Forest Management Plan - USDA
Forest Management PlanLandowner and Site InformationLandowner Name:Joseph K. LandownerLandowner Address:1234 Center Rd., Maplewood, MI 12345Landowner Email:jkl@example.comProperty Location:Part of the SE ¼ of Sec. 12, T0N, R0E (Maplewood Twp., Northwoods Co., MI)Plan Date:1/1/2013Landowner Phone:Alternate Phone:Acres in Plan:555.555.5555555.555.555663.2Plan Writer InformationPlan Writer Name:John ForesterCompany Name:John Forester Forestry Consulting, LLC.Plan Writer Address:4321 Main St., Mainville, MI 12346Plan Writer Email:jffc@example.comPlan Writer Phone:Alternate Phone:Plan AcceptanceLandowner’sSignature:Date:Plan Writer’sSignature:Date:NRCS Signature:Date:555.555.5557n/a
TABLE OF CONTENTSLocation Map [showing general location of site in Twp., Co., etc.]Plan MapSoils MapLandowner Objectives StatementForest Management Plan DevelopmentProperty OverviewSummary Table of Scheduled PracticesManagement Unit 1Management Unit 2Management Unit 3Management Unit 4Management Unit 5Management Unit 6Management Unit 7Appendix A – Soils InformationAppendix B – Water Quality Practices on Forest LandAppendix C – Invasive Species Management InformationNot included in example plan3455567911Not included in example planNot included in example plan14Not included in example plan16Not included in example planNot included in example planADDITIONAL MATERIAL INCLUDED IN PLANForest Stand Improvement (666) Job Sheet – Management Unit 3Tree/Shrub Site Preparation (490) Job Sheet – Management Unit 6Tree/Shrub Establishment (612) Job Sheet – Management Unit 6Resource Considerations Field Inventory Guide Sheet (Excerpt from form MI-CPA-52)2
3
4
LANDOWNER OBJECTIVESThe landowner’s objectives are to improve the value of and productivity of the timber on the property,while also improving the quality of habitat for a variety of woodland wildlife species, by increasing thediversity of cover and food available on the property. Additionally, maintaining a visual and recreationalvalues are important to the landowner.FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENTTo collect data for development of this plan, a variable radius plot (point sampling) inventory wasconducted. Tree data (species and diameter) was collected at 66 points distributed throughout theproperty. Additionally, an ocular assessment of understory vegetation, wildlife habitat elements,invasive species, etc., was conducted throughout the site. Soils information included in this plan wasgenerated by http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.PROPERTY OVERVIEWHISTORYThis property, located in Section 12 of Maplewood Township, Northwoods County, has been in theLandowner family for three generations. Historical aerial photographs indicate that in the majority of theupland acreage was devoid of trees in the early 1900s and likely was used for grazing livestock.Grazing ceased in the 1940s to 1950s and the majority of the current tree cover has grown up since. Afew large scattered trees, primarily along old fencerows, likely predate the land clearing. A small clumpof northern white cedar was planted at about this same time (Management Unit 5, 0.9 ac.), as wereseveral red pines along the steep slope in Management Unit 3, south of Management Unit 2.The current landowner indicated that one commercial timber harvest took place in the early 1980s.This selective harvest removed a small number of larger red oak, white oak and black walnut.GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTIONThe majority of the property is forested, with Management Units 1 and 3 containing a high quality standof mixed hardwood trees.Management Unit 4 to the south is an old field, containing large clusters of woody shrubs including graydogwood, staghorn sumac, autumn olive and multiflora rose. In much of this area, pole-sized Americanelm, black cherry, and cottonwood have become established.The soils on the site range from well drained loams in much of the upland portions of the property tomuck in the wetland (Management Unit 2).The site is relatively flat to somewhat rolling, except for the area directly around the wetland(Management Unit 2). For 200 to 300 feet out from the wetland’s edge, the slopes are 12 to 18%.Natural and Cultural FeaturesThere are no known significant natural or cultural features on any of the management units.Noxious and Invasive SpeciesNo invasive species were found at the time of the forest inventory, except for as noted in ManagementUnit 3. However, several invasive species are known to be in the general area. Regular monitoring for5
invasive species should be conducted. See Appendix C for information on invasive speciesmanagement.Existing Conservation Practices and ActivitiesThe Landowner family owns the property primarily for the recreational value, being avid birdwatchers,deer, turkey, and squirrel hunters, and cross country skiers. They have maintained the foot/ski trailsand have done some very limited firewood cutting, concentrated mostly on dead trees and hazard treesnear trails.They also have expressed an interest in taking a more active roll in forest management and view thetimber crop as an important long term investment for the family. The existing trail network is adequateaccess for their recreation and management needs.SUMMARY TABLE OF SCHEDULED CONSERVATION PRACTICESDateJanuary 2013March 2013April 2013October 2013May 2014May 2015May 2016Land Unit3366666PracticeForest Stand Improvement (666)Herbaceous Weed Control (315)Tree/Shrub Site Preparation (490)Tree/Shrub Establishment (612)Herbaceous Weed Control (315)Herbaceous Weed Control (315)Herbaceous Weed Control (315)6Extent36.0 ac.2.0 ac.1.5 ac.1.5 ac.1.5 ac.1.5 ac.1.5 ac.
