The Longleaf Alliance

8Biennial Regional

Confererence Proceedings

Th

Longleaf Through Time:Yesterday, Today, tomorrow

October 12-15, 2010Columbia, SC

Longleaf Alliance Report No. 16

Kush, John S., comp. 2012. Longleaf through time: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow. Proceedings of the Eighth Longleaf Alliance Regional Conference; October 12-15, 2010, Columbia, SC. Longleaf Alliance Report No. 16.

 

 

 

 

 

The Longleaf Alliance

8th Biennial

Regional Conference

Longleaf Through Time:

Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow

October 12-15, 2010

Columbia, SC 

 

 

 

 

 

ii 

 

 

We would like to thank the following for providing financial support:

Old Growth Level ($10,000 or above)

The Home Depot Foundation

U.S. Forest Service

Pole Stage Level ($5,000 - $9,999)

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Grass Stage Level ($2,500 - $4,999)

USDA-Farm Services Agency

Milliken Forestry Company

National Wild Turkey Federation

US Army Office of Regional Environmental and Government Affairs

Seedling Level ($500 - $2,499)

Columbia Metropolitan Convention & Visitors Bureau

Escambia County Soil and Water

Hancock Forest Management

Meeks Farms and Nursery

National Wildlife Federation

South Carolina Tree Farm Committee

Whitfield Farms and Nursery

iii 

 

Exhibitors & Vendors

Ag-Renewal, Inc.

Beaver Plastics Ltd.

Berger Peat Moss

Blanton’s Container Pines

Bodenhamer Farms & Nursery

Cahaba River Publishing

Dow AgroSciences

DuPont

International Forest Company

Meadowview Biological Research Station

Meeks Farms and Nursery

Roundstone Native Seed

South Carolina Tree Farm Committee

Stone Forestry Services, Inc.

Stuewe and Sons, Inc.

Truax Company

USDA-Farm Service Agency

Whitfield Farms and Nursery

iv 

 

Table of Contents

2010 Regional Conference Field Trip Forward and Summary ........................................... 1

Looming Large Over the Landscape and in our Lives: The Legacy of Larry Harris ......... 8 Johnny Stowe

SPEAKER ABSTRACTS

State of the Longleaf Alliance ............................................................................................. 11   E.J. Williams 

Voluntary Gopher Tortoise Habitat Crediting System ...................................................... 13   Todd Gartner 

The Business of Ecosystem Mitigation ............................................................................. 14   John McGuire 

Federal Interest in Longleaf Pine Restoration: The Cost Share Programs ....................... 15   David Hoge

Conservation Easements ................................................................................................... 16   Lewis Hay 

The Safe Harbor Program: A Brosnan Forest Perspective ................................................ 17   Josh Raglin 

Ecological Forestry in Longleaf Pine: Concepts and Examples from Ichauway .............. 18   Steve Jack 

An Adaptive Fire Management Report Card for the Largest Longleaf Landscape .......... 19   James Furman & Brett Williams 

Understory Restoration ..................................................................................................... 20   John Cox 

Pine Straw Management ....................................................................................................21   Herb Nicholson 

Economics of Longleaf ...................................................................................................... 22   Rhett Johnson 

v 

 

More Than Just Another Pretty Map – Utilizing Geo-Spatial Technology to Aid in Landowner Decision Making ............................................................................................ 23   Rebecca J. Barlow 

A Decision Support Tool for Open-Pine Ecosystem Conservation in the East Gulf Coastal Plain ................................................................................................................................... 24   Catherine Rideout 

Range-wide Quail Suitability Model ................................................................................. 25   Theron Terhune 

Ongoing GIS Mapping Effort and the Need for a Regional Longleaf GIS Database........ 26   John C. Gilbert 

Introdution and Keynote Address..................................................................................... 27   Rhett Johnson & Robert Bonnie 

POSTER ABSTRACTS

Longleaf 101: Developing More Longleaf Expertise through Training Resource Professionals ...................................................................................................................... 29   JJ Bachant-Brown, Anne 

Uneven-aged Management of Longleaf Pine: A Long-term Demonstration ................... 30   Rebecca J. Barlow, John C. Gilbert, John S. Kush

Challenging Time and Changing Values: Developing Innovative Land Use Options for Small-Scale, Private Landowners ...................................................................................... 31   Becky Barlow, Crystal Lupo, Janice Dyer, and Na Zhou

Alabama Pine Straw Association ...................................................................................... 32   Leh Bass, Becky Barlow, Janice Dyer, John S. Kush, John C. Gilbert

Species Composition and Structure of South Carolina Piedmont Tree Communities .... 33 Arvind A.R. Bhuta and Lisa M. Kennedy

Variation in Cavity-Nesting Bird Densities Across Two Fire-Maintained Longleaf Pine Forests and Implications for Factors Limiting Their Populations ................................... 39

Lori A. Blanc, Kevin R. Rose, and Jeffrey R. Walters

Understanding Genetic Diversity, Physiologic Expression and Carbon Dynamics in Longleaf Pine: A New Research Planting at the Harrison Experimental Forest ............. 40

John R. Butnor, Kurt H. Johnsen, and C. Dana Nelson

vi 

 

Plant Community Analysis of the Pine Mountain Region of West-Central Georgia ....... 41 Robert Carter and Robert Floyd

Germination and Field Survival of White-Topped Pitcher Plant Seeds ........................... 42 Kristina Connor and Hilliard Gibbs

Pine Straw: Exploring Market Potential ........................................................................... 47 Janice F. Dyer, John Kush, Becky Barlow, and John Gilbert

New DNA Markers for Longleaf Pine ............................................................................... 54 Craig S. Echt, Dennis Deemer, and C. Dana Nelson

Exceptional Rarity and Carnivory: Characterizing Wetland Plant Communities in the Fall Line Sandhills ............................................................................................................. 55

Michele Elmore, Julie Ballenger, and Wade Harrison

Mountain Longleaf 2010 ................................................................................................... 61 Bill Garland

Morality in Natural Even-aged Longleaf Pine .................................................................. 64 John C. Gilbert, John S. Kush, and Rebecca J. Barlow

GIS Technology as a Path to Restoration: Mapping Longleaf Pine Forests ..................... 65 John C. Gilbert and John S. Kush

Miscommunication and Confusion About Longleaf Pine Growth: Is It What You Say or What You Mean? ............................................................................................................... 66

John S. Kush

Plant HOW MANY Longleaf Pines Per Acre???? .............................................................. 70 John S. Kush, Rebecca J. Barlow, and John C. Gilbert

Will There Be Enough Longleaf Pine Seed to Meet the Goal of “America’s Longleaf” Initiative? ........................................................................................................................... 72

John S. Kush, John C. Gilbert, and Rebecca J. Barlow

Growth Increases in Younger Sequential Cohorts of Naturally-Regenerated Longleaf Pine in Southern Alabama ................................................................................................ 74

John S. Kush, Dwight K. Lauer, John C. Gilbert, and Rebecca J. Barlow

How to Make Longleaf a Major Species in the Age of Cloud Computing ........................ 76 Dwight K. Lauer and John S. Kush

Growing Longleaf Pine Through Time: Models of Today and Tomorrow ....................... 79

vii 

 

Dwight K. Lauer and John S. Kush

Low-cost Wood Working Technologies to Improve Forest Health and Landowner Quality of Life .................................................................................................................... 83

Crystal Lupo, Becky Barlow, and Conner Bailey

North Carolina Longleaf Coalition .................................................................................... 84 Susan Miller, Lark Hayes, Bill Pickens and Barry New 

Landscape-scale Assessment of Current and Future Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris) Communities in the Onslow Bight Area of Coastal North Carolina ................................. 85

Robert O’Malley, Craig Ten Brink, Gary Haught, Bill Rogers, John Ouellette, and Meredith Malone

Effects of Extended Cold Storage on the Survival and Performance of Container Grown Longleaf Seedlings ............................................................................................................. 86

Bill Pickens

Using Smoke in the Nursery to Improve Germination of Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) Seed .......................................................................................................................... 92

Ken Roeder, Ph.D., James West, Bobby Smith and Maxie Maynor

Milestone® VM Herbicide (aminopyralid) for Weed Control in Establishment of Longleaf Pine Plantations ................................................................................................. 97

Travis W. Rogers and Bill Kline

Research in the Center for Longleaf Pine Ecosystems at Auburn University .................. 98 Lisa Samuelson

Current Trends for the Planting of Longleaf Pine in Virginia; 2009-2010 ...................... 99 Philip M. Sheridan, Arvind A.R. Bhuta, and Thomas L. Eberhardt

The Rosin Baked Potato. A Southern Culinary Delight .................................................. 100 Philip M. Sheridan and Thomas L. Eberhardt

Early Reproduction of Longleaf Pine Established in a Savanna-style Planting ............. 101 Philip M. Sheridan, Nathan Rudnick, and Thomas L. Eberhardt

Gopher Frog Population Monitoring and Habitat Restoration on Ft. Benning, Georgia ............................................................................................................................ 103

Geoffrey G. Sorrell and Robert N. Addington 

viii 

 

Conference Area & Field Trip Overview: The Carolina Sandhills – A Look at Longleaf in Time ................................................................................................................................. 104

Johnny Stowe

Planting Native Grasses and Forbs on Exotic Fire Ant (Solenopsis invicta) Mounds: A Potential Technique to Facilitate Groundcover Restoration .......................................... 107

Johnny Stowe, Tim Davis, and Allen Bridgman 

The Carolina Sandhills: Deserts in the Rain ................................................................... 108 Johnny Stowe and Allen Bridgman

Longleaf – Seeing the Ecosystem and the Trees: Longleaf Ecosystem Restoration Classification and Integrity Indicators ........................................................................... 109

USDA Forest Service and NatureServe

Southern Native Plant Restoration and Seed Increase Project ....................................... 110 Victor Vankus and George Hernández

Using Endemicity, Floristics and Ecoregions to Establish Seed Zones for Longleaf Understory Restoration .................................................................................................... 111

Joan Walker & George Hernández

The Population Status of Bachman’s Sparrow and Associated Ground Flora in the Coleman Lake Region of the Talladega National Forest ................................................. 112

Daniel Wright and Robert Carter

The Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership: Conserving and Restoring the Longleaf Pine ................................................................................................................................... 115

Vernon Compton and Justin Jones

A 2010 CIG Grant Will Fund Native Understory Restoration in Longleaf Ecosystems . 116 Mark Hainds, Emily Williams, and Anne Rilling

Trees for A Greener Georgia ............................................................................................ 117 Anne Rilling

Effects of Prescribed Burning to Restore a Longleaf Pine Grassland on Breeding Bird Populations on the Talladega National Forest ............................................................... 126

Daniel Wright, Mathew Smith, and Robert Carter

1 

 

2010 Regional Conference Field Trip

Forward by Johnny Stowe, Heritage Preserve Manager for the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources

Summary by Jack Culpepper, Refuge Forester for the USFWS Carolina Sandhills National Wildlife Refuge and JJ Bachant-Brown, Outreach Coordinator for The Longleaf Alliance

Forward

Billowing and bulging like a braided belt along the belly of the Carolinas, the Sandhills rise and fall -- forming a fascinating landscape full of wonders -- a place of connections, transitions and stark contrasts. In a broad, broken band five to twenty miles or so wide, generally following the gentle arc of the Fall Line -- the deep dunes of the Sandhills, in terms of geology, soils, and topography -- are testament to the long-term vicissitudes of wind and water and the inexorable constant of gravity. Fire, the ecological imperative of the longleaf pineywoods -- has long sculpted its way over the Sandhills, leaving behind great beauty, remarkable adaptations, and phenomenal biodiversity.

Welcome to the Sandhills!

Summary

On many and varied occasions, America’s National Wildlife Refuges have opportunities to become involved with efforts that reach far beyond refuge boundaries. For the Carolina Sandhills National Wildlife Refuge (CSNWR) in South Carolina, such a day came in October when the refuge was one of three sites that hosted a Longleaf Alliance (LLA) conference field event that included approximately 250 guests and participants. As one of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s “Land Management, Research and Demonstration Refuges,” (LMRD), the event provided a great opportunity for demonstrating management activities that drive development and maintenance of biological integrity within America’s National Wildlife Refuges. Welcomed by Refuge Manager Allyne Askins and Assistant Manager Don Cockman, and with the assistance of Allen Bridgman of the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, and Meaghan Johnson of the South Carolina Parks Recreation and Tourism, visitors began a woodland journey that would carry them through the refuge’s beautiful longleaf forests, hills and streams adorned with the freshly fallen needles of October.

The event was made possible through a partnering of landowners that included private, state and federal properties; collectively encompassing more than 90,000 acres of longleaf dominated landscape. The private land is owned and managed by Beth McLeod Watford of McBee, SC; the state land, The Sandhills State Forest, by the South Carolina Forestry Commission; and the federal land, the CSNWR, by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Longleaf Alliance coordinators JJ Bachant-Brown and Mark Hainds worked to connect a wide variety of activities

2 

 

across these neighboring lands. Through an enduring cooperative spirit, the planning effort met a variety of challenges necessary to make the event a reality. While many of the activities occurred on public lands, a primary consideration was to ensure private landowner’s interests were addressed throughout.

To address the forestry fundamentals of timber harvesting, visitors were welcomed by owner and forester Kevin Davis of Palmetto Pulpwood and Timber of Chesterfield, SC to explain timber stand improvement harvesting techniques that are commonly implemented at the CSNWR. Within a 45-year old stand of longleaf pine, the Palmetto Company employed Rhoad Logging of McBee, SC; a logging company that specializes in select harvesting. The results of the logging crew’s efforts reveal the skill and attention to detail required for select operations. Forester Kevin Davis and Randy Carter, Jr. of the Palmetto Company along with Loggers Danny and Daniel Rhoad of Rhoad Logging answered a variety of technical questions related to harvesting techniques and equipment capabilities while explaining how harvest activities enhance the refuge’s conservation objectives. Concluding comments were provided by Jason Johnson of The Conservation Fund who explained that through a partnering effort with the USFWS and an associated “land for timber” agreement, revenues produced by the harvesting efforts are being used to add permanent acreage to the refuge.

As visitors moved onwards they were met by the Refuge’s Wildlife Biologist, Nancy Jordon, who described the wildlife and diversity of this ecosystem. The CSNWR has the largest population of endangered red-cockaded woodpeckers (RCWs) within the National Wildlife Refuge System, an outcome that Nancy credits to the number of “old turpentine trees” scattered throughout the refuge. Alongside the wildlife station stood a huge longleaf pine, deadened from a powerful lightning strike as evidenced by a huge spiraled scar. This common occurrence of the longleaf forest represents the natural ignition mechanism that maintained and expanded the longleaf ecosystem and its inhabitants over the millennia. As Nancy explained, the natural illustration clearly demonstrated the fundamental importance of fire to the ecosystem.

Expanding upon the management at CSNWR, Fire Management Officer Mark Parker provided an overview of the fire program and the intricacies of implementing fire in the longleaf pine ecosystem with an introduction that included specific discussions of the refuge’s fire program. Tools and equipment were demonstrated that included firing devices as basic and fundamental as the drip torch to the more complex Premo MKIII System used for aerial firing operations. Visitors were able to view and discuss additional tools and apparatus such as a John Deere Gator with pump and tank, all of which led to discussions on a wide variety of topics including seasonality of fire, firing patterns and techniques, implementation of fire after planting, the use of herbicide and fire, effects to herbaceous species, and landowner assistance programs. As Mark later noted, there was much interest from an appreciative audience.

In addition to the economics and conservation benefits associated with management activities,

3 

 

private landowners had the opportunity to discuss specifics of timber merchandizing with Bob Cooper, Danny Holladay and Tim Clark of Koppers, a company that specializes in purchasing quality pine timber for supplying poles to a variety of utility markets. Poles have traditionally been among the highest valued timber products and therefore knowledge of these markets by the private landowner is essential to profitable forest management. To demonstrate appropriate selection and management techniques for maximizing a continued flow of these high-valued products, Koppers’ representatives marked timber to demonstrate product variety and described the techniques needed for promoting sustained yield.

As visitors moved on, they passed beneath red maple, yellow polar and black tupelo gum which adorned one of the many crystal clear streams that braid the refuge’s landscape; supplied from the plentiful water reserves of the sand aquifer on which the refuge rests. As visitors admired the natural beauty, their attention was drawn to the beautiful wood products demonstrated by George Goodwin of the Goodwin Heartpine Company of Micanopy, FL. Befitting of the specialty market, the demonstration occurred alongside a longleaf pine “fat-lightered” stump that remained from the felling of the tree long ago, both the stump and tree-top preserved by the plentiful resins that define the species. As George explained the specialty woods and markets from this most beautiful of our southern pines has different levels of rarity. Some is reclaimed from logs harvested from virgin forests when water transport was the means of conveyance. Some of those old-growth logs referred to as “deadheads” were so dense that they sank within the waterways. Goodwin Heartpine has been recovering these products since the 1970s. In addition to reclaimed deadheads and recycling of other previously utilized longleaf lumber, green longleaf of sufficient age also finds application in specialty markets that include flooring, cabinetry and other specialty uses. It is the characteristic quantity of heartwood, tight growth, hardness, color and density that make longleaf uniquely valuable among our southern pines.

The field event also provided the opportunity for visitors to observe timber being converted to lumber as the buzz of the portable sawmill caught their attention. The sound was generated from the sawing of timber harvested to improve equipment access on refuge fire-breaks. Just ahead, Wood-Mizer representatives Nathan Collins and Joseph Whitley along with assistants Earl Hazelwood, Tyler Whitley and Brian Clontz were demonstrating these processes. The crew had donated hours of hard work and equipment usage over a two-day period to provide the demonstration, while Roosevelt Segars of Segars Logging in Bethune, SC, together with associate Rex Sowell of Sowell Logging in Jefferson, SC, and assistants Freddie Segars and Billy Joe Segars donated the hard work, time and equipment needed for harvesting and delivering the timber. Teaming with these efforts was the CSNWR, which donated staff time and equipment, required to prepare the milling site, and load and stage the timber for sawing. Following the event, refuge staff transported the lumber from the mill site to the transport load site approximately one quarter mile distance where equipment operator Doug Mason loaded the sawn product for delivery.

4 

 

All activities and proceeds from the salvage logging, including, harvest, handling, mill site preparation, and milling operations were collectively donated by all involved to The Longleaf Alliance for utilization at America’s College of the Building Arts in Charleston, SC. The college intends to use the lumber to support education in the building arts including timber framing with specific planned application within two construction projects that include a school and an orphanage in the Charleston area.

Given all that the visitors had seen, their journey was only beginning. A trail ride provided visitors with opportunities to tour by wagon as they viewed unusual habitat amid mature longleaf pine that included a “high pocosin” where clear water and rare plant communities sit atop a hill adjacent to an active nest-cluster of the endangered RCWs. Continuing, the trail turned downward through layered communities of bracken fern, wiregrass and other ground species before entering mixed stands of turkey, bluejack, blackjack and sandpost oaks. Further downhill, large southern red oaks and hickories bounded the wavering stands of switch-cane that pervade the clear stream basins of the longleaf fire-forests. And in the wettest areas, standing high above the switch-cane, red maple and yellow poplar added color and texture to the forest canopy.

Some of the obvious, and many of the hidden, natural wonders were revealed through the commentary of natural resource experts Dr. Joan Walker of the USDA Research Station at Clemson University, and Johnny Stowe of South Carolina‘s Department of Natural Resources. The wagon rides were made possible by Bill Milliken II of the Milliken Forestry Company, and driver Gordon Baker, along with CSNWR tractor and trailer, and staff members Doug Mason and Greg Boling. Although unbeknownst to the visitors, their travels were virtually dust-free thanks to repeated passes of a water tanker through the trails that day driven by Randy McLain of the CSNWR.

Following the activities, lunch was served at the Lake Bee Recreation Area, catered by “Big’s” of McBee, SC. This was one of two lunch locations that day. The other location was at Sugarloaf on the Sand Hill State Forest where the group utilized the rustic stone and timber picnic shelters from the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) era. Many positive comments were received on the quality and quantity of food. In preparation for the gathering, U.S. Fish and Wildlife volunteer Harlow Jones had worked diligently over two days to prepare the Lake Bee Recreation Area, and back at headquarters, Administrative Office, Patricia McCoy fielded questions and coordinated a variety of details required to ensure operations ran smoothly.

So far, we have just described one of three sites that the conference field trip participants visited!

The other public land site was the Sand Hills State Forest located in both Chesterfield and Darlington Counties, SC. The history of this area is interesting in that 92,000 acres were purchased by the Federal government in the 1930s for less than $5 per acre. Half became the

5 

 

Carolina Sandhills National Wildlife Refuge, and half was leased to the state for use as a state forest. Between 1939 and 1991, the Forestry Commission managed the 46,000-acre state forest and handled timber practices on the adjacent Wildlife Refuge as well. Through the early 1940s, the CCC contributed manpower and expertise to the developing property. In 1991, the Forestry Commission was granted fee simple title to the State Forest. From the outset, the Forestry Commission agreed to operate the property as “a demonstration conservation area, embodying the principles and objectives of multiple-use management.” Part of the long-range goal was to provide local jobs and stimulate local industry through forest production. Throughout the years, traditional forest products like sawlogs, poles, and pulpwood have been harvested from the forest. Otherproducts, including pine tar, turpentine, fence posts and pine straw, have played important economic roles at various times since 1939.

The second major site on the field tour was Sugarloaf Mountain on the State Forest, a traditional gathering place for over a century. This site was expertly overseen by Site Managers Kenny Robertson and James Brunson. Known locally as "The Mountain", Sugarloaf is an unusual geological phenomenon towering a hundred feet above the surrounding terrain. Composed of sand, it was at one time capped with ferrous sandstone, much of which has now weathered away. Vegetation on the mountain is also quite unusual for this area. It includes mountain laurel and the diminutive pixie moss. The view alone from on top of the mountain was a highlight of the field trip…well worth the hike up! Fred Edinger, professor of geology at Coker College in Hartsville, SC, was on hand to entertain the participants’ geology questions and to showcase rock and fossils samples from the local area.

Since pine straw is such an important economic consideration for longleaf, David Dickins, an Associate Professor of Forest Productivity at the University of Georgia, was also located at the Sugarloaf site. His station discussed old-field planted longleaf pine growth rates that have been measured in the Coastal Plain of Georgia through age 21-years. He also discussed old-field planted longleaf pine straw yields as well as yields from deep sands like those found on the Sand Hills State Forest. This information was based upon a 10-year project in two longleaf stands on the Sand Hills State Forest.

Fire, an integral and important tool in the toolbox for longleaf management, is not without difficulties and challenges. One such challenge is putting fire back into a system that has endured fire exclusion for quite some time. Gary Burger with The National Wild Turkey Federation and Bennett Tucker with the Hitchcock Woods Foundation in Aiken, SC, are both experienced with these fuel conditions. They talked with the participants on techniques and options for putting fire back into long unburned stands.

If fire isn’t an option, or if you are needing to get control of the mid-story and/or apply timber stand improvement, Brian Davis, Herb Nicholson, and Jason Davis, all with the Sand Hill State Forest, were there to discuss mechanical techniques. Prior to the field trip, the area around the

6 

 

station was cut and mulched so that the participants got to see a before and after shot of the area. The machine that they used, a Bobcat with a forestry head, was on site.

GIS and GPS are such powerful land management tools, both in the field and back at the office, but with constant improvements and updates in software and hardware they can be just as confusing as they are useful. Trip Chavis with Milliken Forestry set up at Sugarloaf to answer questions and to assist with clearing up confusions in using these tools.

The last station at Sugarloaf, but certainly not the least, was manned by Steven Hewett with the SC Department of Natural Resources. The Sand Hill State Forest, like the Refuge, has an active population of RCWs. Steven discussed the management of the RCWs on the forest as well as the management of the population across multi-jurisdictional lines. Stephen brought and displayed some tools of the trade that biologists use to monitor RCW populations.

