the dormant season two growing seasons
after planting, that is, in winter 2007. Measurements included basal diameter at 6
in. above ground on all trees, Diameter Breast Height (DBH) on all trees tall
enough to have a DBH, total height on all trees, crown width in two perpendicular directions on a 42-tree sample, height-to-live crown on the same 42-tree
sample, comments when warranted (such as DE for dead, BR for browse, etc.),
and the genetic family tab number on elite and moderate gain stock.
The appropriate analysis identifies each installation as a statistical block, with
Genetic Gain Trial blocks nested within each installation. The genetic gain,
spacing, and vegetation control factors are all crossed in typical factorial treatment structure. Response variables analyzed were survival, total height, basal
diameter, and crown width.
RESULTS
Intensity of vegetation control did not contribute to any differences in treatments at this stage. This seems to indicate that the initial herbicide treatments
may have kept competing vegetation from taking over enough growing space to
interfere with the trees, even after two growing seasons.
8
Figure 1. Schematic layout of a typical GGTIV installation showing expected genetic gain level
(G1, G2, G3), spacing level (S1, S2, S3), and vegetation control level (V1,V2). Purple and gold
colored plots denote shared GG trial and Type IV trial plots. Green plots are the only ones
without complete vegetation control (level V1). Plots with no indication of spacing or
vegetation control level are planted 10 x 10 and receive complete control treatment.
Survival
The statistical model for survival explained 99.5% of the total variation, exhibiting a standard error of the estimate of 0.0620 (units of %). Installation produced
a significant effect on survival (p < 0.0001). On average, Crane Creek (installation 603) had the best survival at 92.2%, followed by Donkey Creek 2 (installation 601) at 91.6%, and then Donaldson Creek (installation 602) with 84.8%.
Effects of spacing on survival appeared to be marginally significant at this stage (p
= 0.0464). Overall, the tighter spacings exhibited marginally better survival.
Interestingly, the genetic gain x spacing interaction was also significant (p =
0.004). It appears at this early date that unimproved stock survives slightly
better at the 7 x 7 ft spacing, but elite gain survives marginally better at the 15 x
15 ft spacing (see Figure 2).
Estimated survival (%) - 1st Meas 2005 GGTIV
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
7x7
10x10
Spacing (ft.)
woods run
moderate
15x15
high
Figure 2. Mean survival (in percent) for each genetic gain – spacing combination. Error bars
represent +/- one standard error of the mean.
Total Height
The statistical model for total height explained 99.5% of the total variation, with
an observed standard error of the estimate of 0.1688 ft. As expected, a large
installation effect was observed (p < 0.0001). Donkey Creek 2 averaged 2.72 ft,
followed by Donaldson Creek with an average height of 2.23 ft, while trees at
Crane Creek averaged 2.09 ft. The effect of spacing on height appeared to be
significant (p= 0.0294). The 10 x 10 spacing is exhibiting the tallest trees averaged over all gain levels at this stage. Genetic gain level does not impact or
interact with spacing or vegetation control intensity at this stage (see Figure 3).
9
Estimated Height - 1st M eas. 2005 GGTIV
2.6
Average Total Height (ft)
2.4
2.2
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
7x7
10x10
Spacing (ft)
woods run
moderate
15x15
high
Figure 3. Mean height for each genetic gain – spacing combination. Error bars represent +/one standard error of the mean.
Basal Diameter - 1st M eas 2005 GGTIV
0.7
Basal Diameter (in.)
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
7x7
woods run
10x10
Spacing (ft.)
moderate
15x15
high
Figure 4. Mean basal diameter for each genetic gain – spacing combination. Error bars
represent +/- one standard error of the mean.
10
Basal Diameter
The statistical model for basal diameter explained 99.5% of total variation,
exhibiting an observed standard error of the estimate of 0.04519 in. Again, the
installation effect was significant (p << 0.01). Basal diameter at Donkey Creek 2
averaged 0.74 in., at Donaldson Creek basal diameter averaged 0.56 in., while at
Crane Creek, basal diameter averaged 0.52 in.
Very mild evidence for an effect of genetic gain on basal diameter was observed
(p = 0.057) and some evidence for a spacing effect on basal diameter was
observed also (p = 0.032). No effect due to intensity of vegetation control was
observed at this stage (Figure 4).
Estimated Crown Width - 1st Meas. 2005 GGTIV
1.5
Average Crown Width (ft)
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
7x7
woods run
10x10
Spacing (ft)
moderate
15x15
high
Figure 5. Mean crown width for each genetic gain – spacing combination. Error bars
represent +/- one standard error of the mean.
Crown Width
11
The statistical model for crown width explained 99.3% of the total variation and
exhibited a standard error of the estimate of 0.1122 ft. Again, strong evidence of
an installation effect on crown width was observed (p < 0.0001). At Donkey
Creek 2, crown widths averaged 1.47 ft, at Donaldson Creek crown width
averaged 1.31 ft, and at Crane Creek the average crown width was 1.13 ft. Fairly
strong evidence for an effect of genetic gain level on crown width was observed
(p = 0.0077). It appears at this stage that unimproved stock has wider crowns
than either moderate or elite gain levels. Mild evidence (p = 0.0505) for a
spacing effect was observed (see Figure 5).
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS
These preliminary results should be considered to be just that: PRELIMINARY. The
conclusions are based on exactly half the number of observations that will eventually
be available for analysis.