Our field tour would not have been complete without the third major site having been a private landowner. Beth Watford, who is also the owner of BIGs restaurant and was our field tour lunch caterer, graciously opened her property to us. Ms. Watford, whose property has been in her family for at least 30 years, is in the process of converting her stands back into longleaf. The entire tract that was on the field trip is 636 acres, with the field trip focusing on the 91 acre longleaf stand. John Maitland was the competent Site Manager for this location and made sure that the groups all had a pleasurable experience.

The property was originally farm land and all of the older pine stands that have been thinned were planted in loblolly through the CRP program, which they are no longer enrolled in, including the 91 acre longleaf stand that was visited. When the loblolly stand was first thinned, it became infected with annous root disease. The stand was then clear cut and replanted in longleaf in 2005. There were some seedling survival issues and the stand has been spot planted at least twice since the initial planting. The family chose longleaf because the soil types call for longleaf pine and they want to explore the advantages of selling longleaf pine straw.

The field trip participants had either a leisurely walk or a short trail ride down a dirt road on the property where they stopped at several stations spread out along the way that covered topics from a landowner’s perspective. The wagon drivers were Bill Milliken of Milliken Forestry and a Sand Hill Forest employee on loan for the day. The groups first heard from Coy Myers, Ms. Watford’s forester, on the challenges Beth has faced, the early successes that have occurred, her decision to go with longleaf, and where she is headed in the future. Coy was also able to provide some perspectives from the other landowners in the area that he works for.

Invasive species is an issue that a lot of landowners must deal with in managing their forests. Tim Davis with Clemson University discussed several invasive species issues, both plants and animals, that landowners throughout the southeast are challenged with managing. His

7 

 

discussions included fire ants, Chinese needle ants, cogon grass, emerald ash borer, sudden oak death, and thousand cankers disease. Tim made sure that the groups had plenty of useful handout materials to take with them for additional information.

The RCW and Safe Harbor Program station was a prime example of the cooperative partnering that this field trip embraced as this station was represented by private, state and federal representatives. On hand was Lamar Commalander with Milliken Forestry, Paige Koon, a biologist with SC Department of Natural Resources, and Susan Miller with the Fish and Wildlife Service. Each spoke on their experiences and involvement with the Safe Harbor Program and was able to answer questions that landowners had in exploring this option.

Most landowners need to take economics into consideration in managing their longleaf. Tammy Cushing with Clemson University and Mark Megalos, a forestry extension specialist at NC State University, talked to the groups about the economics of longleaf, generating income and reducing estate taxes. Along these lines, Bobby Franklin, also with Clemson, covered the question of “when are my pines ready for commercial thinning?” He used the loblolly stand where his station was located as a backdrop for discussing the criteria needed for a stand before commercial thinning is possible and before transitioning into longleaf.

Two of the most commonly asked questions by landowners is how to artificially regenerate longleaf and when can they begin burning their established longleaf. To answer these questions and to clear up misconceptions and misinformation on these topics, Mark Hainds with The Longleaf Alliance and John McGuire with Westervelt Company were the last two stations at Beth’s property. Mark covered the details and intricacies of site prep and planting longleaf. John covered the finer points of when fire can be applied.

This field trip overview wouldn’t be complete if we didn’t mention the six bus leaders – Russell Hubright, Eric West, TJ Savereno, John Gilbert, Anne Rilling, and Vernon Compton – who kept the groups entertained, informed, and (somewhat) on time!

As you can see, it was quite an involved and action packed field trip. For all of those that assisted with planning and execution…THANK YOU! For those that were able to join us on the field trip, we hope that you enjoyed yourself and learned something new. For those that weren’t able to join us, we hope to see you in 2012!

8 

 

Looming Large Over the Landscape and In Our Lives: The Legacy of Larry Harris

Johnny Stowe

Dr. Larry D. Harris died on 15 August 2010.

I almost followed that sad fact by writing that "Longleaf pinelands conservation lost one of its wisest, and most ardent and productive supporters ..." but then I realized that ain't the case; plus it sounds too formulaic; it is too prosaic, to borrow a term Dr. Harris taught me.

So let me regroup and take a fresh, more original bite and see if I can get traction. I make no apologies for my colloquialisms since I think that rural, regional flavor was one of the reasons Dr. Harris took me under his wing after we met at The Longleaf Alliance meeting in Tifton in fall 2006.

A man like Larry Harris is never really lost to his causes, or to the folks who love him. He lives on. Indeed, his presence remains quite palpable as I consider conservation of wild lands, the broad role of humans in Nature, and who I am.

As I think of Dr. Harris, I am reminded of how, in death, he will continue to inspire, nurture, inform and support the wild lands he loved so much -- including, as part of those lands -- the people who work on their behalf. And I reckon he'd get tickled, blue eyes twinkling questioningly in challenge, critically listening to me trip over my words trying to explain how "land" can be "inspired," but I think he'd like my sentiments in this vein even if I stumbled while expressing my notions. For sure, many of the Earth's most-special, linked-up places, and the people who cherish them, are salient testament to his life.

Like an old-growth longleaf pine or doug-fir, which after dying continues to function by providing crucial structure and habitat for so many species, "Mzee" Harris lives on in his work and through his family and many colleagues, friends and admirers.

Teacher, visionary, philosopher, polymath, iconoclast, genius, quintessential critical thinker, wise man, unique character, steadfast friend, and mentor -- we were lucky to have him in-the-flesh and we are lucky that he left us such a rich path to cherish and

9 

 

follow. He joins the ranks of Aldo Leopold, Bob Marshall and others who made quite a splash in Nature and Culture and the nexus that joins the two.

Ed Abbey wrote that "Passion without action is the ruin of the soul." Well, if the converse of that view is true, then we can sure-enough rest easy knowing that Larry's spirit reverberates in splendor in the cosmos. For he was a man who made things happen on-the-land and in human ecology. And how fitting that the brilliant scientist who blazed the ideological trail of landscape connectivity, whose passion and energy drove the intellectual revolution that has linked so many wild lands, also connected so many like-minded folks with one another.

Dr. Harris would be self-effacing about it, but his last years show an amazing resilience, courage, strength, and endurance as he battled a devastating disease. May we all strive to have such force of character.

He may have written it elsewhere, but in case not -- in my much-prized copy of his classic, "The Fragmented Forest," he wrote: "Simple truths require little defense; a purpose of science models is to say very much with very little."

How very much like Dr. Harris to, by example, distill so well the essence of "simple truths" .... I'll remember this pearl of wisdom fondly, and with gratitude.

Farewell, Dr. Harris. Much-Obliged for everything.

Johnny Stowe Carolina Sandhills 9 September 2010

10 

 

SPEAKER ABSTRACTS

11 

 

State of The Longleaf Alliance

E.J. Williams, Executive Director

Abstract: A great deal has happened since the last Longleaf Conference in Sandestin, FL in October of 2008 – both for The Longleaf Alliance (LLA) and for longleaf conservation. The LLA staff has nearly doubled in size and expanded activities and programs into new areas of key importance to our mission of restoring the longleaf ecosystem. Highlights include completion of 16 Longleaf Academies with over 350 graduates, support of longleaf management activities in Alabama and Georgia through American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and Partners for Fish and Wildlife funds, delivery of Teaching Kids the Longleaf Story to thousands of children, countless visits and phone calls assisting landowners with their longleaf, and development of our non-profit organization with excellent guidance and support from an engaged and tireless Board of Directors.

We have been successful in securing significant funding support through supporter donations and grants and agreements with the R.H. Dobbs, Jr. Foundation, Home Depot Foundation, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also representing support from U.S. Forest Service and Department of Defense. We have joined the Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership as a principal managing partner thus substantially increasing our direct role in conserving a key longleaf landscape, strengthening our relationship with The Nature Conservancy and other partners, and supporting implementation of the Range-wide Plan for Longleaf Conservation. We are exploring ways to support longleaf conservation in other key landscapes and preparing to hire a Longleaf Ecosystem Understory Coordinator that will add greatly to understory restoration efforts. We also have eight Longleaf Academies and more than 10 workshops already scheduled for late 2010 and 2011. We are preparing to update our Strategic Plan to ensure that The Longleaf Alliance of the future is ideally prepared to meet our mission of longleaf conservation and support the diverse community of public and private interests involved in longleaf conservation.

In June 2010, we saw the longleaf ecosystem recognized as a key national treasured landscape and part of America’s Great Outdoors Initiative with commitments from the U.S Departments of Agriculture, Interior and Defense to work together and with state and private entities to conserve longleaf forests. Just prior to the conference on October 12, The Longleaf Alliance helped to organize and participated in a meeting of over 60 conservation leaders that came together to tackle the challenge of longleaf conservation collectively, identify key needs and opportunities, and develop strategies for working together to find the needed resources for range-wide conservation.

With so much change, we also should think about those things that will not change for The Longleaf Alliance including our commitment to grassroots conservation that stays focused on increasing the acres of longleaf planted, burned, free from invasive species, protected as old growth, and managed to provide forest products and revenue, recreation, inspiration and education, biodiversity conservation, public natural resource benefits like clean air and water, and family and community legacies. Although we have grown, we do know who brought us to this dance, and we will continue to view our

12 

 

partnerships and strong working relationships with landowners, conservation organizations, state and federal agencies, corporations, foundations, school districts, artists and authors as absolutely essential and the key to success in all things longleaf.

13 

 

Voluntary Gopher Tortoise Habitat Crediting System

Todd Gartner - Senior Associate, Conservation Incentives and Markets, World Resources Institute, People and Ecosystems Program, Washington, DC, 20002

Abstract: Fire-maintained longleaf pine stands once occupied 90 million acres in the Southeast, but today have declined to roughly 3 million acres as a result of habitat conversion and fire suppression. Lack of fire on the landscape has resulted in limited habitat for a variety of species. Consequently, many species have experienced population declines including the gopher tortoise. With over 80% of land in private ownership in the Southeast, the greatest potential for conservation, restoration and management of habitat for declining species lies in the hands of family woodland owners.

To address these issues, the World Resources Institute, American Forest Foundation, and Longleaf Alliance are developing a market-based voluntary habitat crediting system for the gopher tortoise and associated species in portions of Georgia and Alabama. The incentive-based framework will complement other efforts in the region to help preclude the need to federally list the eastern population of the gopher tortoise.

Under the program, interested family woodland owners become eligible for habitat management assistance and conservation credit payments through a process that considers the potential habitat contribution of the property in combination with the landowner’s bid requirements. Landowners selected to participate will be issued credits for verifiable gopher tortoise habitat and agreed upon management activities. These credits can be voluntarily purchased by federal, state or county governments, or private companies to offset impacts on gopher tortoise habitat and populations. These credits may also assist the credit holders in meeting their regulatory obligations should the eastern population of the gopher tortoise become federally listed in the future. Voluntary credits may also be purchased by philanthropic entities seeking to ensure verifiable conservation in high priority areas.

Contact Information: Todd Gartner, Senior Associate, Conservation Incentives and Markets, People and Ecosystems Program, World Resources Institute, 10 G Street, NE, Washington, DC, 20002, USA; Phone: 202-729-7843; Fax: 202-729-7798; Email: tgartner@wri.org

14 

 

The Business of Ecosystem Mitigation

John McGuire

Abstract: As markets in the Southeastern United States evolve, a concomitant increase for ecosystem services is emerging. Westervelt Ecological Services is in the business of establishing areas to offset the impacts to habitat such as coastal flatwood systems and upland areas such as that used by the gopher tortoise. The goal of this ecosystem mitigation is to monetize what heretofore have been viewed as intrinsic values. This talk will focus on the business aspects of mitigation and conservation banking and include case studies in longleaf pine habitat and other habitat in the U.S. that has applicability to longleaf pine.

15 

 

Federal Interest in Longleaf Pine Restoration: The Cost Share Programs

David Hoge

Abstract: Discussion to include a short historical description and personal perspective about federal interest in longleaf pine restoration, including sources of technical and financial assistance available from federal agencies, especially the US Department of Agriculture. Federal interest in longleaf pine restoration mirrors the development of professional forestry in this country, with early conservationists like Pinchot, Hardtner, and Cary advocating longleaf pine restoration. Early federal assistance to States included consideration of wildfire prevention and control, protection of water quality, and reforestation, including longleaf pine restoration. More recently, several federal agencies have established longleaf pine restoration as a priority agency objective and are cooperating and collaborating with a number of partners with mutual interest on a focused landscape approach to longleaf pine restoration. As to the future, federal interest in longleaf pine restoration will continue as its respective agencies promote and implement collaborative landscape restoration initiatives.

16 

 

Conservation Easements

Lewis Hay

Abstract: A brief explanation of what conservation easements are and what the rules are, followed by a review of the easement creation process and some of the benefits that a landowner may enjoy.

17 

 

The Safe Harbor Program: A Brosnan Forest Perspective

Josh Raglin

Abstract: Landowners often fear the discovery of threatened or endangered species on their land. Some seek ways to manage their land to discourage these species, even if these practices ultimately diminish the species' chance of recovery. The endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) is attracted to longleaf pine forests maintained by periodic fire. One of the main reasons for the RCW’s decline is loss of habitat. The Safe Harbor Program was developed more than 15 years ago as a means of providing an incentive to landowners. The RCW Safe Harbor Program provides guarantees for landowners who manage their pine forests in a manner beneficial to the red-cockaded woodpecker. If woodpeckers increase on a property enrolled in the program as a result of beneficial management practices, obligations under state and federal endangered species laws are not increased. Landowners retain all property rights, and management flexibility is often increased by enrolling in Safe Harbor. The 16,000 – acre Brosnan Forest property located in Dorchester County, South Carolina has been enrolled in the RCW Safe Harbor Program since 1999. This property currently has 81 active RCW groups which is the largest population on a single piece of private property in the world.

18 

 

Ecological Forestry in Longleaf Pine: Concepts and Examples from Ichauway

Steve Jack, J.W. Jones Ecological Research Center

Abstract: Ecological forestry is an approach to forest management that utilizes natural disturbance patterns, and the resulting forest structure, as a guide for determining management objectives and treatments. An ecological forestry approach is particularly applicable to forests where objectives include perpetuation of an intact forest, aesthetics, and maintenance of ecological processes while also utilizing resources and providing an economic return. Key concepts in ecological forestry are: 1) retention of biological “legacies” (i.e., organisms and structural components) following harvest events or after disturbance; 2) utilizing intermediate treatments (e.g., thinning) and stand development processes (e.g., patterns of tree mortality) to maintain and enhance heterogeneity in the forest; and 3) allowing adequate time between harvest entries so that complex structures are able to develop. These concepts and research supporting their relevance to management of longleaf pine will be presented, along with examples of implementing the approach in the management of longleaf forests at Ichauway.

19 

 

An Adaptive Fire Management Report Card for the Largest Longleaf Landscape

James Furman & Brett Williams

Abstract: Eglin Air Force Base (AFB) occupies approximately 464,000 acres in the Florida Panhandle and possesses the largest single holding of longleaf pine across its

range, including the largest contiguous acreage of old-growth longleaf. To maintain and restore this precious resource, Eglin AFB natural resource managers have developed one

of the most active wildland fire programs in the country. Guided by an Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP), an intensive conservation planning

process, and an adaptive management philosophy, fire management at Eglin has focused on aggressively applying prescribed fire at a landscape scale, and in a prioritized

fashion, to maximize benefits with limited management resources. Over the past ten years, annual prescribed fire acreage on Eglin has grown from close to 40,000 acres per year in 2000 to over 100,000 acres per year consecutively in the last three years. This

growth in prescribed fire acreage has been followed by a significant increase in the resident red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) population as well as a decrease in annual

wildfire acres. To measure the success of the prescribed fire program and how a frequent fire regime translates into improvement in ecological condition, Eglin

managers have cultivated a multi-method monitoring program that relies on extensive field sampling, GIS spatial modeling, and multivariate statistical analyses. To

complement monitoring efforts and aid in decision-making, Eglin managers have made supporting research related to longleaf restoration and fire a priority as well. Through

these efforts, Eglin AFB has become a nationally-recognized wildland fire research facility. We will present a report card measuring these landscape-level conservation and

fire management efforts over the past 10 years.

20 

 

Understory Restoration

John Cox

Abstract: Oakridge Farms became interested in restoration of the Longleaf/Wiregrass ecosystem in 1999 after attending a meeting at Jones Ecological Research Station that focused on the demise of this fragile system. Focus began on the collection, handling, cleaning and planting of wiregrass seed. With the formation of Lolly Creek Land Management Company in 2006 and a partnership with Roundstone Native Seed Company shortly after, Oakridge Farms, Lolly Creek and Roundstone Seed continue their work with plans to create a southern ecotype seed source for native plants.

21 

 

Pine Straw Management

Herb Nicholson

Abstract: Pine straw has been vital to the well-being of Sand Hills State Forest for fifteen years now. Realizing the financial potential of straw sales, we initiated our Pine straw Enhancement Program, whereby contractors remove the hardwood understory from longleaf stands, in exchange for the rights to rake the straw for an allotted number of years. At the end of the contract period, SHSF has a clean stand of straw to sell. We have also learned a few lessons about the pine straw business along the way, and hope the future of pine straw is as bright as its past.  

22 

 

Economics of Longleaf

Rhett Johnson

Abstract: Lack of satisfactory growth and yield models for longleaf and volatile markets make economic projections for the species difficult and undependable, but standard computations can be very useful in predicting relative profitability among a number of investment and management scenarios. Predictably, the most financially attractive regimes incorporate early returns from cost-share programs, pine straw, or other sources. This presentation will examine those results and discuss information needs to enable better projections.

23 

 

More Than Just Another Pretty Map - Utilizing Geo-Spatial Technology to Aid in Landowner Decision Making

Rebecca J Barlow, Extension Specialist and Assistant Professor, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University; John C Gilbert, Research Associate, Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University; John S Kush, Research Fellow, Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University.

Abstract: Recent studies have shown that non-industrial private landowners can feel overwhelmed by land management tasks, often because they do not have access to knowledge and tools needed to make informed decisions. Understanding the condition of one’s land resource, and its distribution across the landscape, is critical for making long-term management decisions as well as short-term, when there is a need to quickly respond to both environmental and economic changes. Geo-spatial technologies such as geographic information systems can aid landowners in this area. The unique benefit of these technologies goes beyond mapping with the ability to reference natural resource inventory and condition information to a physical location. Long used in scientific and industrial land management applications, recent advances have made geo-spatial technology a useful and affordable tool for landowners with many low to no-cost options available. This talk will highlight the availability and application of geo-spatial technology resources for landowners and land managers.

24 

 

A Decision Support Tool for Open-pine Ecosystem Conservation in the East Gulf Coastal Plain

Catherine Rideout, East Gulf Coastal Plain Joint Venture, Auburn University, AL; James B. Grand, USGS, Auburn University, AL.

Abstract: The East Gulf Coastal Plain Joint Venture (EGCPJV) is a self-directed partnership of federal, state, and private stakeholders dedicated to the conservation of priority birds in the East Gulf region. The EGCP JV has identified open-pine ecosystems as a priority habitat for conservation action, and we have developed a planning tool to enable the strategic conservation of open-pine habitats to support high priority species. We intend for this tool to guide decisions about implementing conservation based on a comprehensive landscape analysis and the application of key conservation biology principles to maximize benefits for birds and other wildlife. This map can be used in conjunction with current land use-land cover data to prioritize areas for the implementation of on-the-ground conservation programs and to include strategies such as reforestation of agricultural lands, habitat management of existing pine habitats, acquisition of high quality stands, and conversion of off-site loblolly and slash pine to longleaf pine. Currently, this tool is available for the EGCPJV boundary area, and an intensive effort is underway to expand the tool to the entire range of longleaf pine.

25 

 

Range-Wide Quail Suitability Model

Theron Terhune, NBCI Rewrite-Coordinator at The Tall Timbers Research Station.

Abstract: Northern bobwhite populations have experienced widespread declines to the point where hunting of bobwhites has been greatly marginalized across much of its range and thereby annual harvest, by most states, represent a small fraction of historical highs. Bobwhite population declines are symptomatic of range-wide habitat loss and reduction of a functional ecosystem in which most species adapted to grassland-shrub habitats thrive. The National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative (NBCI) is a range-wide habitat plan for recovering bobwhites to target densities set by state wildlife agencies and, in effect, restoring functional grassland ecosystems as a whole. Developing spatially-explicit estimates of suitable landscapes for recovery of bobwhites and management needs was accomplished through 23 structured conservation workshops, with 25 states and >600 natural resource-professionals participating, to inform a Geographical Information System (GIS) generating a geospatial layer of ranking information linked to major land-use opportunities for and constraints to management. This information, known as the Biologist Ranking Information (BRI), was used to demarcate priority landscapes whereby bobwhite and grassland conservation has a relatively high potential for success and minimal number of impediments over the long-term. Summary of the BRI ranking data for 16 BCRs identified 195 million acres (23.6%) of habitat having relatively high potential for Northern Bobwhite conservation. These areas provide a "first cut" for developing step-down plans which encourage increasing habitat in focal areas as well as a framework for tiling other geospatial layers to enhance conservation planning of multiple species. Opportunities in high priority areas varied by BCR, but range-wide opportunities included increased use of prescribed fire (23.4%), field edge and field management (19.5%), compatible forest management (10.6%), conversion of sod-forming grasses to native warm season grass systems (8.4%) and brush management (8.1%), among others. In both high and medium potential regions, the greatest single need identified by biologists was increased use of prescribed fire - a major, but important, challenge for conservation of early-succession and grassland obligate species. Specific outputs from this process include: a range-wide recovery plan and prioritization map; a GIS-centric database available to biologists, NGOs, and etc. for creation of step-down plans or layering of other geospatial data for development of future conservation planning; individual on-line state web mapping applications; and a suite of GIS tools for extracting and analyzing GIS data for conservation planning.

26 

 

Ongoing GIS Mapping Effort and the Need for a Regional Longleaf GIS Database

John C. Gilbert, Research Associate, Auburn University, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory; John S. Kush, Research Fellow, Auburn University, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory.

Abstract: The longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) ecosystem that once covered a major portion of the southeastern landscape of the United States has been decimated to only a small percentage of the millions of acres it historically dominated. There has been a surge of interest in longleaf pine restoration over the past decade with momentum continuing to build today. This restoration movement in the longleaf pine community emphasizes restoring functional longleaf pine ecosystems across the historic range. Preserving, enhancing, and restoring functional longleaf pine ecosystems requires focus on both public and private lands, where the majority of the land is privately owned. Efforts to restore the ecosystem across the different types of landownership are driven by multitude of factors including but not limited to restoring the natural ecosystem, growing high quality wood products, producing non-timber commodities like grazing and pine straw, aesthetics, and increasing threatened and endangered species habitat, which has created a need for dynamic planning tools to capture and facilitate these efforts. Without a suitable conservation planning tool and map showing the location and condition of existing longleaf pine forests across all types of land ownership, these various restoration efforts continue in a scattered and undocumented approach across the historic range, where the impact of the restoring functioning landscape scale longleaf pine ecosystems continues to be an unknown.

The purpose of this effort is to create regional GIS database of existing spatial data about longleaf pine which will provide a baseline of knowledge and aid conservation and restoration efforts. This effort has only been possible through support and coordination from the Longleaf Alliance, Inc. and numerous partners and supporters from across the range. The GIS database is being created and continuously updated by collecting and compiling existing available spatial data about longleaf pine stands using the best available technology. This GIS database helps assess the extent and condition of available spatial data on longleaf pine forests, which provides a building block in the restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem. The database will serve as an effective conservation tool by targeting areas of high ecological potential and thereby maximizing the impact of restoration dollars. Among the various utilities of this database are the abilities to identify areas that lack spatial data about longleaf pine stands, to develop potential ways to prioritize likely restoration focal areas and/or corridors, and to serve as an educational tool to promote longleaf restoration.

27 

 

Introduction and Keynote Address

Rhett Johnson and Robert Bonnie

Abstract: With over 80% of the land needed to restore the longleaf ecosystem in private ownership, private landowners are the single most influential group of longleaf forest owners and managers and critical to success of ecosystem restoration. Yet their stories – what brought them to longleaf, connections to the land, management philosophies, objectives and challenges - are as varied as the longleaf forests they manage. Many landowners accomplish forest restoration and management with their own resources and the revenues generated from their forest while many take advantage of state and federal cost share and incentive programs. Longleaf conservation, much of it on private lands, has a vital place in connecting Americans of all ages to the outdoors, is a key component in revitalizing and sustaining rural economies and communities, and can contribute substantially to our country’s natural legacy thus reducing the impacts of global warming, providing clean air and water, surviving and buffering the effects of hurricanes and other storms, insect outbreaks, and wildfire, and providing a home for wildlife species. Thousands of inspiring and dedicated landowners are found throughout the range of longleaf pine and five exemplary landowners will share their personal stories of the longleaf forest.

28 

 

POSTER ABSTRACTS  

 

 

 

29 

 

Longleaf 101: Developing More Longleaf Expertise Through Training Resource Professionals

JJ Bachant-Brown, Anne

(The Longleaf Alliance)

Abstract: This poster will examine the continuing need for additional longleaf expertise across the region and how The Longleaf Alliance is addressing that need. The goal of these academies is to educate resource professionals on the specifics of longleaf management and restoration so that they can provide appropriate advice to landowners and land managers. Through October 2010, sixteen academies have been conducted at the Solon Dixon Center in Andalusia, AL. Future plans for Longleaf 101 are to conduct two academies in Florida, two in Georgia, at least two in Alabama, and possibly two in Mississippi within the next year. In addition to the 101, The Alliance will be developing continuing education to further expand specific topics such as regeneration and understory restoration. Support from the R.H. Dobbs, Jr. Foundation will assist with Academies in 2011 and 2012 as well as development of the continuing education program.

30 

 

Uneven-aged Management of Longleaf Pine: A Long-term Demonstration

Rebecca J. Barlow, John C. Gilbert, and John S. Kush

(Auburn University School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences)

Abstract: Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) forests once covered an estimated 60-90 million acres of the southeastern United States. The original longleaf pine forest was self-perpetuating due to frequent, growing season fire. Longleaf pine reproduced in openings in the overstory where dense stands developed and maintained it over the millennia. The result was a park-like, uneven-aged forest, composed of many even-aged stands of varying sizes. Over the past 15 years there has been an increase in longleaf acreage do to planting in response to a variety of reasons, yet 72% of the existing stands are naturally-regenerated. A disturbing trend is the loss of natural forests, a 32% decrease over the 15 years. It is these natural forests which are ecologically of most concern. Today longleaf forests cover 3.1 million acres and nearly 58% is private ownership. Despite the common belief that landowners have forested land primarily for revenue, a recent survey of Alabama forest landowners found nearly 50% owned land for their heirs, scenery, and hunting/fishing while only 12% listed revenue as their primary reason. A 40- acre stand of longleaf pine has provided a 60-year demonstration of longleaf pine forest management for the small-scale private forest landowner.

Results

In 1948, the Farm 40 was established on the Escambia Experimental Forest in south Alabama, USA as a demonstration of longleaf pine forest management for the small-scale private forest landowner. The long-term management goal of the Farm 40 was to grow high quality sawtimber and poles on a 60-year rotation while minimizing additional investments or expenses. Regeneration and intermediate cuts provided regular income from the forest using the shelterwood method on a small scale. Harvest area gaps were established on the forest so that small areas, 2.0-4.0 acres in size, were harvested leaving the highest quality seed bearers in the overstory for regeneration. To support future management of the Farm 40, a GIS database has been created by tallying and stem-mapping all trees greater than 3.1 in DBH. The database and associated maps have been used to identify cohorts created by past regeneration harvests, gaps, and locations of potential harvests for the future. Gaps have been evaluated and quantified to identify size, presence of regeneration, and distance to cone bearing trees. The database and maps create products that extend beyond management to serve as portable educational tools that can be utilized by landowners and managers for numerous objectives.

31 

 

Challenging Times and Changing Values: Developing Innovative Land Use Options for Small-Scale, Private Landowners

Becky Barlow, Crystal Lupo, Janice Dyer, and Na Zhou

(Auburn University School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences)

Abstract: Forestland in the United States, especially in the east, is predominantly owned by private individuals and families. The number of the small owners has grown in recent years and is predicted to grow as larger landowners, such as the forest industry, sell their land. An increasing number of landowners are acquiring land for amenity-based reasons rather than timber production. The small landowner is likely more interested in multiple-objective of land management, including environmental service, recreation, and any other product that will generate sufficient revenue.

Forest-dependent counties (e.g., the black belt communities across the central Mississippi to Georgia) are usually poor, and under-served by financial and technical assistance. Generating income from the land and creating economic opportunities is a challenge. Agroforestry systems have been practiced for centuries and have been most beneficial in situations where labor is cheap and landholdings are small. This allows for an intensive management approach that is conducive to the development or capture of high value niche markets. By broadening our perspectives of what ‘non-tree’ crops are suitable in a forest farming situation, it may be possible to reinvigorate depressed rural economies. To do this successfully, outreach and education of landowners and professional land managers, in addition to research is essential.

32 

 

Alabama Pine Straw Association

Leh Bass1, Becky Barlow2, Janice Dyer2, John S. Kush2, John C. Gilbert2

(1Great South and 2School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University)

Abstract: Pine straw sales provide an opportunity for owners of pine forests to generate income from a natural renewable resource their pine trees are producing every day. With proper management and preparation a mature stand of longleaf pines can generate up to $200 per acre per year and a loblolly stand can generate $100 per acre per year.

With proper training pine straw harvesters can begin operations with very little investment and make as much as $75,000 per year. The Alabama Pine Straw Association has the expertise to manage pine stands for optimum production of high quality pine straw, train and connect pine straw harvesters with pine landowners.

Networking to create a high quality product the Alabama Pine Straw Association is creating wholesale and retail markets to generate maximum income for landowners and harvest. Join the Alabama Pine Straw Association as we make Alabama pine straw the #1 pine straw in the nation. 

33 

 

Species Composition and Structure of South Carolina Piedmont Tree Communities

Arvind A.R. Bhuta and Lisa M. Kennedy

(Department of Geography, College of Natural Resources and the Environment, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061)

Abstract: Our research focuses on longleaf pine tree communities in the South Carolina Piedmont. We documented forest structure and composition in four plots at each of three different sites: the Sumter National Forest’s Long Cane Ranger District (LCRD) in the south, Harbison State Forest (HSF) in the central Piedmont, and Forty Acre Rock (FAR) in the north. Within each 20 m x 50 m plot, we identified all trees > 5 cm in diameter, measured DBH and height, and geo-referenced each tree. All trees in a 20m x 20 m subplot were cored, while all trees greater than 15 cm DBH outside of the subplot, but within the plot, were cored. In total, we surveyed 1,192 trees. Relative dominance for each site varied, but longleaf pine was always the dominant species (LCRD = 62%; HSF = 71% ; & FAR = 45%). After longleaf pine, the three tree species following in relative dominance were loblolly pine (26%), sweetgum (3%), and red maple (3%) at LCRD; loblolly pine (5%), red maple (5%), and white oak (5%) at HSF; and loblolly pine (26%), turkey oak (12%), and post oak (11%) at FAR. We interpret the relative importance of loblolly pine and fire-intolerant hardwoods like sweetgum and red maple to indicate that the forest communities at all of our sites have been fire suppressed, probably over the past century. Our study of tree rings (in progress) from these sites will allow us to interpret recruitment and disturbance histories with better precision. Current restoration and management plans for these sites include the reintroduction of fire and thinning, which will reduce the importance of fire-intolerant species. This presentation will also address the impacts of management, in the past, present, and future, on community structure and composition at our sites.

Introduction

The rolling hills of the South Carolina Piedmont are a highly variable area and serve as a forest transition zone between the flatlands of the Coastal Plain and the mountains of the Blue Ridge. The eastern deciduous forests are found in the northwestern Piedmont and Blue Ridge. Further southeast the forests are composed of a mix of pines and hardwoods. Evergreen forests, which originate from the Coastal Plain, are found along the southern edge of the Piedmont and the Fall Line. Within the mixed pine-hardwoods forests, species such as longleaf pine, shortleaf pine, loblolly pine, and a variety of oaks and hickories have been described (Frost 2006). The purpose of this poster is to better understand the Piedmont tree communities found in these mixed pine-hardwood forests by examining their composition and structure. The tree communities examined for this research were located in the Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont (Figure 1). Species nomenclature follows the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (www.itis.gov).

Field Methods

Four random 20 x 50 m (0.1 ha) permanent plots were established at all three sites (Peet et al. 1998). Within each plot, all trees greater than 5.0 cm DBH were tree tagged, identified, measured for DBH and height, and georeferenced. Within each plot, five transects running the

34 

 

length of the plot were used in determining canopy cover via a vertical densitometer. At 5 m intervals along each transect, we recorded the presence or absence of canopy cover and the tree species, which provided cover. All data were collected in summer (leaf on) of 2010.

Figure 1. Map showing the location of our three research sites in South Carolina: Sumter National Forest’s Long Cane Ranger District (LCRD), Harbison State Forest (HSF), and Forty Acre Rock (FAR). Results

In total, we surveyed 1,192 trees in all three sites. Longleaf pine was always the dominant tree species followed by a variety of other species per site (LCRD = 62%; HSF = 71%; & FAR = 45%) (Table 1). After longleaf pine, the three tree species following in relative dominance were: loblolly pine (26%), sweetgum (3%), and red maple (3%) at LCRD; loblolly pine (5%), red maple (5%), and white oak (5%) at HSF; and loblolly pine (26%), turkey oak (12%), and post oak (11%) at FAR. To better understand structure, we examined the relationship between DBH and height for these four species (Figure 2). P. palustris dominated the canopy cover for all three sites (FAR = 30%; HSF = 55.45%; and LCRD = 41.36% ) followed by no canopy cover, hardwoods, P. taeda or P. echinata (Table 2).

35 

 

Table 1. Density, Relative Density, Dominance, and Relative Dominance for all tree species at all three sites.

36 

 

Figure 2. Relationship between DBH (cm) and height (m)

37 

 

Table 2. Canopy cover collected by GRS densitometer & based on 220 observations for four plots at three sites.

38 

 

Discussion

Our results find similar patterns as described by Frost (2006), however, we interpret the relative dominance of loblolly pine and fire-intolerant hardwoods like sweetgum and red maple to indicate that the tree communities at all of our sites have been fire suppressed, probably over the past century. Our study of tree rings (in progress) from these sites will allow us to develop a better understanding of structure while interpreting recruitment and disturbance histories with better precision. Current restoration and management plans have and will include the reintroduction of fire and thinning, which have already reduced the occurrence of fire-intolerant species. These impacts will affect the community structure and composition at our sites and future research will monitor how these management plans affect have affected the community.

Literature

Frost, C.C. 2006. History and future of the longleaf pine ecosystem. In The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem: Ecology, Silviculture, and Restoration, edited by S. Jose, E. J. Jokela, E. J. and D. L. Miller, pp. 9–42. Springer, New York, NY, USA.

Peet, R.K., T.R. Wentworth, and P.S. White. 1998. A flexible, multipurpose method for recording vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262–274.

Acknowledgements

We thank (1) Michael Gregory, Louis Keddell, Hannah Lee, Reid Leonard, Kaitlin Morano, Brent Sams, Andrew Waldo, Brandon Whedbee for their field assistance at all three sites and (2) Johnny Stowe at Forty Acre Rock; (3) Ken Oswald and Dell Frost at the Long Cane Ranger District, Sumter National Forest; and (4) James Miller at Harbison State Forest for providing access to field sites. We wish to thank all four individual land managers at all three sites for their hospitality, friendliness, and assistance and the hard work of our field assistants. Without them, this research would never have been completed.

This research was funded by an National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant # 0927687; the Mountain Geography Specialty Group Chimborazo Student Research Grant; Association for American Geographers Dissertation Research Grant; the Sidman P. Poole Endowment for Research; and Virginia Tech’s Graduate Student Assembly’s Graduate Research Development Project Grant. Without their contributions this research and poster would have not been possible.

39 

 

Variation in Cavity-Nesting Bird Densities across Two Fire-maintained Longleaf Pine Forests and Implications for Factors Limiting Their Populations

Lori A. Blanc, Kevin R. Rose, and Jeffrey R. Walters

(Dept. of Biological Sciences, Virginia Tech)

Abstract: Cavity-nesting birds represent a significant portion of avian diversity within longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) forests and can comprise up to 30% of the breeding bird community, including songbirds, ducks, woodpeckers, and raptors. Many cavity-nesters in the Southeast have experienced population declines in recent decades and conservation of these species will require an understanding of factors limiting their populations. Because nest sites are often considered the primary factor limiting cavity-nesting bird densities, the goal of this study was to document the nesting ecology and relative density of cavity-nesting birds in two fire-maintained longleaf pine forests reflecting similar management regimes. During the 2010 breeding season, we documented cavity nests (n = 103) and snag availability in an older second growth longleaf pine forest at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina and an old-growth longleaf pine forest at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida using identical protocols. Species richness was similar at both sites (Lejeune S=8; Eglin S=9). Snag densities were similar across Lejeune (8.7 snags/ha) and Eglin (9.5 snags/ha) and proportional use of tree resource-type was also similar. However, nesting density at Lejeune was twice that of Eglin (0.34 vs. 0.17 nests/ha, respectively; P = 0.008) and this pattern was reflected by both excavating and non-excavating species. These results suggest that snag density may not be limiting cavity-nester populations in the old-growth forests at Eglin. However, further research is necessary to examine whether snag quality (as opposed to quantity) or factors other than nest-site availability (such as food limitation or predation) may be limiting these cavity-nesting birds.    

40 

 

Understanding Genetic Diversity, Physiologic Expression and Carbon Dynamics in Longleaf Pine: A New Research Planting at the Harrison Experimental Forest

John R. Butnor, Kurt H. Johnsen, and C. Dana Nelson

(USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station)

Abstract: In 1960, an experiment was established on the Harrison Experimental Forest in southeast Mississippi to compare productivity and wood properties of planted longleaf, loblolly and slash pines under different management regimes. It was discovered that longleaf pine lagged in productivity the early years, but eventually surpassed loblolly and slash pine. Hurricane Katrina (August 2005) left the experiment heavily damaged; especially the loblolly plots, providing a new opportunity for continuing longleaf pine research on the site. In addition, there is strong region-wide interest in restoring longleaf pine to its former range, with one important goal being to increase forest resilience to climate change and extreme climate events. However, little is known about how regional seed sources and how within seed source variability affects adaptive traits. Our goal is to better understand genetic control of physiologic traits which enhance survivorship and productivity at a hurricane prone site with relatively low native soil fertility. This new installation will allow a direct comparison of four longleaf pine sources originating from similar latitudes from Texas to South Carolina under three planting densities. Physiologic differences between and within the sources will be analyzed along differences in height, diameter, stem taper and carbon allocation to specific components (foliage, branches, stems, roots) across the planting density gradient. Allelic states of several genes will be related to survival and performance traits to determine which genes affect which traits and to measure and monitor the resident genetic diversity in these sources as the stand matures. Experiments such as this will inform development of genetic guidelines for restoring resilient longleaf pine ecosystems.

41 

 

Plant Community Analysis of the Pine Mountain Region of West-central Georgia

Robert Carter and Robert Floyd

(Department of Biology, Jacksonville State University)

Abstract: Multivariate analysis of plant communities in the Pine Mountain Region of Georgia revealed ten unique communities. The communities were composed of a mixture of species with Appalachian, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain affinities. Species included Kalmia latifolia, Quercus laevis, Q. prinus, Q. georgiana, and Pinus palustris. A unique grassland community supported an overstory of Prunus americana, Q. margaretta, and P. palustris. The region currently is protected by state owned lands as well as a Boy Scout Camp. Expansion of protection and restoration of historic fire regimes is recommend for the region.

42 

 

Germination and Field Survival of White-Topped Pitcher Plant Seeds

Kristina Connor and Hilliard Gibbs

(U.S. Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 521 Devall Drive, Auburn, AL 36849)

Abstract: A study was initiated to determine longevity of white-topped pitcher plant (Sarracenia leucophylla, Raf.) seeds in the field and in cold storage. Thirty seed pods were harvested in August 2009 from plants located in Alabama 38 miles from the Gulf Coast. Of the 10,000+ seeds extracted from the pods, some were buried outside in screen-wire bags and harvested throughout the year. In addition, 100 seeds were immediately placed in the growth chamber to test for viability, while others were (1) stratified for 60 days in the walk-in cooler immediately after collection, (2) stratified for 4-6-8 weeks after being stored for 7 months, (3) placed in a vial and left at room temperature for one year, (4) scattered on the surface of two pots and left outside all winter, and (5) stored dry in the walk-in cooler. Seeds placed immediately in the growth chamber without any period of cold stratification did not germinate, while those cold stratified for 4 weeks averaged 21% germination. Seeds stored 7 months and then stratified for 4, 6, or 8 weeks averaged 75%, 78%, and 72% germination respectively. Seeds scattered on the surface of two pots and left outdoors averaged 50% germination the following spring. Seeds in the buried screen-wire bags began germinating inside the bags in June 2010. Seeds were still viable after one year in the buried bags and after one year when stored as dry samples in the cooler.

Introduction

White-topped pitcher plants (Sarracenia leucophylla Raf.) are native to the Gulf Coast region of the United States. The plants are found in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, and North Carolina, with populations in Florida and Georgia listed as endangered. White-topped pitcher plant is a wetland indicator species found in bogs and wet pine savannahs. The plants are insectivorous, trapping and digesting insects to obtain nutrients which may be low or lacking in the poor soils in which they grow. They are threatened by wetland draining for agriculture and development, invasive species, and also by illegal harvesting. Like longleaf pine, they thrive under a naturally occurring fire regime and require plentiful sunlight.

Methods

Thirty seed pods were harvested in August 2009 from a stand of white-topped pitcher plants, located in Alabama 38 miles from the Gulf Coast. Pods were sealed in plastic bags and shipped overnight to Auburn, AL. Seeds were immediately harvested from brown pods. Green pods were allowed to mature, and the seeds were extracted when the pods showed signs of splitting open. All pods had opened and all of the seeds were removed from them within eight days of harvest. The following tests were conducted:

Laboratory Studies

(1) One hundred seeds were scattered into a clear-lidded plastic box lined with paper moistened with distilled water. Seeds were sprayed with Spectracide® Immunox all-purpose fungicide (7

43 

 

oz per gallon) and placed in a growth chamber set at a uniform 30oC. After 4 weeks, with no sign of germination, the growth chamber setting was changed to 30oC with light for 16h and 25oC, no light, for 8h (hereafter referred to as the standard temperature regime). The seeds were tested under this temperature regime for another 4 weeks.

(2) One hundred seeds were rolled into a moist paper towel, sealed inside a plastic bag, and placed in the cold storage room at 5oC. The bag was removed from the cold room after 60 days, and the seeds were scattered into a clear-lidded plastic box, sprayed with the fungicide, and placed in the growth chamber set at the standard temperature regime.

(3) After storage for 7 months at 5oC, 12 lots of 100 seeds each were placed on paper towels moistened with distilled water and sprayed with fungicide. The 12 towels were then rolled up, sealed in a plastic bag, and stored at 5oC. Four rolls were removed after 4-6-and 8 weeks of moist stratification and placed in the growth chamber set at the standard temperature regime to determine if length of stratification affected germination of stored seeds.

(4) Seeds were placed in storage at 5oC. Every six months, a vial containing 400 seeds will be removed from storage and tested for viability.

5) Four replications of 100 seeds were stored at room temperature and tested for viability after 1 year.

Field Studies

1) One hundred seeds were soaked in 10% bleach for 1 minute, rinsed 3 times with distilled water, and divided into 2 lots of 50 seeds each. Two 1-liter plastic pots were lined in the bottom with longleaf pine needles and filled with a 50-50 mix of coconut husk and sand. Seeds were sprinkled on the top of this layer and then thoroughly sprayed with the fungicide. Nets were tented over the pots which were then placed in a tray filled with rain water.

(2) One hundred seeds were placed in each of 56 2x3-inch screen-wire bags that were sewn with clear plastic thread. Three plastic tubs measuring 20 inches x 26 inches were filled with a 50/50 sand/ peat moss mixture. The screen-wire bags were divided into three lots and placed in a single layer on top of the sand/peat moss mixture, then covered with a layer of fine sand. The tubs were kept moist by a rainwater irrigation system (Figure 1).

44 

 

Bags were harvested from the field after 3, 7, 10, 11 and 12 months. Viability of the seeds was tested in the growth chamber set at the standard temperature regime. Ungerminated seeds from the 11 and 12 month samples were stained with tetrazolium chloride (TZ) to determine if they were still potentially viable. Bags will continue to be harvested and tested at intervals throughout the next year until viability or sample bags are depleted.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Laboratory Studies

White-topped pitcher plant seeds harvested from pods and placed immediately in the growth chamber did not germinate. However, 21% of the seeds that were moist stratified at 5oC for 60 days produced plants.

Dry seeds stored at 5oC for 7 months and placed immediately in the growth chamber without a period of moist stratification did not germinate. Seeds that were stratified for 4 weeks averaged 75% germination. The sample stratified for 6 weeks averaged 78% germination, and the 8 week stratified sample averaged 72% germination.

Seeds stored at 5oC for one year averaged 75.5% germination. Some pitcher plant seeds remained viable after being stored at room temperature for one year, although germination averaged only 2.5%.

Field Studies

No germination was recorded in the tented pots through April 6, 2010. Two weeks later, however, 47% of the seeds had germinated, averaging 23 per pot. Three more seeds later produced plants, raising total germination to 50%. No germination occurred after June 2010.

After 3 months in the field, four bags of the seeds buried in the tubs were uncovered and brought into the lab. No germination occurred in the field; however, laboratory germination was 66%. A second seed sample was collected from the field after 7 months, instead of 6, because of mechanical difficulties with the growth chamber. There was no evidence of germination in the field. After 4 weeks in the germinator, average germination was only 16%. The third seed sample from the field study was harvested after 10 months. Germination occurred in the field, with 126 of the 400 seeds (31.5%) already producing plants. An additional 70 seeds germinated in the laboratory, raising total germination to 49%.

45 

 

By the time the 11 and 12 month samples were harvested, seeds had decayed to the extent that it was impossible to tell which had germinated and produced plants; they could only be counted as ‘empty’. Empty seeds from the 11 month sample averaged over 50%. While only 2% of the remaining seeds germinated in the laboratory, staining with TZ indicated that 56% of the remaining seeds were potentially viable. In the one year sample, 50% of the seeds harvested from the bags were empty and 8% germinated in the laboratory. Of the remaining 193 ungerminated seeds, however, only 3% stained positive with TZ.

Conclusions

It is evident from these studies that, despite the southern location of the seed source, some cold stratification is necessary to stimulate germination of white-topped pitcher plant seeds and that some seeds buried for at least one year retain viability. While many of the seeds remaining after 1 year in the field and 4 weeks in the germinator appeared firm and white, they did not react to the TZ stain. We will continue to harvest seeds from the field and will periodically test viability of seeds kept in cold storage. It is unknown how germination from these controlled studies in the laboratory translates to long-term survival in the field.

Figure 1. Diagram of the planting tub watering system used in the outdoor field study. Water flows from a rainwater catchment basin into the PVC connector pipe at the top of the diagram. This system waters the tubs from the bottom, eliminating upper layer soil disturbance while keeping the soil surrounding the buried bags moist throughout the year.

46 

 

Recommended Resources

International Carnivorous Plant Society, http://www.carnivorousplants.org

The Meadowview Biological Research Station, http://www.pitcherplant.org

McPherson, S. 2007. Pitcher Plants of the Americas. The McDonald and Woodward Publ. Co., Blacksburg, VA. 320 p.

Schnell, D.E. Carnivorous Plants of the United States and Canada. John F. Blair, Publisher, Winston-Salem, NC. 125 p.