Overall, and not unexpectedly, strong evidence for installation level effects on all
response variables was observed (p < 0.0001 in all cases). The installation effect most
certainly includes the differences caused by site quality (site index). Differences may be
due also to minor variations in aspect, elevation, slope, soil types, as well as other local
effects. Overall differences in amounts of local animal damage sustained (fences work
most of the time, but may fail during significant storm events due to fallen trees, etc.)
may have contributed to installation-wide differences, as well.
Survival was marginally better at the narrowest spacing after two years (p = 0.0464).
The interaction between gain level and spacing – high gain survived better at widest
spacing, but woods run at narrowest – provides room to speculate whether it will
continue through time.
Height was seemingly affected by spacing (p = 0.0294) after two growing seasons, but
the effect appears to be quite small at this stage. No differences in height due to
genetic gain level were observed.
Surprisingly, basal diameter appeared to be the largest for the woods run stock, though
quite marginally so. Given that they started out with a larger caliper as shipped from
the nursery, about 4.6 mm for the woods run compared to 4.4 mm for the elite, it may
just be a carryover into the field until the seedlings become acclimated to the sites and
the genetic advantage expected from the elite gain level truly begins to express itself.
Crown width seemed strongly affected by gain level (p=0.0077), slightly by spacing
(p=0.0505). Narrower crowns were observed in the elite gain level.
It is interesting to speculate whether or not carbohydrates are allocated differently in
the elite gain versus the woods run based on these results. Perhaps the elite gain level
allocates relatively more to height growth than to crown expansion when compared to
the unimproved stock, since their heights are the same, but basal diameter is smaller in
the elite gain. Narrower crowns on elite gain seedlings along with similar heights as
the woods run indicates less crown volume in the elite gain seedlings, which may in
turn indicate more efficient use of carbohydrates for height growth, assuming equal
foliage density.
12
Next year we will incorporate the second set of installations, i.e., those sites that were
planted in 2006, which will enable us to analyze the complete set of six installations.
The real questions to be answered, of course, are how the small differences observed
at this stage develop over time.
Abstracts and Publications
John C. Tappeiner II, Douglas A. Maguire and Timothy B. Harrington. Silviculture and
Ecology of Western U.S. Forests. 448 pages, B&W photographs, line drawings, references, index. ISBN 978-0-87071-187-9. Paperback, $35.00. Secure online ordering is
available at http://oregonstate.edu/dept/press/s-t/Silviculture.html
ABSTRACT: Once regarded mainly as the cultivation of forest trees, silviculture is
today shifting to a broader focus, one that reflects society’s changing forest values. In
addition to timber management, the practice and science of silviculture are now
concerned with tending forests-to maintain forest health and reduce fire potential,
benefit wildlife, and maintain aesthetics-and with ensuring options for future uses of
the forest. Silviculture and Ecology of Western U.S. Forests follows the progression of
silviculture as a science and looks closely at the value of forests. The only silviculture
text to focus on the forests of the western U.S., primarily those in Oregon, Washington, and California, it is based on over 900 references as well as the authors’ extensive
research and management experince.
Yuzhen Li, Eric C. Turnblom, and David G. Briggs. Effects of density control and
fertilization on growth and yield of young Douglas-fir plantations in the Pacific
Northwest. Can. J. For. Res. 37(2): 449–461 (2007).
ABSTRACT: To examine the effects of density control and fertilization on stand
growth and yield of young Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) plantations, seven treatment regimes were applied in sixty-three 9-year-old plots from nine
installations across western Washington and Oregon. Fertilizer was applied at the rate
of 220 kg N·ha–1 (as urea) at stand establishment and every 4 years thereafter. Results
after 12 years showed that widely spaced stands exhibited significantly larger quadratic mean diameter than did narrowly spaced stands. The densest stands initially had
the greatest overall stand basal area and volume, but accumulation rate in the dense
stands had been declining with time. After 12 years, the less dense stands had met or
exceeded the basal area periodic annual increment of dense stands. Across all densities, the periodic annual increments of quadratic mean diameter, basal area, and
volume in fertilized plots were significantly greater than in unfertilized plots following
the first and second urea applications. However, the first fertilization was insufficient
to produce a significant increase in stand yield and the significant fertilization increases
in yield were found following the second and the third urea applications. This study
showed neither significant fertilization effect nor density effect on dominant height. In
addition, no significant interactions were found for any stand growth and yield
variables considered, but fertilization responses showed different trends among
density treatments over time.
13
Upcoming Meetings and Events
June 24-26, 2007, Meeting of the Western Forest Mensurationists, Lake Okanagan Resort,
Kelowna, British Columbia. For more information please visit: www.westernforestry.org/wmens/
July 31-August 1, 2007, NWFSC Summer Meeting, Diamond Lake Ranger District, Umpqua national
Forest. For more information visit: http://soilslab.cfr.washington.edu/nwfsc/
August 7-10, 2007, International Scientific Conference Forest Growth and Timber Quality:
Crown Models and Simulation Methods for Sustainable Forest Management, Doubletree Hotel,
Portland, OR. For more information please visit: www.westernforestry.org/
September 17-18, 2007, SMC Annual Fall Meeting, OSU Library, Willamette Room, Oregon
State University, Corvallis OR., Lodging can be booked at the Salbasgeon Suites and Conference
Center under the group code “Stand.” For more information visit the SMC Home Page: www.standmgt.org
College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, Box 352100
Seattle, WA. 98195
14