47 

 

Pine Straw: Exploring Market Potential

Janice F. Dyer, John Kush, Becky Barlow, and John Gilbert

(Auburn University School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences)

Abstract: Pine straw, especially needles collected from Longleaf pine stands, is a valuable commodity throughout the Southeastern United States. Aside from being decorative, pine straw provides mulching benefits – protecting against surface erosion, moderating soil temperature and moisture, and inhibiting growth of weeds. As traditional timber markets wane, landowners are looking for alternative sources of income from their forests. Pine straw is one non-timber forest product (NTFP) offering landowners a way to secure short-term income while allowing timber to remain “on the stump.” We present needle fall yield data collected as part of the Regional Longleaf Growth Study (RLGS). This data will provide a biological framework for a study of market potential of pine straw. Central to the project will be survey assessment of the pine straw market from opposite ends: the pine straw producers (landowners) to buyers (retailers, landscapers, etc.). An understanding of consumer demand and characteristic preferences would provide insight to management demands of landowners interested in selling pine straw. This project will also explore willingness of landowners to conduct pine straw harvesting operations, examining socioeconomic factors as well as biological characteristics of their forests. Findings from each stage of the project will be used to develop outreach programming and materials.

BACKGROUND

Markets for timber are disappearing as demand for forest products declines and manufacturing facilities are moved overseas. Recent decades have witnessed forest industry consolidation (Bliss et al. 2010), transfer and subdivision of large amounts of forest acreage (Wear and Greis 2002), and the decline of long-term ownership (Clutter et al. 2007). Owners of small tracts are increasingly cut out of traditional markets. Landowners seek new ways to generate income from their forestland, while maintaining sustainable forest systems. Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) offer landowners a way to secure short-term income while allowing timber to remain “on the stump.” In the South, pine straw is one NTFP with strong potential. Boatright and McKissick (2010) estimate that in 2009 pine straw contributed more than $81 million to Georgia’s economy, accounting for more than 16 percent of the forest products market. Pine straw is a byproduct of a natural biological process – pine trees shed their needles regularly. Pine straw is compatible with many land uses, including timber production. Through proper planning and development of a management regime, landowners can harvest straw without jeopardizing the growth potential of their pine trees. It can be harvested on marginal or poor quality forest acreage or sites unsuitable for wood fiber production (Taylor and Foster 2004).

Project Setting

This project will explore the market potential of pine straw in the South and, in particular, Alabama, where the market is not well developed. Alabama ranks number two in the country in terms of the percent of forestland owned by non-industrial private landowners – second only to Georgia. In 1995, Alabama ranked third in the amount of pine plantations, but is expected to

48 

 

become second by 2040 (Wear and Greis 2002). It is difficult to estimate pine straw harvests for Alabama – yields are not reported in the state’s Agricultural Statistics. Yet, despite the high potential for pine straw production in the state’s many pine plantations, the market is not well developed.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES

This project has four main objectives: (1) Analyze pine straw yield data collected as part of the Regional Longleaf Growth Study; (2) Determine demands and preferences of pine straw consumers; (3) Assess willingness of Alabama forestland owners to establish pine straw harvesting operations; and (4) Develop outreach materials and programming based on synthesis of pine straw data and survey results.

Objective 1

Pine straw yields can vary widely depending on a range of biological variables (species, site index, tree age, basal area, and number of trees per acre) and management practices (fertilization, herbicide usage, harvest intervals, and thinning regimes). The goal of Objective 1 is to develop a biological framework within which the remaining components of the study can be conducted. The information collected will allow for a quantitative assessment of the biologic potential of longleaf pine forests, based on various stand characteristics (age, tree density, basal area, site index, and location). This information is crucial to knowing production potential and, therefore, market potential of longleaf pine straw in the Southeast.

In the mid-1960s the U.S. Forest Service established the Regional Longleaf Growth Study to track growth and mortality of naturally-regenerated, even-aged longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) stands in five Southeastern states (Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina). The study, now in its 45-year re-measurement, includes collection of pine straw yield data (needle fall) on more than 200 plots. Figure 1 shows the locations of pine straw data collection by county. Data collected will be used to answer research questions such as: What variables show strong correlations to higher needle fall? How do interactions of different site characteristics impact pine straw production? What stand characteristics appear to have biggest impact on pine straw production?

Figure 1. County locations of pine needle data collected as part of the Regional Longleaf Growth Study

49 

 

 

Preliminary Results

Descriptives, derived from a preliminary assessment of the data available from the Regional Longleaf Growth Study, are presented in Table 1. This table shows that, on average, plots produced approximately 170 bales of pine straw per acre.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of data collected on Longleaf stands1

Variable  Unit  Minimum  Maximum  Mean 

Standard 

Deviation 

Age  Years  18 110 55  28

Density  Trees per acre  15 4452 529  836

Basal area  Square feet per 

acre 

22 152 81  36

Site index (base 

age 50) 

Based on height 

in feet 

43 89 70  11

Needle fall  Pounds per acre 

per year 

12 26126 3398  3202

Pine straw  Bales per acre 

per year2 

1 1306 170  160

1Data collected on 205 plots during various months between 1993 and 1997 2Based on 20-pound green weight bales

There is a wide range of possible variable correlations by which to analyze pine straw yields. Figures 2 and 3 demonstrate two such observations. Figure 2 shows that stands with higher basal area classes yielded more bales per acre per year. However once basal area reached a certain point (about 120 square feet per acre), younger stands with lower basal area produced

50 

 

more pine straw than older stands with higher basal area. Figure 3 shows that in stands with lower planting density (fewer than 200 trees per acre), site index does not appear strongly correlated to pine straw yield. In contrast, as density increased (more than 900 trees per acre), plots with higher site indices yielded much higher amounts of pine straw.

 

 

Objective 2

Wolfe et al. (2005) examine pine straw volume demands and characteristic preferences among buyers of pine straw; however, their study was limited in size (29 respondents, only 20 of whom use pine straw) and geographic scope (within a 60-mile radius of Eufaula, Alabama). More information is needed about pine straw consumer demands (volumes, discount rates, delivery, timing of harvests) and preferences (species, bale shape, bale binding, color, needle length). The goal of Objective 2 is to assess the current pine straw market in Alabama. A mail survey will be administered according to Dillman’s (2000) Tailored Design Method (TDM), which calls for four mailings (a prenotice letter, a first-round survey, a follow-up postcard, and a second-round survey). The participant population for the survey will be business owners or managers of

51 

 

retailers, landscapers, lawn maintenance specialists, landscape suppliers, and nurseries in Alabama who buy and sell pine straw. Respondents can provide insight to the pine straw market and identify consumer preferences, while providing data on sales volume and prices paid.

The information collected will be used to help outreach professionals prepare landowners for potential market-related challenges and inform them of management practices that may increase product quality and efficiency of pine straw operations. An analysis of the pine straw market can help answer questions about whether there is room for more producers to enter the market and whether forestland owners would benefit from developing management regimes geared toward pine straw production and harvesting. Information collected on product preferences and market demands can be used by pine straw producers who may be interested in expanding operations or need guidance determining pricing schedule or marketing channels. Results can provide useful information for Extension personnel interested in educating forestland owners about the revenue-generating pine straw market and in identifying cost and logistical issues that need to be considered when developing management regimes that incorporate pine straw harvesting operations.

Objective 3

Despite pine straw’s mulching benefits and its popularity in landscaping, the market is not well-developed in Alabama. Buyers (garden centers, landscapers, and nurseries) often purchase pine straw from more than 200 miles away, usually from Florida or southwest Georgia (Dyer unpublished data). Research of alternative forest management regimes provides insight to why landowners are not engaging in such practices. Workman et al. (2003) cite poor market development and inadequate education of the public and of land use professionals as constraints to agroforestry development (including forest farming). Access and distance to markets is an important factor in the successful implementation of alternative forestry systems (Hauff 1998).

In a mail survey conducted by Workman et al. (2003), 67 percent of landowners in Alabama and Florida were familiar with non-timber forest products, but only 18 percent of Alabama landowners engaged in forest farming. More than 40 percent of Alabama landowners expressed interest in learning about forest farming and production of non-timber forest products. When asked about benefits of agroforestry regimes, Alabama landowners rank wildlife habitat, soil conservation, and aesthetic value as the most important potential benefits. Top rated obstacles among respondents were lack of equipment, component competition, lack of land area, and lack of demonstrations. Land use professionals in Alabama and Florida site lack of familiarity with the practices and lack of demonstrations as obstacles to agroforestry (Workman et al. 2003). These findings provide a starting point for Objective 3 of the research project. Yet, many questions remain regarding the 40 percent of Alabama landowners who expressed interest in NTFPs. Information is needed about their ownership objectives, current management practices, environmental concerns, market awareness, and interest in harvesting pine straw.

52 

 

The goal of Objective 3 is to gauge the potential for higher involvement of Alabama forestland owners in a pine straw market. A survey will be mailed to owners of land in six Alabama counties (Jackson, Shelby, Autauga, Baldwin, Houston, and Pickens). Survey results will be used to assess landowner interest and knowledge of agroforestry systems and, more specifically, production of non-timber forest products (NTFPs). Those who are interested in pine straw production will be asked willingness to accept (WTA) questions in order to determine an approximate expected price range based on various factors (such as respondent location and pine species). This information is vital to developing programming geared toward expanding market opportunities. Questions will also be asked regarding current management practices and ownership objectives, reasons for not engaging in alternative forestry practices, and consumer willingness to pay (WTP) for pine straw.

Objective 4

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the Alabama Forestry Commission have both expressed interest in developing the pine straw market in the state. The goal of Objective 4 is to synthesize research findings (from two mail surveys as well as the data from the Regional Longleaf Growth Study) and share them with these agencies and the general public. Tasks associated with Objective 4 will use the answers to the research questions addressed in the previous objectives, and organize the information in user-friendly formats. Resulting publications and programming will answer questions landowners have about their property (regarding biological as well as site characteristics), ownership and management regimes, and about the pine straw market.

CONCLUSION

Pine straw holds potential even for those for whom timber is not the primary ownership objective. Pine straw operations require a clean understory, meaning they can complement plans already managing for aesthetics. Because pine straw yields usually peak well before stands reach rotation age, there is opportunity for landowners to secure regular, short-term income while allowing tree diameter growth to continue. Extra income can be used by landowners to cover living expenses, property taxes (thus, continued ownership), or to further invest in land management.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding for mail surveys provided by the McIntire-Stennis program. The authors also wish to thank the Forest Service Southern Global Change Program and the National Forest System.

REFERENCES

Bliss, J.C., E. Kelly, J. Abrams, C. Bailey, and J. Dyer. 2010. “Disintegration of the U.S. Industrial Forest Estate: Dynamics, Trajectories, and Questions.” Small-scale Forestry 9:53-66.

53 

 

Boatright, S.R., and J.C. McKissick. 2010. “2009 Georgia Farm Gate Value Report.” The University of Georgia: Center for Agribusiness & Economic Development. Available at <http://www.caed.uga.edu/publications/2010/pdf/AR-10-01.pdf>. Accessed September 7, 2010.

Clutter, M., B. Mendell, D. Newman, D. Wear, and J. Greis. 2007. “Strategic factors driving timberland ownership changes in the US South.” Available at <http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/econ/pubs/southernmarkets/strategic-factors-and-ownership-v1.pdf>. Accessed August 31, 2010.

Dillman, D.A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Dyer, J.F. 2010. Unpublished data.

Hauff, R.D. 1998. “A Case Study Assessment of Agroforestry.” Journal of Sustainable Forestry 8(3):39-51.

Taylor, E.L., and C.D. Foster. 2004. “Producing Pine Straw in East Texas Forests.” Texas Cooperative Extension, Publication B-6145.

Wear, D.N., and J.G. Greis. 2002. Southern forest resource assessment: summary report. General Technical Report SRS-54. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 103 p.

Wolfe, K., M. Best, and T. Price. 2005. “Pine Straw Market Analysis for Southwest Georgia.” Market Analysis 05-01. University of Georgia: Center for Agribusiness and Economic Development. Available at <http://www.caed.uga.edu/publications/2005/pdf/MA-05-01.pdf>.

Workman, S.W., M.E. Bannister, and P.K.R. Nair. 2003. “Agroforestry Potential in the Southeastern United States: Perceptions of Landowners and Extension Professionals.” Agroforestry Systems 59:73-83.

54 

 

New DNA Markers for Longleaf Pine

Craig S. Echt, Dennis Deemer, and C. Dana Nelson

(US Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Southern Institute of Forest Genetics 23332 Success Road, Saucier, MS 39674)

Abstract: Genetic markers are essential tools for conservation genetics programs and seed orchard monitoring. Isozymes have been used in longleaf pine, but they have limited resolving power to unambiguously identify individual trees or weakly differentiated populations. Microsatellite markers, also known as SSR (simple sequence repeat) markers, are DNA markers that are highly polymorphic and are the ideal DNA fingerprinting tools, whether for individuals or populations. We analyzed loblolly pine DNA sequences from public databases, designed and synthesized primers for PCR amplification, and have to date tested 108 SSR primer pairs on 26 longleaf pine DNA samples. We identified eleven polymorphic markers, ten of which were EST-SSRs, that is, they were from transcribed gene sequences (ESTs). The average number of alleles per locus was 3.6, and the average gene diversity (expected heterozygosity) was 0.34. This compares favorably to the 2.9 average allele number and 0.10 gene diversity that previous researchers found with isozyme loci. Next, we will screen 328 more primer pairs, from which we expect to obtain an additional 40 markers. We will also screen in longleaf pine a set of 233 SSR markers that we have genetically mapped in loblolly pine. From all sources, once screened and fully characterized, we expect to have over 100 SSR markers available for use in a variety of applications by the longleaf pine community.

55 

 

Exceptional Rarity and Carnivory: Characterizing Wetland Plant Communities in the Fall Line Sand Hills

Michele Elmore1, Julie Ballenger2, and Harrison, Wade1

(1The Nature Conservancy, Georgia Chapter and 2Columbus State University)

Abstract: The Fall Line Sand Hills physiographic province of west central Georgia is known for its unique plant communities and rare, often disjunct, plant populations due to the region’s distinct geologic history. Embedded within xeric longleaf pine uplands are unusual wetland plant communities, with composition and dynamics driven by fire and water. While the ecology of the upland pine woodlands has been fairly well studied less is known about the wetland system. The community types can be broadly categorized as herbaceous or shrub bogs, bay swamps, and Atlantic white cedar swamps but they have not been clearly described by their species composition. So little is documented about these communities that the rarity or imperilment rank of the plant communities has not been formally established, nor have they received the attention they deserve in conservation plans. Therefore, this project seeks to better characterize, classify, and rank these wetland communities, provide new elemental occurrence information, and outline protection and management needs. Here we present preliminary results from eight sites from the Fall Line Sand Hills region. Across the eight sites over 210 species in 110 genera and 69 families have been documented. Nine carnivorous species were found and 13 species are considered rare (S1/S2) in the state of Georgia. Significant populations of Asclepias rubra, Platanthera blephariglottis, Macbridea caroliniana, Sarracenia psittacina, Sarracenia rubra, Pinguicula primuliflora, Zigadensus leimanthoides and Chamaecyparis thyoides were found. Preliminary descriptions of plant communities and their potential rarity will be presented. All sites represent significant plant diversity and rarity for Georgia.

Introduction

The Fall Line Sandhills physiographic province of west central Georgia is known for its unique plant communities and rare, often disjunct, plant populations due to the region’s distinct geologic history. Embedded within xeric longleaf pine uplands are unusual wetland plant communities, with composition and dynamics driven by fire and water. While the ecology of the upland pine woodlands has been fairly well studied less is known about the wetland system. The community types of this wetland complex often occur in patches and can be broadly categorized as herbaceous or shrub bogs, bay swamps, and Atlantic white cedar swamps. Sandy soils of the Fall Line allow free percolation of rainwater, until it encounters a less permeable clay or hardpan, after which water moves laterally and can emerge on a hillside as a seep. These wetlands are also associated with clearwater stream branches, or along larger streams they may be adjacent to wet, sandy floodplain terraces. In addition, where beavers build dams extensive swamps can spread out creating wetland habitat with exceptional plant diversity. However, these community types in the Fall Line Sandhills have not yet been clearly described by their species composition. So little is documented about these communities that the rarity or imperilment rank of the plant communities has not been formally established, nor have they received the attention they deserve in conservation plans.

56 

 

Much of the current knowledge about these species and community occurrences comes from surveys by Georgia and Alabama Heritage Programs and The Nature Conservancy (Cammack et al 2000, Sheridan et al 1999, Sheridan and Patrick 1999), some of which was funded by the MeadWestvaco Foundation (Harrison et al 2007). While many of these species are not globally imperiled individually, they are often unusual for the area, and the community types of the Fall Line Sandhills in which they occur may well be quite rare. In fact some of these species were not previously known to occur in this particular geography prior to recent surveys.

Therefore, this project seeks to better characterize, classify, and rank these wetland communities, provide new elemental occurrence information, and outline protection and management needs. Here we present preliminary results from eight sites from the Fall Line Sandhills in Georgia. Across the eight sites, over 210 species in 110 genera and 69 families have been documented. Nine carnivorous species were found and 13 species are considered rare (S1/S2) in the state of Georgia. Significant populations of Asclepias rubra, Platanthera blephariglottis, Macbridea caroliniana, Sarracenia psittacina, Sarracenia rubra, Pinguicula primuliflora, Zigadensus leimanthoides and Chamaecyparis thyoides were found. Preliminary descriptions of plant communities and their potential rarity are presented. All sites represent significant plant diversity and rarity for Georgia.

The objectives of this study are to:

(1) Characterize, classify and rank wetland communities in the Fall Line Sandhills

Clearly define these wetland communities by collecting species lists and hydrologic information. Assign quality rankings for each site and establish reference conditions for high quality examples of particular communities. If new community types are described, a global-imperilment (G-) rank will be determined. New association descriptions and rankings will be submitted to Natureserve for consideration and new or revised Element Occurrence (EO) information will be submitted to Georgia’s Natural Heritage database.

(2) Outline protection and management needs

Once these communities are more clearly defined, landscape level data will be analyzed to gather information about management actions necessary to conserve these communities. Data gathered on reference conditions will be utilized to determine appropriate desired future conditions for management and restoration of these dynamic habitats. Potential portfolio sites (those most worthy of protection and management or restoration) will be identified and management plans developed as well as more detailed maps and conservation strategies for Conservancy ecoregional and conservation plans; land management plans, prescribed fire plans, and conservation easement templates appropriate for use on preserves, private conservation lands, and special areas of the Fall Line Sandhills.

57 

 

Methods

The geographic area of this research is the working area of Fort Benning’s Army Compatible Use Buffer (ACUB) Program within the Fall Line Sandhills physiographic province of Georgia including Fort Benning Military Installation. Counties include Muscogee, Chattahoochee, Talbot, and Marion (Fig. 1). Priority habitats for investigation are longleaf pine sandhills, Atlantic white-cedar swamps, clearwater beaver swamps, and riparian and hillside seepage communities. Sites were selected based on a priori knowledge of wetland communities from previous reconnaissance or from aerial image interpretation.

Vegetation data were collected from 8 sites using the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) Method (Peet et al 1998), where all species were recorded within a

20 x 50 meter plot and given a cover class. Nomenclature follows Weakley (2008). Voucher specimens were collected for most species and have been deposited in the Columbus State University Herbarium.

To identify similar community types based on their species assemblages and begin exploring potential for new plant community descriptions two kinds of classification and two kinds of ordination procedures were applied using species cover data. Classification procedures used were: 1) cluster analysis with group average group linkage method and Sørenson's distance measure, and 2) TWINSPAN with the default settings. The two ordination procedures used were 1) Bray-Curtis ordination with Sørenson's distance and variance-regression endpoint selection, and 2) non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMS) using Sørenson's distance and the coordinates from the Bray- Curtis ordination as a starting configuration.

Results

This project has documented approximately 228 species in 110 genera and 69 families. These 8 wetland sites in the Fall Line Sandhills represent significant plant diversity for the state of Georgia. So far, this project has documented 13 rare plant species for Georgia and 9 carnivorous species (Table 1). Major discoveries include Asclepias rubra (Marion, Muscogee, and Talbot COs) and Platanthera blephariglottis (Talbot CO) which had not been seen in the state for over 20 years. Many of the other rare species documented represent new locales for the state. Also significant, Sarracenia psittacina was discovered at 3 sites in two counties (Marion and

Fall Line Sandhills Province

BJX 

HS PM1 PM2 

GS 

NM 

O9 

O14 

Figure 1: Map of study area and location of 8 sites 

58 

 

Chattahoochee COs), which were not known to occur in the study area prior to recent surveys. These discoveries represent a significant northern range extension of over 100 miles for S. psittacina.

Table 1: List of rare and carnivorous species documented. Carnivorous species are listed in bold font. Rare species are defined by state rank of either S1 or S2, critically imperiled or imperiled, respectively.

Scientific Name

Common Name

Global Rank

State Rank

Notes

Asclepias rubra Red Milkweed G4 SH State historical (SH), species had not been observed in more than 20 years, but was rediscovered during this project. Found at 4 of the 8 sites.

Chamacyparis thyoides

Atlantic White-cedar

G4 S2 Documented at 2 sites. Significant mature stand found at one of the sites.

Drosera capillaris

pink sundew G5 Not

Ranked Documented at 5 sites

Drosera intermedia

spoonleaf sundew G5 Not

Ranked

Documented at 3 sites. One population found exhibited significant vegetative apomyxis, the formation of vegetative plant structures in place of normal flower structures

Helenium brevifolium

bog sneezeweed G4 S1 Documented at 2 sites

Macbridea caroliniana

Carolina bogmint G2/G3 S1 Significant new population found with over 1000 stems found in excellent habitat. Documented at one site

Pinguicula primuliflora

clearwater butterwort

G4 S1/T Documented only at one site

Platanthera blephariglottis

northern fringed orchid

G4 S1? Only two known records for the state, both recently discovered, one is located at one of these sites

Rhynchospora macra

southern white beaksedge

G3 S1? Documented only at one site

Rhynchospora stenophylla

Chapman’s beakrush

G4 S2 Documented at 7 sites

Sarracenia psittacina

parrot pitcher plant G4 S2/ T Three populations all in the Chattahoochee River watershed discovered within the last several years, represents a significant northern range extension of over 100 miles

Sarracenia rubra

sweet pitcher plant G4 S2/T Documented at 4 sites

Utricularia floridana

Florida bladderwort

G3/G5 S2/S3 Documented at 2 sites

59 

 

Scientific Name

Common Name

Global Rank

State Rank

Notes

Utricularia juncea

southern bladderwort

G5 S5 Documented at one site

Utricularia purpurea

purple bladderwort G5 S4 Documented at 3 sites

Utricularia subulata

zigzag bladderwort G5 S5 Documented at 2 sites

Xyris drummondii Drummond yellow-eyed grass

G3 S1 Documented at 3 sites

Zigadensus leimanthoides

death-camus G4Q S1 Significant populations found at 2 sites

Ordination analyses were conducted using seven of the eight sites. One site (NM) was not included in these analyses because it was considered an outlier in terms of its species composition and structure. NM is most similar to the Nyssa biflora - Acer rubrum var. rubrum/Lyonia lucida Forest association (NatureServe) but contains a significant population of Macbridea caroliniana (Talbot CO) in the herb layer. Although not inherently rare, this forest type is limited in its distribution and has been reduced by habitat alteration and poor buffering from upslope landuse.

Preliminary classification and ordination analyses show sites HS, GS, PM2 are most similar to each other while the other four sites, BJX, O9, PM1 & O14 are somewhat similar. BJX and PM1 are herbaceous/shrub bogs artificially maintained open by power line Right-of-ways (ROWs). While ROWs provide critical refugia for many rare species, they are often subject to mechanical and chemical treatments that strongly influence species composition and can be detrimental to rare plant populations. The artificial maintenance of these sites makes classification difficult. However, sites such as O9 and O14 which have some similarity in species composition (such as Arundinaria

Figure 2: NMS ordination of 

sample sites in species space, 

where labeled species represent 

the positive and negative 

preferential species from 

TWINSPAN for grouping sites.  

wet 

60 

 

and carnivorous spp.) and structure but are maintained by prescribed fire (on Fort Benning) may serve as reference conditions for the ROW sites.

Sites, HS, GS & PM2 may represent a distinct plant community type similar to the globally critically imperiled (G1) East Gulf Coastal Plain muck bog associations described by NatureServe. Ordination analyses indicate a potential hydrologic gradient along axis 1 (Fig 2). All 3 sites are highly saturated and influenced by beaver activity. They are largely herbaceous containing similar species such as Rhynchospora stenophylla, Eriocaulon compressum, E. decangulare, Drosera spp and Sarracenia spp., but also have tussocks with woody vegetation dominated by Nyssa, Morella, and Lyonia. However, these communities have unique combinations and abundance of particular species, such as Sarracenia psittacina, Utricularia floridana, Brasenia schreberi, Mayaca fluviatilis, and Peltandra virginica which warrant further investigation.

Conclusion

This work has revealed extraordinary diversity and rarity previously unknown for the Fall Line Sandhills province of Georgia. Future fieldwork will focus of identifying additional sites for surveys, especially beaver swamps, and collection of landscape data such as soils (pH and nutrient analysis) and hydrologic information from all sites. Future data collection and analysis will incorporate landscape data, vegetation structure, and seasonality of plants. Investigation of fauna, such as crayfish and herptofauna may further define these communities and offer additional discoveries of rare species along the Fall Line.

The next phase of this project will focus on identifying portfolio sites, those most worthy of protection and management. Detailed maps and conservation strategies for Conservancy ecoregional and conservation planning will be developed including, prescribed fire plans, and conservation easement templates appropriate for use on preserves, private conservation lands, and special areas of the Fall Line. Management and restoration plans will be implemented on at least one portfolio site as a demonstration.

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the MeadWestvaco Foundation and the Department of Defense for funding this work and landowners who granted access to their property. Additional gratitude is given to Catherine Prior, Brant Slay, Rob Addington, Trevor Cutsinger, Don Imm, and Amanda Posey who have greatly assisted this project.

61 

 

Mountain Longleaf 2010

Bill Garland

(Environmental Policy & Information Center, Jacksonville State University)

Abstract: Mountain Longleaf 2010 was conceived as a strategy for evaluating and characterizing forest lands in Northern Alabama and northwest Georgia that are commonly referred to as the mountain longleaf pine region. Our current understanding of this forest region is primarily based on late 19th and early 20 Century observations by local scientists, and a series of forest ecology and silvicultural studies completed during the late 20th Century.

The forests we see on today’s landscape are not necessarily characteristic of the former forest. If the Appalachian provinces are viewed as the mountain longleaf region, a much broader definition of mountain longleaf pine should be considered. Historically, a long-term fire regime allowed these forests to expand onto more productive soils that connected a broad fire dependant landscape. Today, these former longleaf forests of more competitive mesic soils have disappeared through timber harvest and agriculture. The fragmentation of the landscape and disappearance of fire prevented new longleaf forests from growing on these sites. What primarily remains on today’s landscape is longleaf pine along steep slopes and shallow rocky soils.

The mountain region was and continues to evolve under the influence of a variety of environmental factors. The project will review those factors and identify issues that set the mountain region apart from other longleaf forests; Geographical Location, Species Diversity, Environmental Setting, and Prehistoric, Historic and Current Land Use.

Introduction

Mountain Longleaf 2010 was conceived as a strategy for evaluating and characterizing forest lands in Northern Alabama and northwest Georgia that occur within an area commonly referred to as the mountain longleaf pine region. Our current understanding of this forest region is based on late 19th and early 20 Century observations by local scientists, and a series of forest ecology and silvicultural studies completed during the late 20th Century. Early descriptions by scientists such as Roland Harper described mountain longleaf pine as of “lower stature than on the coastal plain, with shorter leaves and shorter more crooked branches.” It is this description that is often used to characterized mountain longleaf pine.

What we see on today’s landscape, however, is not necessarily characteristic of historic forests throughout the mountain region. Thousands of years of lightning fires augmented by Native American burning created a broad and differing longleaf landscape across northern Alabama and northeastern Georgia. Under a long-term fire regime, these forests were able to expand onto more productive soils adjacent and connecting a broad fire dependant landscape.

Today the mountain region is often viewed as a transition between the forests of the Appalachian Mountains and the coastal plain. The mountain region, however, is a complex and distinctive ecosystem in need of a thorough and diverse assessment. The current project will

62 

 

attempt to characterize and describe the region through a holistic approach that integrates geology, geography, environmental history, global warming, forestry and biology.

The mountain region was and continues to evolve under the influence of a variety of environmental factors. The project will review these factors and identify issues that set the mountain region apart from other longleaf forests.

Geographical Location: The mountain region is the only area within longleaf pine’s range where forests extend beyond the coastal plain deep into Appalachian provinces. The location of this region along the northern edge of longleaf’s range exposes forests to environmental and climate stress. Stress effects on these forests, at least on steep slopes, include poor timber quality, higher internal decay rate, and more frequent cone production.

Species Diversity: The mountain region includes an overlap of species and natural community's characteristic of both the coastal plain and Appalachian provinces. Biologists often view this region as a transition area between the Appalachian Mountains and coastal plain. The presence and distribution of these species and communities, however, may prove to be the diagnostic characteristic that defines the region. The absence of certain coastal plain species is also a significant factor in assessing species diversity.

Environmental Setting: Steep slopes and mountain topography create a forest landscape where longleaf pine occurs as the matrix binding together a broad mosaic of natural communities. Fire constitutes the driving force maintaining this forest complex. Mountainous topography, however, plays a major role in forest fragmentation, resulting in a less frequent fire regime than occurred on more continuous coastal plain forests.

Prehistoric, Historic and Current Land Use: Land use has always played a part in perpetuating, maintaining and altering longleaf forests. Environmental historians continue to argue that up to two million Native Americans may have inhabited the Southeast during the pre-contact period. Decimation of these populations through disease may have given rise to a landscape in a state of recovery when early pioneers and traders first entered the region. Subsequent land use involving the deer-skin trade, livestock grazing, turpentine extraction, logging, habitat fragmentation, and altered fire regimes all impacted longleaf pine forests. The mountain region in particular was affected through the iron industry, charcoaling and mineral land speculation.

Global Warming: The mountain region provides an active laboratory for documenting the effects of global warming. The mountains, particularly in the Talladega Uplands, contain high elevation relict species characteristic of more northern climates. Species that have been documented from these high elevation forests include the wood frog (Rana sylvatica), Appalachian cottontail (Sylvilagus obscurus), ground juniper (Juniperus communis), and

63 

 

turkey beard (Xerophyllum asphodeloides). Recent surveys for the Appalachian cottontail failed to document the rabbit at locations where multiple records exist for the early 1900s.

The project will be centered at Jacksonville State University within the Environmental Policy & Information Center (EPIC). Project findings will be published in a user friendly book directed at both technical and lay individuals. A website providing field locations that can be visited to further understand and appreciate written discussions will be developed to support the book.

64 

 

Mortality in Natural Even-aged Longleaf Pine

John C. Gilbert, John S. Kush, and Rebecca J. Barlow1

(Auburn University, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory and 1Alabama Cooperative Extension System)

Abstract: Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) forests only occupy a small fraction of the Southern United States landscape they once dominated prior to European settlement, with natural stands being an even smaller fraction. Longleaf pine is the keystone species in several threatened and endangered species habitats as well as a very valuable crop tree. Efforts are already underway to restore these forests and habitats to the landscape. Sustaining natural stands is often overlooked in the restoration effort, but it is vital to maintaining sustainable structure for habitats and regular income without the need for or cost of intensive site preparation and planting. Mortality associated with longleaf pine is an important and very dynamic question when looking at managing longleaf pine for a variety of objectives. A better understanding of mortality can affect management practices like using prescribed fire, thinning regimes, and regeneration methods for the forests of today and the forests of the future. To assess and evaluate mortality in natural even-aged stands of longleaf pine, permanent plot data from the US Forest Service Regional Longleaf Pine Growth Study (RLGS) have been analyzed.

In 1964, the U.S. Forest Service established the RLGS to study longleaf pine stand dynamics. Data from the RLGS cover a range of age classes, basal area classes, site indices, and ecoregions across the southern United States. Plots have been measured every five years since the establishment of the study, and the database contains a history of burn frequency, plot density, and the location of each tree on a plot. Mortality is also assessed every five years to determine if trees died due to lightning, insects, disease, windthrow, mechanical damage, fire, trespass cutting, suppression, or unknown causes. The plots are thinned as needed to maintain the assigned basal area classes. The dataset provides over 40 years of measurements with the 45th measurement already underway. The maintained basal area classes mimic stand densities from stand replacement regeneration cuts to single tree selections and high density stands left to grow. Results from these densities across a range of sites show trends in mortality over four decades and provide insights about the effects of management options for natural stands with implications for the future management of longleaf pine.

65 

 

GIS Technology as a Path to Restoration: Mapping Longleaf Pine Forests

John C. Gilbert and John S. Kush

(Auburn University, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory)

Abstract: The longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) ecosystem that once covered a major portion of the southeastern landscape of the United States has been decimated to only a small percentage of the millions of acres it historically dominated. There has been a surge of interest in longleaf pine restoration over the past decade with momentum continuing to build today. This restoration movement in the longleaf pine community emphasizes restoring functional longleaf pine ecosystems across the historic range. Preserving, enhancing, and restoring functional longleaf pine ecosystems requires focus on both public and private lands, where the majority of the land is privately owned. Efforts to restore the ecosystem across the different types of landownership are driven by multitude of factors including but not limited to restoring the natural ecosystem, growing high quality wood products, producing non-timber commodities like grazing and pine straw, aesthetics, and increasing threatened and endangered species habitat, which has created a need for dynamic planning tools to capture and facilitate these efforts. Without a suitable conservation planning tool and map showing the location and condition of existing longleaf pine forests across all types of land ownership, these various restoration efforts continue in a scattered and undocumented approach across the historic range, where the impact of the restoring functioning landscape scale longleaf pine ecosystems continues to be an unknown.

The purpose of this effort is to create regional GIS database of existing spatial data about longleaf pine which will provide a baseline of knowledge and aid conservation and restoration efforts. This effort has only been possible through support and coordination from the Longleaf Alliance, Inc. and numerous partners and supporters from across the range. The GIS database is being created and continuously updated by collecting and compiling existing available spatial data about longleaf pine stands using the best available technology. This GIS database helps assess the extent and condition of available spatial data on longleaf pine forests, which provides a building block in the restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem. The database will serve as an effective conservation tool by targeting areas of high ecological potential and thereby maximizing the impact of restoration dollars. Among the various utilities of this database are the abilities to identify areas that lack spatial data about longleaf pine stands, to develop potential ways to prioritize likely restoration focal areas and/or corridors, and to serve as an educational tool to promote longleaf restoration.

66 

 

Miscommunication and Confusion about Longleaf Pine Growth: Is It What You Say or What You Mean?

John S. Kush

(Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University)

Abstract: If you answer yes to any of these questions below, then you might need, or should be interested in a growth and yield model!!!

Questions:

1. Are you interested in knowing how your trees are growing?

2. Do you want to know how long it will take to grow certain wood products?

3. Have you been told that site index is a static number?

4. Are you interested in knowing how many trees per acre you want, or how many to plant?

5. Do you think that all older trees grow slowly and stagnate?

6. Have you wondered how rules of thumb for live crown ratio relate to longleaf pine?

7. Are you interested in knowing how natural mortality may affect your stand?

8. Do you want to know how different tree densities could affect ground cover?

9. Are you interested in knowing how long it would take to grow a potential cavity tree for a red-cockaded woodpecker?

10. Do you think growth and yield models are just for intensive fiber production or strictly for economic purposes?

11. Are you interested in non-timber products like pine straw or agroforestry?

12. Would you be happy to learn that there has been an increase in longleaf pine growth over the past 2 decades compared to the previous 2 decades?

13. Have you been told that existing models or models for other species like loblolly pine, slash pine, or even sweetgum will give you a “good enough” estimate?

Answers to questions:

1 and 2. See abstracts by Lauer and Kush in this Proceeding.

67 

 

3. Work done on the Escambia Experimental Forest over 50 years documented an 18-foot increase in site index. This work was published in 2001by W.D. Boyer in: A generational change in site index for naturally established longleaf pine on a south Alabama Coastal Plain site. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 25(2):88–92. Further evidence of a growth increase in longleaf pine is discussed in question 12.

4. See the paper by Kush, Gilbert, and Barlow "Plant how many longleaf pine?" in this Proceeding. Think about what your management/ownership objectives are. Longleaf pine offers many opportunities.

5 and 6. Naturally-regenerated stands of longleaf pine do not stagnate as will happen with loblolly and slash pine. The tree will grow with as little as 10% crown ratio. In addition, the tree will respond to release. The graph below illustrates the disk of tree where the DBH at 115 years old was 4.2". The tree was 36.2" when it died at 340 years. Diameter in inches is on the y-axis and tree age in years is on the x-axis. The graph shows it was putting on its best growth at 240 years old.

5 and 6 (continued). Longleaf can grow in dense stands, THIS IS HOW LONGLEAF REGENERATED ITSELF, not at 300 trees/acre. Plots on the Escambia Experimental Forest established in 1985 in an area naturally-regenerated in 1969 had over 4,000 trees/acre and 82 square feet/acre. Today, some of those plots have over 3,000 trees/acre and 180 square feet/acre (loblolly pine cannot do that). No signs of disease or decline and there is even groundcover in these "dense" plots.

7. See abstract by Lauer and Kush and the paper by Gilbert, Kush, and Barlow "Mortality in natural even-aged longleaf pine" in this Proceeding.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

15 40 65 90 115

140

165

190

215

240

265

290

307

68 

 

8. A fire-maintained longleaf pine stand will have ground cover despite the overstory. The graph below illustrates the amount of forge available, if agroforestry was an interest, based on different overstory densities. The y-axis is in pounds/acre and the x-axis describes the overstory basal area where seed tree = 25-40 square feet/acre; shelterwood = 40-80 square feet/acre and fully stocked is > 80 square feet/acre.

9 and 10. See abstracts by Lauer and Kush in this Proceeding.

11. See the paper by Kush, Gilbert, and Barlow "Plant how many longleaf pine?" in this Proceeding. What are your management/ownership objectives? Longleaf pine stands with a basal area of 120 square feetacre can produce nearly 300 pine straw bales/acre/year.

12. We know that longleaf pine growth has changed – it has INCREASED. We know the parameters for the last growth & yield model from 1985 no longer fit the data. Growth since the mid-1980's has significantly increased when compared to the 1960's and 1970's. See the paper "Growth increases in younger sequential cohorts of naturally-regenerated longleaf pine in southern Alabama" by Kush, Lauer, Barlow and Gilbert in this Proceeding.

13. There is now an additional 30 years of data since the last growth model for naturally-regenerated longleaf stands was published in 1985 and that a region-wide plantation model has not been produced. The Regional Longleaf Growth Study (RLGS) was established by the U.S. Forest Service in 1964 to create a model for naturally regenerated which produced the 1985 model. The RLGS continues to be re-measured to this day, now in its 45-year re-measurement. The RLGS database has over 260,000 individual tree observations.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

seed tree shelterwood fully stocked

Forage

69 

 

Conclusion: Longleaf pine has been growing in the southeastern United States for millennia. Only with the loss of the ecosystem and the increasing market demand for high quality wood products, threatened and endangered species habitat and carbon storage has there been a need to understand the details of growth. Misconceptions, miscommunication, and artificially imposed limits on the wealth of knowledge desired and provided by growth and yield models negate the vast potential of a longleaf pine information system.

70 

 

Plant HOW MANY Longleaf Pines per Acre????

John S. Kush1, Rebecca J. Barlow1,2, and John C. Gilbert1 1Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory, Auburn University School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences, 2Alabama Cooperative Extension System

Abstract: In 1964, the USDA Forest Service established the Regional Longleaf Pine Growth Study (RLGS) in the Gulf States. The original objective of the study was to obtain a database for the development of growth and yield predictions for naturally regenerated, even-aged longleaf pine stands. As part of the study, a group of research plots were thinned to 300, 600, 900, 1,200 and 1,500 trees per acre while the seedlings were still in the grass-stage. These plots have been re-measured on an every 2- to 5-year basis since their establishment. The plots have been maintained at a basal area of 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 square feet/acre, respectively. In addition to monitoring growth over time, data have been collected on the percentage of trees that would make a high quality utility pole, a product that has been bringing land owners almost 2X what they would get for saw timber. For a 3 year period, needle fall was monitored on a monthly basis. This effort has provided information on how much pine straw is being produced by these different densities. Longleaf pine straw can bring landowners more than $100.00 per acre per year without having to cut a tree. So if you are thinking about planting longleaf pine, how many longleaf pines per acre should you plant?

Initial start - 300 trees/acre and maintained at 30 sq ft/ac

Equivalent spacing - 12' x 12'; mortality through age 10 - 0.9 tree/acre/year; first thinning at age 17; utility pole production begins at age 30 with 62% of stems making poles; pine straw production at age 20 = 113 bales/acre/year; pine straw production at age 30 = 90 bales/acre/year; longleaf pine regeneration present.

Initial start - 600 trees/acre and maintained at 60 sq ft/ac

Equivalent spacing - 8' x 9'; mortality through age 10 - 1.4 trees/acre/year; first thinning at age 20; utility pole production begins at age 35 with 69% of stems making poles; pine straw production at age 20 = 168 bales/acre/year; pine straw production at age 30 = 144 bales/acre/year; longleaf pine regeneration present.

Initial start - 900 trees/acre and maintained at 90 sq ft/ac

Equivalent spacing - 6' x 8'; mortality through age 10 - 1.8 trees/acre/year; first thinning at age 20; utility pole production begins at age 40 with 81% of stems making poles; pine straw production at age 20 = 255 bales/acre/year; pine straw production at age 30 = 211 bales/acre/year; no longleaf pine regeneration present.

Initial start - 1200 trees/acre and maintained at 120 sq ft/ac

71 

 

Equivalent spacing - 6' x 6'; mortality through age 15 - 2.8 trees/acre/year; first thinning at age 25; utility pole production begins at age 40 with 77% of stems making poles; pine straw production at age 20 = 269 bales/acre/year; pine straw production at age 30 = 231 bales/acre/year; no longleaf pine regeneration present.

Initial start - 1500 trees/acre and maintained at 150 sq ft/ac

Equivalent spacing - 6' x 5'; mortality through age 25 - 4.5 trees/acre/year; will never be thinned; utility pole production begins at age 45 with 64% of stems making poles; pine straw production at age 20 = 282 bales/acre/year; pine straw production at age 30 = 251 bales/acre/year; no longleaf pine regeneration present.

Answer: How many trees one plants depends on their management goals. It must be remembered that longleaf pine is not loblolly or slash pine and evolved under different conditions than the other southern pines. It regenerated in dense stands in openings created by some disturbance event and has a grass-stage for several reasons. Longleaf pine, with the use of fire, gives the landowner/manager more options than do the other southern pines. Through thinnings, opening can be created in denser stands, as nature did, to capture regeneration when trees are old enough to produce viable seed.

72 

 

Will there be Enough Longleaf Pine Seed to Meet the Goal of "America's Longleaf" Initiative?

John S. Kush1, John C. Gilbert1, and Rebecca J. Barlow1,2

(1Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory, Auburn University School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences, 2Alabama Cooperative Extension System)

Abstract: As stated on the web site for America's Longleaf - A Restoration Initiative for the Southern Longleaf Pine Forest, "The 15-year goal for the Conservation Plan is an increase in longleaf from 3.4 to 8.0 million acres". The question has to be asked, is this going to be possible based on seed availability? Certainly this is an ambitious goal. This poster presentation will focus on longleaf pine cone crops. The production of cones which is nearly a 3-year process will be presented as well as stand conditions which seem most favorable for cone production and what impacts climate may have on cone production. A history of cone production over the past four decades will be presented to illustrate that longleaf cone crops occur somewhere over the range of longleaf pine most years. A longleaf site zone map will be illustrated to show where it may be most advantageous not to move seed from.

Longleaf pine cone production

• Longleaf is a sporadic seed producer; good seed crops may occur every 5 to 7 years with region-wide heavy seed crops once in 8 to 10 years.

• For successful regeneration, minimum cone crop is 750 cones/acre or roughly 30 cones/tree; means the seed should be pretty viable.

• Do not bear cones until 20-30 years old.

• Trees > 9” DBH needed.

• Closely grown trees, young or old, are not prolific until some time after release.

• Cone production is generally better on burned versus unburned land.

73 

 

Regional longleaf pine cone crops

The figure below shows the average longleaf pine cone production/year from 7 to 9 sites located across the Southeast. The figures shows there have been several good crops, > 30 cones/tree since the mid-1980's. Prior to that time, though, the good cone crops were very sporadic.

Final thought

We could be entering a period, like the 1960's, when there were few cone crops. If that is the case, then where will the seed come from? Why not organize a longleaf pine cone crop "support" group where cone counts can be done across the longleaf range and the information put into a longleaf pine mapping database. Longleaf pine gives us a 2-year notice on a cone crop, we need to take advantage of all that the tree is telling us.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Con

es/T

ree

66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10

Year

74 

 

Growth Increases in Younger Sequential Cohorts of Naturally-regenerated Longleaf Pine in Southern Alabama

John S. Kush1, Dwight K. Lauer3, John C. Gilbert1, and Rebecca J. Barlow1,2 1Longleaf Pine Stand Dynamics Laboratory, Auburn University School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences, 2Alabama Cooperative Extension System, 3Silvics Analytic

Abstract: Before the arrival of settlers to the United States, natural communities dominated by longleaf pine occurred throughout most of the southern Atlantic and Gulf coastal plains. These communities once covered an estimated 60-90 million acres, or two-thirds of the area in the Southeast. Dissimilar to other southern pines, longleaf pine tolerates a wide variety of habits. It is found growing from dry mountain slopes and ridges to coastal poorly drained flatwoods, as well as the excessively drained sandhills found along the coast and fall line. Today, estimates indicate that less than 3.1 million acres remain. Ecological restoration and reforestation in the longleaf pine forests has increased over recent years, motivated by both ecological and economic benefits derived from long rotation management strategies. Part of this motivation is driven by the idea that longleaf pine may be better suited to increased levels of CO2 or a warming climate. A series of plots established in young, naturally regenerated longleaf pine stands in south Alabama will be used to investigate potential differences in growth due to differences in climatic factors (represented by different time periods) after reducing the differences in initial stand characteristics as much as possible.

Introduction

In 1964, the USDA Forest Service established the Regional Longleaf Pine Growth Study (RLGS) in the Gulf States. The original objective of the study was to obtain a database for the development of growth and yield predictions for naturally regenerated, even-aged longleaf pine stands. In 1984, Auburn University, in a cooperative agreement with the USDA Forest Service, re-measured the RLGS plots for its fourth measurement period (20-year measurement). The cooperation continues today, and the project in the middle of its ninth measurement period (45-year measurement). The study accounts for change in growth by adding new plots in the youngest age class every 10 years (time reps). These time rep plots are located on the Escambia Experimental Forest (EEF) near Brewton, AL. This location is central to the range of longleaf pine has 5 “time reps”, each initiated in the 20-year age class.

Time Reps

The idea behind the Time Reps was to see keep site and age the same and then see if there are differences in growth over time. There are 5 time reps located on the EEF. Each of these reps was initiated in the 20-year age class. Each time rep is made up of at least 15, 1/5-ac permanent plots. Plots making up Time Rep 1 plots were installed in 1964, Time Rep 2 in 1973, Time Rep 3 in 1985, and Time Rep 4 in 1995. The 5th Time Rep was installed in 2005. These plots will be re-measured during the 2010-2011 winter. The plots have been treated with the same management prescription since the study began. The plots are prescribed burned every 3 years during the winter, though they are not burned the same year. Time Reps 2 and 4 are burned the same winter, as are 1 and 5, with Time Rep 3 plots getting burned in the third year.

75 

 

Results

Basal area increment/year was calculated for each of the Time Rep series over the first 10 years for each of the series. There has been increase in growth (expressed as basal area increment in square feet/acre/year) over the 40 years of this study. The basal area increment was 4.6, 5.2, 6.7 and 5.4 square feet/acre/year for Time Reps 1, 2, 3 and 4, in that order. The period from 1985 to 1995 saw the greatest growth among the Time Reps for the same location and stand history.

Discussion

There has been an increase in longleaf pine growth over the past 40 years. West et al. (1993) and Boyer (2001) have reported similar increases in longleaf pine growth over the past 20 years. When a comparison is made between the average temperature and precipitation data from 1924 to 1964 and 1964 to 2004, there appears to be no discernable change in climate in south Alabama. If climate has not changed appreciably then might be happening? The controlled nature and close proximity of the Time Rep series plots to each other should allow for the look at climate but it may take finer scale measurements to isolate the cause.

Longleaf pine grows on all soils in the southeastern U.S. other than the heavy prairie soils and soils inundated by water for a few months of a year. The growth increase has been region-wide and if climate is not the driver than speculation could focus on CO2. If there has been an increase in CO2 levels, then it may show that longleaf is better able to utilize the increase to stimulate growth.

Acknowledgements

The U.S. Forest Service, Region 8, for supporting the study; T.R. Miller Mill Company for the use of the Escambia Experimental Forest; and Dr. Bob Farrar, Jr. (retired) for the insight to include this component into the Regional Longleaf Pine Growth Study.

Literature Cited

Boyer, W.D. 2001. A generational change in site index for naturally established longleaf pine on a south Alabama Coastal Plain site. Southern Journal Applied Forestry 25(2):88-92.

West, D.C., T.W. Doyle, M.L. Tharp, J.J. Beauchamp, W.J. Platt, and D.J. Downing. 1993. Recent growth increases in old-growth longleaf pine. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 23(5):846–853.

76 

 

How to Make Longleaf a Major Species in the Age of Cloud Computing

Dwight K. Lauer1 and John S. Kush2

(1Silvics Analytic, Wingate, NC 28174; 2School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University)

Abstract: There is a strong historical foundation of growth and yield research for longleaf pine but resources devoted to this species have been much less than those devoted to loblolly pine. An efficient strategy is required to develop models and decision support systems for a species that is more diverse in terms of rotation length, products produced, and services rendered. With this in mind, the current modeling approach is to develop models that describe the fundamental way longleaf grows regardless of stand origin (natural vs. plantation), years in the grass stage, density, thinning regime, and cause of mortality. Modifiers can then be used to adjust models for these attributes and geographic location. This approach treats longleaf as a MAJOR southern pine species grown in a variety of ways for a diversity of objectives as opposed to a minor species for each sub-population and objective. In the age of cloud computing with gridded satellite climate data from NOAA, online soils maps from the NRCS, and efforts to track geographic location of longleaf stands, it may be possible to develop a decision support system if longleaf is approached at major species scale.

The expansion of longleaf acres depends heavily on attracting private investors and landowners. The required valuation of stands to attract these groups will depend on more than growth models but models in conjunction with anonymous aggregation of acres and stand conditions form the foundation of a decision support system. Such an approach could help define ecological services produced, coordinate state extension programs to assist landowners, and promote the development of value added specialty markets.

Introduction: Resources available to develop growth and yield models for longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) have been limited. Efforts to move forward on this work can be fragmented by conflicting interests of regions and ownerships. Many of the limits are self-imposed by the inability to view longleaf pine as a major species apart from its management context. It is important to develop a coordinated plan and pool limited resources to efficiently develop a longleaf pine decision support system that can be available to the longleaf community at large.

Longleaf Models: Recent longleaf growth and yield models have used the Regional Longleaf pine Growth Study natural stand data to better understand how longleaf grows. Purposeful efforts have been made to structure models to use breast height age and include stand density (trees per acre) to allow comparisons and modifications with plantation stands. The objective is to develop model theory that can be adapted or modified for longleaf dependent on its management context. Models have also been developed to allow modifiers for climate.

Soil/Climate interface: Previous work (Craul et. al 2005) identified longleaf pine site zones (Figure 1) based on soils, physiographic regions/provinces, and climate. The incorporation of

77 

 

soils/climatic information into a growth models based on this framework (Figure 2) has the potential to increase applicability of models across the range of this major southern pine species known as longleaf pine.

Outcomes: The age of cloud computing has the potential to be leveraged to expand longleaf acreage. There are many aspects of this that must evolve, but some are known. First, information is available. Gridded climate data based on ground station and satellite data are available. Soil maps are available online. Stand information can be anonymously aggregated. Imagine an online system where landowners or consultants log stands by geographic coordinates, enter stand characteristics and have access to stand growth and yield information. Second, state forestry agencies and extension services could tailor programs to landowner’s needs if they had aggregated information on acreage by condition classes. Markets of scale and specialty markets could be developed if the projected product supply were better understood. Landowners and investors would benefit through development of value-added products. Third, the expansion of longleaf acres depends on private ownership. Demonstration of value and development of management plans for private ownerships may be the most important driver to expand acreage.

Figure 1. Climatic Areas and Site Zones. From: Craul, Phillip J.; Kush, John S.; Boyer, William D. 2005. Longleaf pine site zones. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-89. Asheville, NC: U.S. Dept. of Agric., Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 23p.

78 

 

Figure 2. Current longleaf models merged with potential contextual models.

79 

 

Growing Longleaf Pine through Time: Models of Today and Tomorrow

Dwight K. Lauer and John S. Kush

(Silvics Analytic, Wingate, NC 28174 and School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University)

Abstract: Growth and yield models provide valuable information for the development of management plans and proper valuation of long-rotation longleaf stands. This information will help promote longleaf pine as a major species in the southern U.S. Models of today, developed from the Regional Longleaf pine Growth Study data, include stand level growth models and site index equation. Models of today have advanced the theory of longleaf growth to account for mortality (including catastrophic mortality), multiple thinning, and variability of the grass stage period. The focus of tomorrow’s models is the ability to use them throughout the range of longleaf pine, for planted or natural stands, for different site zones/soil types, and over long rotations. These future models are possible due to the strong foundation of past research but will require a major effort. Interaction with the diverse needs of landowners, managers, and markets will be necessary to develop model outputs that fit their needs.

Introduction: A part-time modeling effort has been underway to use 40 years of longleaf pine growth and yield data to develop models that provide accurate growth and yield information. The demands of the longleaf community are greater than those for other timber species due to the broad geographic range, differences in stand origin (natural vs. plantation), long-rotation management options inclusion of multiple thinning, habitat management treatments, and unique longleaf characteristics such as the grass stage. Current model development is using the strong foundation of past modeling efforts to create models that are adaptable to these different situations. These include the use of breast-height age, accounting for stand age structure when appropriate, and development of variable-density models to account for thinning and different sources of mortality. Models are also being structured so they are useful foundations for inclusion of modifiers that can address regional differences and a diversity of management options.

Foundations: The foundations for natural longleaf pine and yield using the Regional Longleaf Pine Growth Study (RLGS) include long-term growth plots, stand level growth and yield models, and investigation of growth and climate. An abbreviated list of past work includes stand level models (Farrar 1979, 1993), stand simulation models (Farrar and Matney 1994), individual tree level models for diameter increment and survival rate (Quicke et al. 1994, 1997), and models that examine the relationship between climate and growth (Rai 1995, Rayamajhi 1996). These efforts developed model theory and have provided key information about how longleaf grows.

However, 15 to 20 years of additional measurements have been collected since these efforts. In addition, statistical techniques and computing power have made large technological advances. The focus of current and future efforts is to use the foundations of this early work but to update, improve, and increase the versatility of past models.

80 

 

Current models: Site index (Lauer and Kush 2010) and stand level growth and yield models that include multiple thinning, stand level mortality, the ability to handle mortality of different sources, and the ability to handle issues unique to longleaf have been developed (Table 1). These models use breast height age to avoid confounding of stand age with years in the grass stage. Stand level models include stand density (trees per acre) to modify growth following thinning or mortality. Models are formulated so they can incorporate modifiers for soil-climate effects, stand origin (natural versus plantation) and management options.

Future work: The modeling of stand structure and improvement of mortality prediction depend on developing updated tree-level models. This is particularly important for longleaf stands with long rotations and multiple thinnings. The inclusion of climatic-soils information is important to expand the predictive range of models in both time and space. Individual tree models with climatic drivers (Table 1) are required to improve and expand the utility of stand level models. It is important to continue measurement of field plots because model theory for stands over 80 years of age is still poorly developed and data is limited.

There is much potential to improve stand valuation for longleaf pine. Sub-models can be developed to predict pine straw production, pole production, sawtimber quality as related to density/thinning, carbon sequestration, and habitat structure as related to stand development (Table 2). These models are critically important to development of value-added markets but depend on having a foundation of stand and individual tree level models.

81 

 

Table 1. Recently developed stand level models and focus of future efforts. (G=basal area, V=total or merchantable volume, A=breast height age, N=trees per acre, NR=ratio of trees per acre, H=total height, S=site index, dbh=individual tree dbh, BAL=basal area larger, di=dbh increment).

Model -------------------------------------- Variable ---------------------------------

Stand level G1 G2 V1 V2 A1 A2 N1 N2 NR H1 H2 S dbh BAL di

----------------------------------------- Recently Developed --------------------------------------

Site index (S) x x P

Height projection (H2) x x x P x

BA prediction (G1) P x x x x

BA projection (G2) x P x x x x

Vol prediction (V1) x P x x x x

Vol projection (V2) x x x P x x x x x x

Mortality (N2) x x x P x

Merch volume x x x

BA after thin (Ga)a x x x x x

-------------------------------- Focus of Future Efforts --------------------------------

Quicke’s ind. tree

Basal area increment x x x x

Survival rate x x

Climatic factors

BA area projection (G2) x P x x x x

Height projection (H2) x x x P

a Requires estimate of arithmetic mean dbh as well. P=variable that is predicted.

82 

 

Table 2. Future sub-models to improve stand valuation.

Age TPA Basal Area Thin History Site index Soils

Pine Straw x x x x x

Poles x x x x x x

Sawtimber quality x x x x x x

Carbon x x x x x

Habitat (various) x x x x x x

Older stand growth x x x x x

Literature

Farrar, R.M., Jr. 1979. Growth and yield predictions for thinned stands of even-aged natural longleaf pine. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Res. Pap. SO-156, 78 p. South. For. Exp. Stn. New Orleans, LA.

Farrar, R.M., Jr. 1993. Growth and yield in naturally regenerated longleaf pine stands. P. 311-335. In: Proceedings of the Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference, No. 18, The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem: ecology, restoration and management. Edited by Sharon M. Hermann, Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL.

Farrar, R.M., Jr. and T.G. Matney. 1994. A dual growth simulator for natural even-aged stand of longleaf pine in the South’s East Gulf Region. South. J. Appl. For. 18(4):147-155.

Lauer, D.K., and J. S. Kush. 2010. Dynamic site index equation for thinned stands of even-aged natural longleaf pine. South. J. Appl. For. 34(1):28-37.

Quicke, H.E., R.S. Meldahl, and J.S. Kush. 1994. Basal area growth of individual trees: A model derived from a regional longleaf pine growth study. For. Sci. 40(3):528-542.

Quicke, H.E., R.S. Meldahl, and J.S. Kush. 1997. A survival rate model for naturally regenerated longleaf pine. South. J. Appl. For. 21(2):97-101.

Rai, R.B. 1995. The impact of rainfall and temperature on the tree and stand growth of natural longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.). Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation. Mississippi State University, Starkville, Mississippi. 46 p.

Rayamajhi, J. N. 1996. Productivity of natural stands of longleaf pine in relation to climatic factors. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation. Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama. 177p.

83 

 

Low-cost Wood Working Technologies to Improve Forest Health and Landowner Quality of Life

Crystal Lupo, Becky Barlow, and Conner Bailey1

(School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences and 1Department of Agricultural Economics & Rural Sociology, Auburn University)

Abstract: An important issue to many nonindustrial forest landowners is the potential to receive income from small parcels of timberland. However due to increasing operating costs, these parcels are often ignored by large scale timber operations. The absence of a market for their timber not only affects income from the land, it also limits employment opportunities in the local economy and can have an adverse effect on forest health. One alternative available is to utilize low cost wood working technologies such as portable sawmills on small parcels of forestland. A national web-based survey of portable sawmill owners was conducted in late 2008 to obtain a basic understanding of their operations as well as the economic viability of entrepreneurial opportunities for both small-scale nonindustrial private landowners, as well as rural residents who do not own land.

The results of our national portable sawmill owner survey indicated a variety of portable sawmill owner objectives ranging from full-time employment to operating as a hobby only. There also existed a wide range of timber species signifying a potential microenterprise opportunity for those in various regions of the country. Respondents indicated that timber was milled from both their own land and others’ land, originating from a variety of sources including storm damage, thinning, yard trees, bug damage, and other sources. These sources of timber used in the portable sawmills demonstrate the maintenance of forest health, while at the same time utilizing the byproducts to increase landowner quality of life either through financial gain or product creation for self use.

84 

 

North Carolina Longleaf Coalition

North Carolina Longleaf Coalition Planning Committee: Susan Miller, US Fish & Wildlife Service; Lark Hayes, Southern Environmental Law Center; Bill Pickens and Barry New, NC Division of Forest Resources

Abstract: The North Carolina Longleaf Coalitions’ mission is to promote the maintenance and restoration of North Carolina’s longleaf pine ecosystem, including its cultural and economic values, by forming a collaborative network of diverse stakeholders to provide strategic leadership across the historic range while also supporting local restoration activities. The formal organization of the Coalition in early 2010 built on a long history of interest in longleaf restoration in the Tar Heel state and was also inspired by the recent launch of the America’s Longleaf Restoration Initiative with its Range-wide Conservation Plan. The Coalition aims to provide the state/local level leadership called for in the regional plan. Participants in the Coalition include multiple state agencies (Forest Resources, Wildlife Resources Commission and the Heritage Program) and federal agencies (Fish and Wildlife, Forest Service, NRCS and the NC Commander’s Council representing multiple military services). The Coalition is rounded out by multiple nonprofits, consulting foresters/landowners, academics and other longleaf proponents. The Coalition coordinates closely with on-the-ground restoration efforts including the North Carolina Sandhills Conservation Partnership, the Onslow Bight Conservation Forum and the Cape Fear Arch.

A 12-person Steering Committee has been formed and multiple subcommittees and teams are actively at work on such topics as GIS mapping, longleaf growth & yield, economics, education/outreach and restoring longleaf on both private and public lands. A joint meeting of the Coalition and the North Carolina Prescribed Fire Council in August 2010 drew almost 200 attendees. Please stay tuned for a website to be found soon at www.nclongleaf.org.

85 

 

Landscape-scale Assessment of Current and Future Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris) Communities in the Onslow Bight Area of Coastal North Carolina

Robert O’Malley1, Craig Ten Brink2, Gary Haught2, Bill Rogers2, John Ouellette1, and Meredith Malone1

(1Environmental Division, Geo-Marine Inc., 2703 Magruder Blvd., Suite D, Hampton, VA 23666; 2Environmental Conservation Branch, Building 12, Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, Camp Lejeune, NC 28542)

Abstract: Efforts were made to develop a GIS-based landscape-scale prioritization and decision-making system for longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) restoration in the Onslow Bight Conservation Landscape (OB) and the enhancement of the Coastal North Carolina core red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis, RCW) population. This process resulted in a detailed, integrated GIS product that reflects multiple data inputs and incorporates various perspectives and goals. A landscape approach to this system was taken, as meeting conservation goals also means addressing human needs, and balancing the trade-offs for both species is only possible at a landscape scale. In an effort to identify individual properties in the OB with the greatest likelihood of supporting current and future longleaf pine restoration activities a methodology and protocol for collecting and analyzing data was developed. Landscape characteristics that indicate current and potential longleaf pine habitat were analyzed for individual land parcels using a variety of GIS software packages. Geospatial data analyses were performed using landscape characteristics data, county parcel boundaries, Light Detection and Ranging terrain, 2008 Onslow Bight RCW clusters, and changes in fire-dependent species guilds from pre-settlement to current vegetation. Parcels may be queried and selected based on acreage and/or percentage values of each landscape characteristic evaluated. Data resulting from this analysis enables public landowners and natural resource managers to work productively together to address encroachment of human communities near public lands and conservation of forested ecosystems on a landscape scale.

86 

 

Effects of Extended Cold Storage on the Survival and Performance of Container Grown Longleaf Seedlings

Bill Pickens

(Pine Silviculturist, N.C. Division of Forest Resources, Griffiths Forestry Center, Clayton, NC 27520)

Abstract: - Research has documented the survival of bareroot longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) is significantly reduced by extended cold storage. Similar research for container grown longleaf seedlings has not been conducted. This study evaluates the effects of extended cold storage (up to 10 weeks) on the survival and growth performance of container grown longleaf seedlings lifted on four different dates in October and November. Seedlings were measured for:

1) Survival at age one,

2) out-of-grass stage at age two,

3) height at age two, and

4) height and dbh (diameter at breast height) at age eight.

The study showed the storage length affected the survival and performance of container grown longleaf pine. Survival was significantly lower for seedlings stored longer than six weeks. Storage for more than two weeks reduced the number and height of seedlings that initiated height growth at age two. Affects of storage length on productivity are still present at age eight. At age eight, seedlings stored two weeks or less have significantly better height and DBH. A significantly higher number of seedlings not stored, or stored for only two weeks, initiated height growth at the end of two years than those stored longer than four weeks. While no clear influence on survival was seen, lift date did significantly affect seedling performance. Significantly more seedlings lifted on October 2 or October 16 initiated height growth at age two than those lifted October 30th and November 13th. However, lift date affects on height and DBH were not present at age nine. Planting date affected seedling survival and out-planting performance. Seedlings planted before mid-November were taller and had a higher percentage of seedlings out-of -the grass stage at age two. Study data suggest that for best survival and performance container grown longleaf seedlings should not be stored longer than two weeks. Results support the recommendation that fall planting improves early growth but affects survival to a lesser extent.

Introduction

An increase in the demand for containerized seedlings has occurred across the Southeast over the last decade. In response nursery production increased to its current level of thirty million seedlings annually. To meet the needs of its customers, the nursery manager must store an increasing number of container longleaf seedlings for extended periods. Without storage,

87 

 

inventory losses to seedlings left on the benches exposed to extended periods of freezing temperatures are possible. Extended storage allows the nursery manager to utilize lifting and packing crews efficiently. Nursery managers need to know how long container longleaf seedlings can be stored without affecting outplanting survival. With this data informed decisions concerning lifting schedules, inventory control, and protection of the crop over winter can be made.

Methods

The test was initiated in the fall of 2001 on a site at the Bladen Lakes State Forest in southeastern North Carolina. Container grown longleaf seedlings were lifted at the N.C. Division of Forest Resources Claridge Nursery on each of four different dates; October 5th, October 16th, October 30th, and November 13th. Of those lifted, 480 seedlings were then stored at 35 degree Fahrenheit for no-storage, two weeks, four weeks, six weeks, eight weeks, and 10 weeks prior to planting. The 24 treatments (four lifting dates multiplied by six storage lengths) were planted in a 20 tree row random block design that was replicated four times. Survival counts were completed one year after outplanting in November. Two years after outplanting the surviving trees were counted and their height measured. Second year survival and percentage of seedlings initiating height growth was determined. Seedlings less than 4 inches tall were considered to still be in the grass stage. Total height and tree diameter at breast height was measured eight growing seasons after outplanting. Statistical analysis (Waller-Duncan K-ratio t test) was completed using SAS software.

Results

Storage Length

The length of storage prior to out-planting was found to have significant effects on survival and early growth of container grown longleaf pine seedlings.

Seedling survival two years after outplanting decreased as cold storage length increased. Across all treatments survival at age two for seedlings stored for as long as six weeks was not significantly different from seedlings that were not stored. Seedlings stored for eight weeks and 10 weeks experienced a 12 point and 19 point drop in percent survival respectively. These results are similar to those reported in previous unpublished studies. Empirical evidence in this and other studies suggest weather extremes and plant cold hardiness may impact seedling survivability. Performance as measured by height growth initiation after two growing seasons and height and diameter at breast measured after eight growing seasons was significantly affected by storage length. The percentage of seedlings out of the grass stage at age two and the height of those seedlings decreased the longer seedlings were stored. At age two the number of seedlings out of the grass stage and the height of those seedlings were significantly higher for seedlings stored two weeks or less. The number out of the grass stage ranged from 93 percent for seedlings stored two weeks to 69 percent for seedlings stored eight weeks. Seedling height at age two continued to decrease the longer the seedlings were stored. Seedlings stored 10 weeks

88 

 

were the shortest at 0.41 feet while those stored two-weeks were the tallest at 1.04 feet. The effects of storage length on longleaf pine growth were still present at age eight.

Table1. Percent number of seedlings out-of-the grass stage at age two by length of storage and planting date. Significant differences for length of storage are shown (p < .0001).

Percent Number Seedlings Out-of- Grass Stage

none

2 week

4 week

6 week

8 week

10 week Mean

2-Oct 96% 92% 79% 79% 60% 57% 77% a

16-Oct 84% 99% 90% 89% 48% 42% 75% a

30-Oct 81% 87% 76% 44% 53% 53% 66% a

13-Nov 87% 90% 55% 64% 74% 82% 76% a

Mean 87% 92% 75% 69% 59% 58%

a a b b b b

Lift Date

Differences in survival due to lifting date were found but no clear trend was apparent. Survival for the seedlings lifted October 2 and November 13 (the first and last lifting dates), at 92 percent and 94 percent respectively, were significantly better than the October 16th and October 30th lifting dates with 80 percent and 78 percent survival. By the end of the second growing season after outplanting, 73 percent of the seedlings across all treatments had initiated height growth. Percent number of seedlings out-of the-grass was 77 percent, 75 percent, 66 percent, and 76 percent for October 2nd, October 16th, October 30th, and November 13th lift dates respectively. Lift date did not have a statistically significant effect on height initiation.

Planting Date

Significant differences by planting date were recorded for percent survival at age two. Percent survival for the October and November planting dates and the January 22nd date ranged from 88 to 92 percent. The December 13th and January 2nd dates were seven to 13 points lower at 81 percent and 79 percent respectively. The lowest mean survival was seen for the December 22nd

89 

 

planting date at 60 percent. The worst overall survival of

38 percent for all treatments occurred for seedlings lifted in mid October and out-planted on December 22nd. The second poorest survival at 50 percent also occurred for seedlings planted on December 22nd that were lifted on October 30th (Table 2). At the end of the second growing season significant difference (p<.0001) in percent number trees out of the grass stage and the height of those seedlings was found. Overall seedlings planted before mid November initiated height growth sooner and were taller at age two. It is suspected that minimum temperatures extremes after planting may have adversely impacted seedling survival. Several days with night time temperatures below freezing were recorded after the planting days with the poorest survival rates.

90 

 

Table 2. Survival at age by planting date and lifting date. Differences in survival are significant for both planting date and lifting date and the lift date*plant date interaction (p<.0001)

Performance at Age Eight

Affects of storage length on longleaf pine growth were still present at age eight. After eight growing seasons overall height across all treatments averaged 11.6 feet. Average DBH was 1.9 inches. Both height and DBH decreased as storage length increased. Height growth and DBH

Percent Survival Age Two ***

Lift Date

2-Oct 16-Oct 30-Oct 13-Nov

1 2 3 4 mean

Pla

nti

ng

Dat

e

3-Oct-01 92 . . . 92 a

17-Oct-01 90 86 . . 88 ab

1-Nov-01 90 89 86 . 88 ab

14-Nov-01 95 90 86 96 92 a

29-Nov-01 88 90 92 90 90 a

13-Dec-01 86 79 76 86 82 bc

Sustained Freezing Temperatures at Planting Site 16-Dec-01

22-Dec-01 . 38 50 91 60 d

8-Jan-02 . . 66 92 79 bc

22-Jan-02 . . . 92 92 a

mean 90 77 76 91

a b b a

91 

 

was significantly better for seedlings stored less than two weeks. Seedlings stored for two weeks and those not stored had the tallest height at age eight (Table 3). Lift date had no significant affect on height or DBH at age eight.

Table 3. Average percent survival and growth data at age eight. Height and Dbh values are significantly different (p<.0001)

Storage Length % survival Height (feet) Dbh (inches)

None 76% 13.0 a 2.01 a

2-weeks 77% 12.6 a 1.93 ab

4-weeks 70% 11.6 b 1.94 bc

6-weeks 67% 11.2 bc 1.84 b

8-weeks 56% 10.7 c 1.76 cd

10-weeks 51% 10.2 c 1.62 d

Mean 66% 11.6 1.85

Conclusions

Length of seedling storage was found to be significant for all traits assessed. Longleaf pine seedlings put in two weeks of storage perform as well as seedlings

lifted and planted immediately. Longleaf pine seedlings stored for more than two weeks do not perform as well as

unstored or seedlings stored for two weeks. Longleaf pine seedlings stored as long as six weeks survive as well as seedlings not

put into storage before planting. The longer longleaf pine seedlings are stored the worse they perform for all traits

tested (Year 1 Survival, Out of Grass Stage at age two, Height at age two, Height-DBH-Volume at age eight).

Affects of short storage time (two weeks and less) on longleaf pine seedling productivity are still present in 8 year old field plants.

A Significantly higher percentage of seedlings not stored or stored for two weeks emerge out of the grass stage sooner than those stored for four weeks or longer.

92 

 

Using Smoke in the Nursery to Improve Germination of Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) Seed

Ken Roeder, Ph.D., James West, Bobby Smith and Maxie Maynor

(Forest Geneticist, Nursery and Tree Improvement Program Head, Tree Improvement East Supervisor, Manager-Claridge Nursery; all with North Carolina Division of Forest Resources)

Abstract

Research on habitat restoration in South Africa and Australia has indicated that exposing seed to smoke as a pretreatment prior to sowing can improve seed germination. Published research has identified a substance in smoke (karrikins) that belongs to a family of chemicals structurally related to plant growth regulators. Karrikins may function by breaking physical seed dormancy. These researchers were working with species which evolved in fire adapted ecosystems. The dormancy breaking chemical is also reported to work on species from non-fire ecosystems including agricultural species like corn (Zea mays) and soybeans (Glycine max).

Work was initiated by conducting seed germination studies on Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), a fire ecosystem species, to confirm any beneficial germination effects from smoke treatment. Procedures were also developed to expose commercial quantities of seed to smoke. These smoke exposure treatments and procedures are planned for use with seed with low germination potential or long germination times like Fraser Fir (Abies fraseri) and Atlantic White Cedar [Juniper] (Chamaecyparis thyoides). Early results have been promising and research is continuing.

Keywords: fire ecosystem, karrikins, dormancy, growth regulators

Introduction

Historically, fire has been used by humans since before our cave-dwelling days (U of I, 20XX). While fire was being used to clear unwanted vegetation for agriculture, to drive game and other practices, smoke was an unavoidable product of these fires. For many years, it was noted that wild-fires stimulated natural regeneration; however, the contribution by smoke alone was unknown. During U.S. colonial times it was reported that the Huron Indians exposed their pumpkin (Cucurbita spp) seeds to smoke before planting (U of I, 20XX), a very sophisticated cultural practice for that time.

More recent research work in South Africa and Australia on fire ecosystems has shown that wild-fire smoke from burning cellulose contained a substance which was a primary seed germination stimulant (Nelson et al, 2009). This substance has been identified as belonging to a family of chemicals structurally related to plant growth regulators, karrikins (KAR1), and may function by breaking physical seed dormancy. It is also reported that these karrikins have a germination stimulation effect on other species. This includes species which evolved in non-fire dependent ecosystems and even on agricultural crop species such as maize (Zea mays) and soybeans (Glycine max).

93 

 

Several researchers however, report that smoke can have an effect which promotes germination, has no effect, or even hinders germination (U of I, 20XX). Some of these reports also note that length of smoke exposure is important. Work at the University of Illinois showed that seed exposure as short as one-minute was sufficient to increase germination from 50% to 90% for Tennessee Coneflower (Echinacea tennesseensis) (U of I, 20XX). Smoke exposure is also reported to speed germination. Other work reports that the type of smoke carrier, smoke carried in the air [aerosol smoke] or smoke passed through water [referred to as liquid smoke in the literature], may also be a factor in stimulating germination of seeds (Adkins and Peters, 2001). Age of seed and length of seed storage may also be factors affecting seed germination response to smoke exposure.

North Carolina Division of Forest Resources’ Claridge Nursery in Goldsboro collects processes and sows genetically improved and wild seed of more than 40 forest tree and shrub species. We typically handle and process 60,000 pounds of seed annually. Most of these species require different cultural practices regarding seed collection and extraction protocols, storage conditions, stratification requirements, etc. Procedures recommended by the U.S.D.A. and the Forest Service Seed Lab are followed (Bonner 2008, USDA 2010). Most of these species also produce seed of varying qualities from source to source and year to year. Some of these species consistently produce seed of low germination capacity or they may require a longer period of time to germinate. An easily applied, inexpensive, pre-sowing treatment such as seed exposure to smoke, which would increase the speed of germination and shorten to length of the germination period would be a valuable cultural practice that we could apply in the nursery to our more difficult species and seed-lots. Fraser fir (Abies fraseri), for instance, produces seed of varying viability that germinates over a relatively long time period, of a few weeks. Atlantic White Cedar [Juniper] (Chamaecyparis thyoides) generally produces seed of low germination capacity.

Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) was selected as our initial test species to evaluate the performance of seed germination following exposure to smoke. Longleaf pine evolved in a fire ecosystem and should be an ideal species to develop test practices and procedures.

Methods

Prior to sowing, Longleaf pine seed is typically placed under a 24-hour soaking in water. The water is then drained, and the moist seed is then cold stratified for two weeks. Stratified seed was then exposed to aerosol smoke for varying lengths of time (no-smoke, 15-minutes of smoke, 30-minutes of smoke and 45-minutes of smoke). The stratified/no-smoke seed treatment served as a stratified control treatment. Only aerosol smoke has been used in these tests so far. We also took un-stratified seed and soaked it for 24-hours prior to testing. We exposed the un-stratified seed to aerosol smoke for the same lengths of time as the stratified seed. The no-smoke/un-stratified seed also served as a second control treatment.

94 

 

After exposure to the smoke treatment, each seed treatment was sown into germination plates for replicated germination testing. Periodic germination counts were made throughout the 14+ day germination testing period. Seed tested by the U.S.D.A. Forest Service Seed Lab (U.S.D.A. 2010) also served as an additional comparison of the 14-day seed germination capacity.

In one of the latest series of tests, potassium nitrate (KNO3) was added to the no-smoke treatment to compare its affect on seed germination with the smoke and no-smoke exposure treatments.

A smoke generator was also developed to produce consistent and uniform amounts of cellulose based smoke for the numerous series of runs in this set of smoke studies. The smoker burned pine-straw in a controlled smoldering fire to maximize the smoke produced. This smoker can also be easily used when processing commercial quantities of seed for nursery production.

Discussion and Results

Preliminary tests indicate that seed must be wet or damp during smoke exposure. Smoking dry seed resulted in no difference in treatments. Seed must therefore be wet to absorb the chemicals be carried in aerosol smoke. This should not be a problem with seed exposed to various concentrations of liquid smoke.

In some instances, un-stratified seed germinated faster than stratified seed. Smoked un-stratified seed germinated faster than un-smoked stratified seed (Figure 1).

The optimum smoke exposure time for those times tested was 15-minutes. The 30 and 45-minutes of smoke exposure treatments appeared to reduce germination capacity of Longleaf pine seed.

95 

 

Figure 1. Longleaf pine seed timed smoke exposure germination test results for stratified and un-stratified seed from one set of germination tests.

Germination capacity of our smoke exposure tests were always lower than those reported for tested seed-lots conducted the USFS Seed Lab. The Seed Lab also may use potassium nitrate (KNO3) to promote germination in their germination tests. Potassium nitrate is another potential aid that a nursery may use to promote seed germination.

Tests have also shown that exposing the seed to smoke gives the seed a germination advantage that is gone after about 10 days.

These series of tests has also raised many interesting questions.

1. Does the smoke treatments of seed prior to sowing speed up seed germination? 2. Does un-stratified seed that has been smoked germinate as-good or better than

stratified seed? 3. What length of smoking time is optimum for each species? 4. When the actual aerosol smoke treatment is applied to Longleaf pine should the

seed be air dried or damp/wet when exposed? 5. Will air drying seed after it has been exposed to smoke affect it germination

capacity? 6. Will Longleaf pine families perform differently from each other as had occurred

with the Fraser fir families? 7. Will water-smoke yield the same results as smoke in the air?

96 

 

8. How long will the smoke exposure remain in seed placed into cold storage? 9. What about the effects of potassium nitrate on seed germination? Can it be used

as a practical cultural practice in a commercial nursery?

Conclusions

The use of smoke as a seed pretreatment in the nursery has not been answered by these series of studies. More questions need to be answered. In a practical sense, the procedure of exposing seed to a specific timed quantity of smoke should be simple to execute using nursery facilities typically already in place.

More questions have been raised regarding use of this seed pretreatment cultural practice in the nursery than has been answered. We are continuing our studies.

Literature Cited

Adkins, S.W. and N.C.B. Peters (2001) Smoke derived from burnt vegetation stimulates germination of arable weeds. Seed Science Research 11:213-222. Cambridge University Press

Bonner, F.T., R.P. Karrfalt and R.G. Nisley (eds) (2008) The Woody Plant Seed Manual. U.S.D.A Forest Service. Agri. Hdbk. 727. July 2008. pp1223. http://www.nsl.fs.fed.us/wpsm/

Illinois Steward (20XX) Where There’s Smoke, There’s Germination. Web article: http://web.extension.uiuc.edu/illinoissteward/openarticle.cfm?ArticleID=453

Nelson, D.C., Riseborough, J-A., Flematti, G. R., Stevens, J., Ghisalberti, E. L., Dixon, K. W. and Smith,

S. M. (2009) Kerrikins Discovered in Smoke Trigger Arabidopsis Seed Germination by a Mechanism Requiring Gibberellic Acid Synthesis and Light. Plant Physiol. Vol. 149, pp 863-873

U.S.D.A. National Seed Laboratory. 2010. http://www.nsl.fs.fed.us/

97 

 

Milestone® VM Herbicide (aminopyralid) for Weed Control in Establishment of Longleaf Pine Plantations

Travis W. Rogers and Bill Kline

(Dow AgroSciences, Charleston, SC)

Abstract: Forest landowners interested in growing longleaf pine must follow a carefully designed and well executed management plan to grow a productive longleaf pine stand. In some cases landowners are faced with circumstances during the establishment period resulting in either poor establishment/survival or complete loss of the longleaf pine stand.

Dow AgroSciences has developed a new herbicide, Milestone® VM, providing forest landowners a new tool for management of longleaf pine stands which has been shown to improve chances for successful longleaf pine establishment. Milestone VM herbicide controls a broad spectrum of broadleaf weeds and certain susceptible woody plants and vines.

Dow AgroSciences initiated field research trials beginning in 2007, applied over-the-top of newly established longleaf pine seedlings. Objectives were to determine crop tree tolerance and efficacy for controlling competitive weeds that affect longleaf survival and early growth. Field trials were conducted on longleaf pine plantations ranging in age from newly planted to three years in age. Sites were chosen based on presence of highly competitive weed species that threaten longleaf establishment. Treatments were applied while seedlings were in the “grass stage” (prior to crop tree bud break and elongation).

Research sites were evaluated for weed control efficacy and longleaf pine tolerance following the herbicide applications. Milestone VM alone (or tank mixtures containing Milestone VM) provided good to excellent weed control resulting in crop tree release from competing vegetation. All locations demonstrated excellent longleaf pine tolerance to Milestone VM Herbicide applied over-the-top of “grass stage” longleaf seedlings.

98 

 

Research in the Center for Longleaf Pine Ecosystems at Auburn University

Lisa Samuelson

(Professor and Director, Center for Longleaf Pine Ecosystems, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849, samuelj@auburn.edu, (334) 844-1040)

Abstract: Research based knowledge is needed to effectively implement ecosystem management on public, industrial and private longleaf pine lands to better conserve, restore and manage longleaf pine. The mission of the Center for Longleaf Pine Ecosystems (CLPE) at Auburn University is to address knowledge gaps in the restoration, conservation and management of longleaf pine ecosystems to provide a variety of ecological, social and economic services for the people of Alabama and the Southeast. A major focus of the CLPE is a regional longleaf carbon modeling project in association with the University of Florida’s Carbon Resources Science Center and the USDA Forest Service. The project, "Developing Tools for Ecological Forestry and Carbon Management in Longleaf Pine," is funded by the U.S. Department of Defense through its Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, or SERDP. Please visit http://clpe.auburn.edu for more information. In addition, field and greenhouse studies are underway to better understand how longleaf pine may respond to climate change.

99 

 

Current Trends for the Planting of Longleaf Pine in Virginia; 2009-2010

Philip M. Sheridan1, Arvind A.R. Bhuta2, and Thomas L. Eberhardt3

(1Meadowview Biological Research Station, 8390 Fredericksburg Tnpk., Woodford, Virginia, 22580, USA 2College of Natural Resources and the Environment, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, 24061, USA

3USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Pineville, Louisiana, 71360, USA)

Abstract: We contacted federal, state, and private land managers and owners to determine current trends for the planting of longleaf pine via location, year planted, provenance, and acreage in Virginia. Over 1600 acres of longleaf pine was planted in Virginia from 2009-2010 (Figure 1), more than tripling that planted in the preceding ten years (total to date 2155 acres). Equally encouraging was the increased use of indigenous Virginia longleaf pine planting stock. The current trend for longleaf pine planting in Virginia is therefore moving in a positive direction.

Figure 1. Acres of longleaf pine planted in Virginia 1998-2010.

Acknowledgments

We thank the following for providing the information for this research: Virginia Department of Forestry (Todd Edgerton, Jerre Creighton, Billy Apperson, & Zach Dowling); The Nature Conservancy (Bobby Clontz); Natural Resources Conservation Service (Harvey Baker, Yamika Bennett, & Galon Hall); Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation (Rick Myers); & the following landowners (Jo & Fred Weaver and Mike & Phyllis Rasnake). We also thank the International Forest Company for financial support to attend the 2010 Longleaf Alliance regional in Columbia, South Carolina.

100 

 

The Rosin Baked Potato, a Southern Culinary Delight

Philip M. Sheridan1 and Thomas L. Eberhardt2

(1Meadowview Biological Research Station, Woodford, Virginia, 22580, USA 2USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Pineville, Louisiana, 71360, USA)

Abstract: Who would think of cooking a potato in boiling rosin? The origin and rationale for this interesting cooking behavior is lost in ethno-botanical lore but directions for the practice persisted until recent editions of The Joy of Cooking (Rombauer and Becker 1975). Indeed, the dish can still be obtained at Sweetie Pies Restaurant (Decatur, TX) one day a week. We obtained rosin (Pinerez 1277), produced by Hexion Specialty Chemicals, to duplicate the cooking recipe and to investigate the gustatory effects. The basic recipe involves heating the rosin to 275 0F and carefully lowering the spud into the pot (see Figure 1). The potato initially sinks in the rosin, but after about 45 minutes, floats to the surface (Rombauer and Becker 1975). The potato is simmered a further 30 minutes, removed from the rosin, and wrapped in heavy brown paper with the ends twisted tightly. The rosin baked potato is cooled for 10 minutes and then slit and served with butter, salt, and freshly ground pepper. The cooking process must be done outside and the skin must not be eaten. The cooking in rosin provides a baked potato with an exceptional texture that is distinctively flaky.

Figure 1. Images of a) rosin before melting, b) potato cooking in molten rosin, and c) the final product ready for eating!

Reference

Rombauer, I.S., Becker, M.R. 1975. The Joy of Cooking, Scribner, New York, p. 319.

a  b c 

101 

 

Early Reproduction of Longleaf Pine Established in a Savanna-style Planting

Philip M. Sheridan1, Nathan Rudnick1, and Thomas L. Eberhardt2 (1Meadowview Biological Research Station, Woodford, Virginia, 22580, USA

2USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Pineville, Louisiana, 71360, USA)

Abstract: We planted a 5 acre cloverleaf in Prince George County, Virginia with native Virginia longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) in 1998. The seedlings were planted at low density (20+ foot centers) to mimic a savanna-style longleaf pine habitat. In 2009, mature cones were first observed in some trees within the planting site. This was an interesting observation in itself because open grown longleaf pines do not typically produce cones until 20 to 30 years (Wahlenberg 1946). Cone development for longleaf pine is unusual at 16 years (Wahlenberg 1946) and here cones had developed before 12 years of age. Figure 1 shows the planting site in 2010 and a couple of unopened cones we observed. The number of cones and conelets on each tree were recorded along with values for height and diameter at breast height (dbh) to investigate whether fecundity correlated with growth. Statistical analyses did not indicate any correlations. However, it should be noted that 34% of the trees, with a maximum diameter of 16.13 cm, were producing cones or conelets. The percentages of trees with cones or conelets were calculated for 4 size classes (ca.13, 14, 15 and 16 cm) and plotted along with data reported in Wahlenberg (1946). No trend was observed in our data (Figure 2). Nevertheless, it was readily apparent that we were observing unusually early reproduction in longleaf pine growing in Virginia. The factors contributing to the phenomenon, perhaps being tree seed selection, provenance, quality of planting site, and/or planting style, remain to be determined.

Figure 1. Longleaf pine a) planting site in Prince George County, Virginia and b) seed cones discovered at an earlier than expected tree age.

a  b

102 

 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 10 20 30 40 50

Trees with cones or conelets (%)

DBH (cm)

Longleaf data in Wahlenberg (1946)Virginia longleaf pine

trees grouped into four size classes

Figure 2. Percentage of trees with cones or conelets for Virginia longleaf pine compared to previously reported data.

Reference

Wahlenberg, W.G. 1946. Longleaf Pine: Its Use, Ecology, Regeneration, Protection, Growth, and Management p. 70-78.

103 

 

Gopher Frog Population Monitoring and Habitat Restoration on Ft. Benning, Georgia

Geoffrey G. Sorrell and Robert N. Addington

(The Nature Conservancy, Ft. Benning Field Office, Ft. Benning, GA )

Abstract: The gopher frog (Rana capito) is a species that relies on fire-maintained uplands as well ephemeral wetlands found within the longleaf pine ecosystem. The gopher frog utilizes subterranean refugia during the summer and migrates to nearby wetlands during the fall and winter breeding season. Our work is being conducted in sand hills habitat on Ft. Benning in Chattahoochee County, Georgia. The project has two priorities. The first focus is to monitor gopher frog populations. Egg mass surveys are the primary sampling technique that we will use. Our second goal is to restore and maintain gopher frog habitat. This will involve the use of fire, mechanical removal of woody vegetation, and control of feral hogs. During the spring of 2010 initial surveys were conducted. Of nine ponds surveyed, there were six used by gopher frogs. Of the nine wetlands with potential as breeding sites, only one is a natural wetland. The remaining eight were created to serve as water sources for wildlife. Gopher frogs have dispersed from the natural wetland to many of the others. This case gives credence to concept of repatriation for the gopher frog on sites where wetlands can be created or restored within a matrix of ecologically intact uplands.

104 

 

Conference Area & Field Trip Overview: The Carolina Sandhills—A Look at Longleaf in Time

Johnny Stowe

(South Carolina Department of Natural Resources)

Abstract: Billowing and bulging like a braided belt along the belly of the Carolinas, the Sandhills rise and fall -- forming a fascinating landscape full of wonders -- a place of connections, transitions and stark contrasts. In a broad, broken band five to twenty miles or so wide, generally following the gentle arc of the Fall Line -- the deep dunes of the Sandhills, in terms of geology, soils, and topography -- are testament to the long-term vicissitudes of wind and water and the inexorable constant of gravity. Fire, the ecological imperative of the longleaf pineywoods -- has long sculpted its way over the Sandhills, leaving behind great beauty, remarkable adaptations, and phenomenal biodiversity.

Welcome to the Sandhills! For our field trip, we’ll be leaving from Columbia heading northeast along the Sandhills to the McBee area, so let’s look at some of the natural and cultural heritage of the places we’ll pass though along the way. I will hop about a bit, in location and time, to try to cover some things that we won’t get to see along our route but that I hope you’ll find relevant and interesting. Although technically considered part of the Coastal Plain, I will treat the Sandhills as a separate physiographic region, and make some other arguable distinctions and generalizations to make this trip more enjoyable. Also, keep in mind that ecologically, there are “sandhills” ecosystems unconnected to the major “Sandhills” we will be focusing on, for instance the rims of some Carolina Bays and dunes associated with river systems.

The Fall Line is most prominent in South Carolina in the form of rapids at the Savannah River near Augusta, and in Columbia at the junction where the Broad and Saluda rivers form the Congaree. The Fall Line is a low, east-facing cliff paralleling the Atlantic coastline that shows up most prominently from New Jersey through the Carolinas. It separates the harder rocks of the Piedmont from the softer rocks of the Coastal Plain and is the site of many waterfalls. It is these waterfalls which powered flume- and water-wheel-powered industries in colonial times and thus in part determined the location of such cities as Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, Richmond, Raleigh, Columbia, Camden and Augusta. Settlement along the Fall Line was also influenced by the limits of river navigation from the coast and by the fact that the Indians tended to have large towns there. From the Indian’s perspective, the Fall Line and associated Sandhills held many benefits – the rapids made good sites to trap and spear fish, and the unique resources of the Piedmont, Coastal Plain, and Sandhills, as well as both blackwater and fertile redwater river systems were all uniquely juxtaposed and close at hand.

Fort Jackson, on the eastern edge of Columbia, has some of the best managed longleaf forests in the state, and also represents a “defragmented” landscape, one that was subdivided many times but that has been pulled back into one ownership. Forts Bragg and Benning are other good examples of this phenomenon in the military realm, while Sandhills State Forest, Carolina Sandhills National Wildlife Refuge and Cheraw State Park, all once busted into many tracts but now each cohesive, show that land fragmentation does not have to be a one-way route. But even more praiseworthy, in my view, is the recent, patient quilting together of scattered parcels by

105 

 

Bill Moody, a private landowner in Lexington County. Bill shows that it can be done, that the longleaf pine Sandhills can be reunited and sustainably managed by a working man in the daunting face of taxes and other economic burdens. We should all salute Bill Moody!

While traveling to the field trip sites, we’ll pass close to White Pond, an isolated freshwater wetland in the Sandhills between I-20 and US Highway 1 near Elgin that is a landmark paleoecology site. In the late 1970s, W.A. Watts cored into the natural pond’s sediments and removed ancient, stratified pollen. From these cores, he reconstructed the climate and vegetation of the site during the period from about 19,000 years ago to present and his findings reveal much about what the current longleaf pine range was like during that span. White Pond was just right for such research since its sediments had never been churned by streamflow and never burned deeply enough to destroy the pollen. Watt’s research showed that jack pine and spruce, species found much farther north today, dominated the Sandhills at the end of the last glaciation, later changing into a oak-hickory-beech-ironwood dominated forest, and then about 7,000 years ago, into the pine forest of today. Work such as this will be important in the future as we try to unravel the natural and man-made factors involved in climate change. Longleaf of course, being long-lived, holds great promise as a dendrochonological tool and researchers like Arvind Bhuta are collecting new data that will be useful for a wide variety of purposes.

Another small town along the way is Camden which holds a prominent place in our nation’s history as a center of activity during the American Revolution. Camden, like Aiken over on the Georgia line, is today known as horse country, both towns having vibrant equestrian communities and racetracks.

We will be getting onto US Highway 1 near Camden. Known in much of the South as the Jefferson Davis Highway, US 1 follows the Carolina Sandhills and was, before the construction of I-95, one of our country’s major, easternmost north-south routes. We will also be coming back into wiregrass country.

Where we began our trip in Columbia, we were in the wiregrass “deadzone.” When Dr. Bob Peet split wiregrass into two species a few years ago, he divided them in the South Carolina Sandhills, where a so-called wiregrass deadzone centered on the Congaree-Santee River drainage divides northern (Aristida stricta) from southern wiregrass (A. beyrichiana). The deadzone is not as extensive now as it was thought to be a few decades ago.

Northeast of Camden we pass near the Department of Natural Resources Savage Bay Heritage Preserve which protects two Carolina Bays. The origins of these shallow, elliptical-shaped wetlands, oriented northwest to southeast along their long axes, have been the subject of much debate with theories ranging from meteorite showers to wind and wave action to the bedding activity of huge marine animals!

As we get closer to the McBee area where we will be spending the day, truck farming and orchards become evident, and the forests show more careful management. Longleaf pine stands, natural and planted, burned and/or raked, become more common. Many thousands of acres of longleaf were clearcut here decades ago and replaced with slash pine planted a hundred

106 

 

or so miles north of its natural range—a conversion that turned out to be unwise. Much of that slash has since been removed and longleaf restored, and in fact, much of what we now know about planting longleaf pine was figured out by now-retired South Carolina Forestry Commission foresters working in the McBee area—folks like Joe Mills and Forrest Murphy. To them we owe a lot.

Well, we have now arrived in some of the nicest longleaf pineywoods remaining. This country, including similar sites in North Carolina such as Sandhill Game Land, hold a wondrous assemblage of native species – up to 150 species of grasses and 70 species of legumes (dozens of them rare) can be found here. Some of these are endemic species, found nowhere else. Other species are disjunct, popping up here with the next closest populations many hundreds of miles away. Springs and seepage slopes give rise to blackwater streams, and associated Atlantic white cedar swamps, canebrakes and pocosins (don’t know what a pocosin is…come on the field trip to find out). The pine barrens tree frog, perhaps the prettiest frog on the continent, lives in the herb bogs and pocosins. Red-cockaded woodpeckers abound in these intensively managed forests as do game animals such as deer and turkey. Besides offering superb public hunting and fishing, horse-riding and bird dog field trials are popular activities.

The three largest public land holdings around McBee are the Sandhills State Forest, Carolina Sandhills National Wildlife Refuge and Cheraw State Park. Since we will be visiting the state forest and refuge in addition to a private tract, I’ll leave the details of those sites for the field trip, but let me say a bit about the state park.

Cheraw State Park, like many other state parks in South Carolina, was developed by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), a New Deal Program created by President Roosevelt. The CCC was set up to provide jobs during the Great Depression while tackling national needs in conservation and recreation. Rugged, artistic structures built by the CCC in the 1930s are still in use at the park. Golfing is an extremely popular activity here (and the State Park has donated a golfing trip to the Silent Auction), pulling in folks from all over the country.

The economic impact of all these public lands is significant and ranges from forest products such as timber and pine straw to a wide variety of recreation with the accompanying rippling effects in the local economy. The town of Patrick weaves forest products and recreation into a celebration of heritage with its Pine Straw Festival.

Speaking of heritage, nearby Cheraw is the proud hometown of jazz legend Dizzie Gillespie and at the end of our meeting on 15 October, the South Carolina Jazz Festival begins in Cheraw. So after the conference, try to spend a few extra days enjoying the delights of the South Carolina Sandhills -- whether at the jazz festival, golfing at the state park, horseback riding or hunting on the state forest, or biking and nature watching on the refuge. Welcome to the Sandhills!

107 

 

Planting Native Grasses and Forbs on Exotic Fire Ant (Solenopsis invicta) Mounds: A Potential Technique to Facilitate Groundcover Restoration

Johnny Stowe, Tim Davis, and Allen Bridgman

(South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Clemson University Extension Service, and South Carolina Department of Natural Resources)

Abstract: Invasive, exotic fire ants are nearly ubiquitous and fairly uniformly distributed wherever sufficient sunlight hits the ground in many longleaf pine and other grassland restoration sites, and this amount of light is roughly sufficient to support herbaceous groundcover. While the techniques to get longleaf seedlings to survive in a wide variety of situations have been greatly improved over the last decade, the challenge of restoring native groundcover has not been as fully addressed. For many landowners, restoration of the groundcover is as important as restoring longleaf itself. Planting a fire ant mound is much easier and quicker than clearing and planting a vegetation-covered area of the same size -- especially when soils are heavy and fertile and ruderal species are well-established. Thus, we propose using fire ant mounds as a pedestal on which to establish native grasses and forbs that would later spread over the site. This idea, if it proves worthy, would facilitate groundcover restoration in longleaf pinelands and other grassland ecosystems, while requiring less labor, seed and other resources, and less soil disturbance.

108 

 

The Carolina Sandhills: Deserts in the Rain

Johnny Stowe and Allen Bridgman

(South Carolina Department of Natural Resources)

Abstract: Billowing and bulging like a braided belt along the belly of the Carolinas, the Sandhills rise and fall -- forming a fascinating landscape full of wonders -- a place of connections, transitions and stark contrasts. In a broad, broken band five to twenty miles or so wide, generally following the gentle arc of the Fall Line -- the deep dunes of the Sandhills, in terms of geology, soils, and topography -- are testament to the long-term vicissitudes of wind and water, and the inexorable constant of gravity. Fire, the ecological imperative of the longleaf pineywoods -- has long sculpted its way over the Sandhills, leaving behind great beauty, remarkable adaptations, and phenomenal biodiversity. We will showcase some of the marvels of the Carolina Sandhills and Fall Line, while also reaching outside the Carolinas a bit to give perspective on this unique landscape.

109 

 

Longleaf – Seeing the Ecosystems and the Trees: Longleaf Ecosystem Restoration Classification and Integrity Indicators

(USDA Forest Service and NatureServe)

Abstract: Longleaf pine forests are some of the most biologically diverse ecosystems. Many interdependent species are associated with longleaf pine, relying on attributes or processes of longleaf pine systems for at least a portion of their life cycle. In turn, overall ecosystem health and functionality are intimately linked with these same species. The vision described in the Range-Wide Conservation Plan for Longleaf Pine (Conservation Plan) is to have functional, viable, longleaf pine ecosystems with the full spectrum of ecological, economic, and social values inspired through a voluntary partnership of concerned, motivated organizations and individuals.

What is a healthy longleaf ecosystem? Certainly the trees themselves are important. They provide the conditions under which the rest of the ecosystems and their processes can be sustained. But a complete set of ecosystem health indicators should include also the below canopy conditions and processes that reflect the integrity and sustainability of the full systems.

NatureServe developed indicators for assessment of two broadly defined longleaf ecosystems of the east gulf coastal plain, the upland and flatwoods systems (NatureServe. 2006. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 29 March 2006). These indicators are developed for application at different levels of assessments, from broad remote sensing imagery analysis across landscapes to intensive sampling within a landscape. The USDA Forest Service and NatureServe are further developing a full set of indicators for addressing the highly varied hydrologic, geographic and botanical systems of the 12 longleaf ecosystems in the Conservation Plan.

110 

 

Southern Native Plant Restoration and Seed Increase Project

Victor Vankus and George Hernández

(USDA Forest Service, Dry Branch, GA and USDA Forest Service, Atlanta, GA )

Abstract: The Southern Native Plant Restoration and Seed Increase Project (SNPRSIP) was formed by the SERPPAS/America’s Longleaf Restoration Understory Committee. The Understory Committee was tasked with developing the protocols and establishing the framework that will be needed for a collaborative approach to both protect native plant diversity and aid in the development of a commercial native plant industry. A multi-stage approach will be required including work in the following areas: species selection, seed collection, seed production, seed certification, seed processing, seed testing and storage, genetic conservation, germination requirements, and plant production. Due to the absence of genetic data to guide suitable movement of native seeds within the region, common garden studies will be utilized to verify proposed seed zones to minimize the loss of genetic diversity through domestication during the seed increase process. SNPRSIP is a web based location where partners can access and share information making it possible for the partners to work collaboratively, share information and minimize duplication of effort. This project will ensure that all restoration efforts are consistent and that accepted gene conservation strategies are utilized. This website is hosted by the Southern Region Extension Forester, USDA Forest Service Southern Region and the University of Georgia.

111 

 

Using Endemicity, Floristics and Ecoregions to Establish Seed Zones for Longleaf Understory Restoration

Joan Walker & George Hernández

(USDA Forest Service, Clemson, SC and USDA Forest Service, Atlanta, GA)

Abstract: The demand for native plant materials for restoring the ground layers of longleaf pine forests is increasing. Although seed of some native species is commercially available, in the interest of protecting local genetic diversity it is important to consider where purchased seed comes from relative to the target restoration site. Because the Southeastern coastal plain is one of the most floristically diverse regions in North America, establishing transfer zones for native plant materials to protect the genetic diversity of the region is critical. Seed transfer zones are traditionally based on climatic zones, and more recently on selected ecoregion classifications. We have expanded on these approaches by including regional patterns of endemism. Our goal was to establish seed zones that will protect natural genetic diversity while not restricting the opportunity for private sector seed vendors to develop economically viable seed production of the seed for restoration. We examined the Coastal Plain ecoregions delineated by the Nature Conservancy, USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, US Environmental Protection Agency, and USDA Forest Service classification systems, in light of recognized zones of endemism in the Atlantic and Gulf coastal plains. Based on these considerations, we propose seed transfer zones that we believe will reflect the genetic diversity of native species across the region. Common garden studies and associated genetic characterizations of selected species are needed to evaluate this proposal, and ultimately to provide sound guidance for the developing native seed industry.

112 

 

The Population Status of Bachman’s Sparrow and Associated Ground Flora in the Coleman Lake Region of the Talladega National Forest

Daniel Wright and Robert Carter

(Department of Biology, Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville, AL)

INTRODUCTION

Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) forest communities are one of the most diverse ecotypes in the temperate North America, providing critical habitat for many threatened and endemic species (Peet and Allard, 1993). Hundred’s of species are believed to be restricted to these types of longleaf ecosystems (Schafale 1994) including neotropical migrants and grassland associated birds.

The Bachman’s sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis) is endemic to the southeastern US (Dunning 1993) occupying disturbance prone ecosystems (Dunning and Watts 1990). Fire creates a suitable habitat by eliminating shrubs (Engstrom et al.1984) and encouraging the development of dense stands of grasses and forbs (Dunning and Watts 1990). The populations of the Bachman’s sparrow have been shown to decline and disappear 4-5 years after burning ceases (Gobris 1992, Engstrom et al. 1994). Due to three centuries of fire suppression and fragmentation, open pine forests have been replaced with closed canopy pine and pine-hardwood forest. Bachman’s sparrow is considered a priority 2 species by Alabama (Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 2005) and a G3 (vulnerable to extirpation or extinction) by NatureServe (2009).

While the effects of fire on breeding bird species has been studied to some extent in Coastal Plain longleaf communities (Hill 1998a, Dunning and Watts 1990, Engstrom et al. 1984), its influence on birds that breed in mountain longleaf stands is still virtually unknown. Hill (1998b) observed significantly higher bird species richness in mature and recently established longleaf pine stands than hardwood stands in the Talladega Mountains. Also in the Talladega Mountains, Shurette et al. (2007) described the differences between stands with a dense mid-story and stands that had the mid-story reduced by fire or mechanical treatment. This study determined the population status of Bachman’s sparrow and other disturbance dependent species in an area being restored to a longleaf pine grassland.

METHODS

The study area was near Coleman Lake on the Shoal Creek Ranger District of the Talladega National Forest in Cleburne County, Alabama. Twenty-four (24) sites were randomly designated throughout the study area. Twelve (12) sites were in an area receiving biennial burns and 12 in undisturbed sites. This area is managed for red-cockaded woodpeckers (Picoides borealis) and bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus).

113 

 

Breeding bird surveys, were conducted by a single observer during a period (May 15 and ending May 30) in which it is assumed that all birds are considered breeders rather than migrating individuals. A point count was conducted from the center of each plot following the technique described by Ralph (1993) and Hamel et al. (1996) in which the observer records all birds by sight and sound within a five minute interval.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Overall, 8 species were found exclusively in burned stands and 10 species were found only in unburned stands (Table 1). Bachman’s sparrow was detected 5 times in burned stands and never in unburned stands. Northern bobwhite, Field sparrow, White-eyed vireo and Common yellow-throat were more abundant in burned stands where the shrub and herbaceous layers were reduced. Cavity nesting species including the Red-cockaded woodpecker, Red-headed woodpecker, and Northern flicker were found exclusively in burned sites. Mesic hardwood-associated species such as the Hairy woodpecker, Black-throated green warbler, and Scarlet tanager were found more abundantly in unburned stands. Ruby-throated hummingbird, Belted kingfisher, Northern parula, and Acadian flycatcher preferred moist dense hardwood bottomlands, while the American goldfinch preferred moist burned bottomlands.

This study suggests that burned and unburned sites in the Coleman Lake area support different bird species assemblages. Burning greatly reduces midstory density and has a negative impact on those species that prefer a dense midstory (e.g. Scarlet tanager, Northern parula). A second season of data will be collected in 2011. In addition to breeding bird assemblages, forest stand characteristics will be sampled so they can be related to bird populations.

REFERENCES

Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 2005. Alabama Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Montgomery, AL

Dunning, J.B. 1993. Bachman's Sparrow. In: Poole, A.; Stettenheim, P.; Gill, F., eds. The Birds of North America. No. 38. Philadelphia, PA: The Academy of Natural Sciences; Washington, DC: The American Ornithologists' Union: 1–16

Dunning, J.B., and B. D. Watts. 1990. Regional differences in habitat occupancy by Bachman’s Sparrow. Auk 107:463-472.

Engstrom, R. T., Crawford, R. L., and W. W. Baker. 1984. Breeding bird populations in response to changing forest structure following fire exclusion: a fifteen year study. Wilson Bull. 96:437-450.

Gobris, N. M. 1992. Habitat occupancy during the breeding season by Bachman's sparrow at Piedmont National Wildlife Refuge in central Georgia . M.S. Thesis,University of Georgia, Athens, GA. 45 pp.

114 

 

Hamel, P. B., W. P. Smith, D. J. Twedt, J. R. Woehr, E. Morris, R. B. Hamilton, and R. J. Cooper. 1996. A land manager’s guide to point counts of birds in the southeast. U.S.D.A. Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-120, New Orleans, LA. 39 p.

Hill, G. E. 1998.a The importance of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) for breeding birds in the Talladega Mountains, Alabama. Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science 69:206-222.

Hill, G. E. 1998b. Use of forested habitat by breeding birds in the Gulf Coastal Plain. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 22:133-137.

NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: April 12, 2010 ).

Peet, R.K., and D.J. Allard. 1993. Longleaf pine vegetation of the southern Atlantic and eastern Gulf Coast Regions: A preliminary classification. In: S.M. Hermann , eds. Proceedings of the Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference, No. 18, The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem: ecology, restoration and management. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 45-82.

Ralph, C. J. 1993. Designing and implementing a monitoring program and standards for conducting point counts. Pages 204-207 in D. M. Finch and P. W. Stangel (editors). Status and management of Neotropical migratory birds. US Forest Service General Technical Report RM-229.

Schafale, M.P. 1994. Inventory of Longleaf Pine Natural Communities in North Carolina. NC Natural Heritage Program, Div. of Parks and Recreation, DENR, Raleigh, N.C. 230 pp.

Shurette, G.R., R. E. Carter, and G. Cline. 2007. The effect of forest midstory reduction on breeding bird populations in montane longleaf pine stands of the Talladega National Forest, Alabama. Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science 78: 221-230.

115 

 

The Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership: Conserving and Restoring the Longleaf Pine

Vernon Compton1 and Justin Jones2

(1The Longleaf Alliance, Project Director, GCPEP Office, Milton, FL; 2The Nature Conservancy, Ecosystem Support Team Leader, GCPEP Office, Milton, FL)

Abstract: The Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership (GCPEP) is a public/private voluntary landowner partnership that collectively manages over 1.05 million acres in northwest Florida and south Alabama, including some of the best remaining longleaf pine habitat in the world. By working together to reconnect the longleaf pine ecosystem, the GCPEP partners are providing critical contiguous forest to aid in the recovery of many rare species, including the federally endangered red-cockaded woodpecker and other rare species such as the Florida black bear, flatwoods salamander, and the Florida bog frog. While pursing individual missions, the partners work together to protect and manage the high biodiversity of the GCPEP landscape. To date the partners and GCPEP staff have completed numerous cooperative projects centered on prescribed burning, invasive species management, ecological monitoring, land protection, forest management, ecological restoration, endangered species management and monitoring, and public education and outreach. The partnership operates under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and is guided by a Steering Committee of representatives from each of the partners. Through the MOU the partners have agreed to develop and implement a cooperative and voluntary stewardship strategy that sustains native plants and animals, conserves and restores ecosystem integrity, ensures a continued supply of forest commodities, recreational opportunities, clean water and ecosystem services, and supports human communities that depend on these resources and services. Facilitation of the partnership has been through The Nature Conservancy until a recent transition of partnership facilitation to The Longleaf Alliance. This poster outlines the establishment of GCPEP, the Memorandum of Understanding, operations of the Steering Committee, the GCPEP Conservation Action Plan, successful projects such as the Ecosystem Support Team, and current and future transitions for the partnership.

116 

 

A 2010 CIG Grant Will Fund Native Understory Restoration in Longleaf Ecosystems

Mark J. Hainds, Emily Jo Williams, and Anne Rilling

(The Longleaf Alliance)

Abstract: The Longleaf Alliance has secured funding through a 2010 Conservation Innovation Grant (CIG) to promote native understory restoration in longleaf pine ecosystems. The project will support a range-wide, networked effort to develop reliable, affordable native plants necessary for successful restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem. Through the grant, The Longleaf Alliance will support and assist in coordinating the continued work of the Longleaf Understory Working Group including development of techniques and protocols for plant materials handling, transport, and storage. The Alliance will facilitate sharing of information regarding successful techniques and practices to avoid and increase availability of research results and available practical knowledge relative to native understory restoration in longleaf forests. Other activities of the project include identification and initiation of pilot programs in key longleaf landscapes that help to link interested landowners, understory technical assistance professionals, available seed/plant sources, and native understory plant growers and nurseries. Additionally, through development of materials, direct contact, presentations, and inclusion in workshops and media, the project will promote the use of native species for ecosystem restoration, erosion control, roadside stabilization, wildlife plantings, habitat for pollinators, and enhanced aesthetic values. The most direct outcome for The Longleaf Alliance will be the addition of a Longleaf Understory Coordinator to our staff to lead the project effort and work. This will be a full-time position with 3 years of guaranteed funding.

117 

 

Trees for a Greener Georgia

Anne Rilling

(The Longleaf Alliance)

Abstract: As part of its long-term commitment to building homes and communities that are healthy and strong, Home Depot Foundation has committed to restore 1 million trees. Given the importance of the longleaf ecosystem planting 500,000 of those trees as longleaf seedlings is a natural partnership with The Longleaf Alliance and site partners in Georgia. Site partners include Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Georgia Forestry Commission, and The Nature Conservancy, and Lolly Creek Ecological Management and Restoration Company is providing technical expertise and planting services.

118 

 

Effects of Prescribed Burning to Restore a Longleaf Pine Grassland on Breeding Bird Populations on the Talladega National Forest, AL

Daniel Wright, Mathew Smith, and Robert Carter

(Department of Biology, Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville, AL)

Abstract: The study area consisted of twelve sites with experiencing burn treatments of 1 year, 2 year, 5 year and 15+ year control sites. Point surveys for breeding birds were conducted in late May when breeding males are most active. Species common in the 1 and 2 year burn area were prairie warbler (Dendroica discolor), yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens), and indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea). Red-cockaded woodpeckers (Picoides borealis) were not uncommon in the study area. Present but uncommon was Bachman’s sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis). In the 5 and 15+ treatment sites common species included yellow-throated vireo (Dendroica dominica), summer tanager (Piranga rubra), and Eastern wood peewee (Contopus sordidulus). The open grassy habitat in the 1 and 2 year burn treatments should support larger populations of Bachman’s sparrow. It is plausible that a longer fire return (3 to 4 years) interval is required to produce ideal Bachman’s sparrow habitat.

 

 

119 

 

Table 1.  Number of times breeding bird species were detected in biennially burned longleaf pine stands and 

unburned longleaf pine stands on the Talladega National Forest, AL. 

Common Name  Scientific Name Burned  Unburned 

Acadian Flycatcher  Empidonax virescens ‐‐ 3 

American Crow  Corvus brachyrhynchos 9 12 

American Goldfinch  Carduelis tristis 1 ‐‐ 

American Robin  Turdus migratorius 1 2 

Bachman's Sparrow  Aimophila aestivalis 5 ‐‐ 

Belted Kingfisher  Megaceryle alcyon ‐‐ 2 

Black‐and‐white Warbler  Mniotilta varia 5 5 

Black‐throated Green Warbler  Dendroica virens ‐‐ 7 

Blue‐gray Gnatcatcher  Polioptila caerulea 2 1 

Bluejay  Cyanocitta cristata 1 1 

Broad‐winged Hawk  Buteo platypterus 1 1 

Carolina Chickadee  Poecile carolinensis 4 4 

Carolina Wren  Thryothurus ludovicianus 1 1 

Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica ‐‐ 1 

Chipping Sparrow  Spizella passerina 6 ‐‐ 

Common Yellow‐throat  Geothlypis trichas 3 ‐‐ 

Downy Woodpecker  Picoides pubescens 3 2 

Eastern Bluebird  Sialia sialia 3 1 

Eastern Towhee  Piplis erythrophthalmus 9 2 

Eastern Wood Peewee  Contopus sordidulus 7 1 

Field Sparrow  Spizella pusilla 8 ‐‐ 

Great‐crested Flycatcher  Myiarchus crinitus 4 10 

Hairy Woodpecker  Picoides villosus ‐‐ 1 

120 

 

Indigo bunting  Passerina cyanea 9 1 

Mourning Dove  Zenaida macroura 5 2 

Northern Bobwhite  Colinus virginianus 1 ‐‐ 

Northern Cardinal  Cardinalis cardinalis 4 4 

Northern Flicker  Colaptes auratus 10 ‐‐ 

Northern Parula  Parula americana ‐‐ 2 

Ovenbird  Seiurus aurocapillus 4 6 

Pileated Woodpecker  Dryocopus pileatus 4 3 

Pine Warbler  Dendroica pinus 13 8 

Prairie Warbler  Dendroica discolor 13 3 

Red Shouldered Hawk  Buteo lineatus 1 1 

Red‐bellied Woodpecker  Melanerptes carolinus 2 1 

Red‐cockaded Woodpecker  Picoides borealis 3 ‐‐ 

Red‐eyed Vireo  Vireo olivaceus 9 11 

Red‐headed Woodpecker  Melanerptes erythrocephalus 8 ‐‐ 

Ruby‐throated Hummingbird  Archilochus colubris ‐‐ 1 

Scarlet Tanager  Piranga olivacea ‐‐ 1 

Solitary Vireo  Vireo 2 1 

Summer Tanager  Piranga rubra 2 9 

Tufted Titmouse  Baeolophus bicolor 4 9 

White‐breasted Nuthatch  Sitta carolinensis 3 1 

White‐eyed Vireo  Vireo griseus 1 ‐‐ 

Yellow‐billed Cuckoo  Coccyzus americanus 2 1 

Yellow‐breasted Chat  Icteria virens 16 2 

Yellow‐throated Warbler  Dendroica dominica 11 3