MANAGEMENT UNIT 1 FOREST (MIXED HARDWOOD FOREST)CURRENT CONDITIONSLand UnitAcres:Basal Area:Soil Type:6.397 sq. ft./ ac.St. Clair Clay Loam (see Appendix A formore information)Average TreeDiameter:Stocking Level(trees per acre):Site Index:7.221966 (northern red oak)Species CompositionThe majority of this stand of timber can be classified as an oak-hickory forest, a forest type dominatedby red and white oak, hickories, basswood, ash, and black cherry. This forest type is usually found inthe drier soils in this part of Michigan. As is fairly common in many stands in this area, this stand alsocontains species more typical of a mesic (moist) forest as well – sugar maple and American beech,specifically. Also, a fair number of soft maples (red and silver maple) are here, commonly in the wettestforested areas.Other trees present include American elm, black cherry, black walnut, ironwood (hop hornbeam), andpin cherry.Stand DensityThe unit has good stand density and tree distribution. It currently has a basal area of 97 sq. ft./ac.Basal area, a measure of stand density, is the sum of the cross-sectional area of all trees [measured atbreast height, 4.5’] expressed as a per-acre amount. Ideal basal area for this forest type is between 70and 110 sq. ft./ac. When basal area is too low, the stand is underutilized, and may result in trees thatare excessively branchy, or prone to windthrow damage. If basal area is too high, the growth ofindividual trees is stunted due to competition for resources, and trees may become more prone to pestdamage.This stand has an overabundance of small diameter trees (4 to 8” dbh) and a slight deficit of trees inlarger size classes. The species mentioned above are fairly evenly distributed throughout all sizeclasses.Wood Products PotentialThis stand has good potential for growing high quality hardwood sawtimber and veneer, but due to itssmall size and lack of access – it is effectively landlocked from the property by the wetland(Management Unit 2) – the stand will not be managed intensely for timber but rather to maintain goodspecies diversity and provide valuable wildlife habitat.TopographyThere is a steep gradient on the majority of this management unit, with a south aspect, towards thewetland (Management Unit 2). There is no evidence of erosion concerns, currently, but the site shouldbe monitored regularly. Additionally any management activities should be done in accordance to“Sustainable Soil and Water Quality Practices on Forest Land,” the Michigan Department of NaturalResources’ Forestry Best Management Practices guide (see Appendix B).Natural and Cultural FeaturesSee “General Site Description,” page 3.7
Roads and TrailsThere are no roads and trails in this management unit.Forest HealthThere is no significant wildfire or pest risk in this management unit.Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ElementsFrom a wildlife standpoint, the species composition is quite good. The oaks, hickories, beech, andwalnut all provide an important hard mast food source for deer, turkey, squirrels (all regularly seen inthis management unit) and other species. Many of the other trees provide additional food source fromsoft mast (such as the cherries) and/or from buds, leaves and twigs.Noxious and Invasive SpeciesSee “General Site Description,” page 3.Water FeaturesThere is no surface water present in this management unit and no known ground water issues.Existing Conservation PracticesSee “General Site Description,” page 3.Harvest HistoryThe harvest history of this management unit is unknown.Desired Future ConditionThis unit will be largely unmanaged due to access restriction. It is anticipated that over time, a portionof the oak and hickory component will be replaced by more shade tolerant sugar maple and beech,which are already present in lower numbers. The stocking and density will ultimately reach equilibriumas the stand begins to exhibit more “climax forest” characteristics (larger, shade-tolerant trees, morewoody debris, etc.). This condition, however, is not as conducive to timber production, as tree vigor willbe reduced.Recreation will be the key use of this management unit. The landowner has a “verbal agreement” withthe neighbor allowing foot traffic/ski access to this site. The likely eventual conversion to a sugar mapledominated stand (and loss of oaks) will provide some diversity and contrast to the remainder of theproperty.PLANNED CONSERVATION PRACTICESNo conservation practices are planned on this management unit.ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSMonitoringThis management unit should be monitored for invasive species on a regular basis, at least annually. Ifany new invasive species are noted, contact the NRCS office or the plan writer for information oncontrol. Also, refer to Appendix C for general information on invasive species.Similarly, forest health, erosion and other potential concerns should be monitored regularly.8
MANAGEMENT UNIT 2 WILDLIFE (BUTTONBUSH SWAMP)CURRENT CONDITIONSLand UnitAcres:Basal Area:Soil Type:9.6n/aEdwards & Houghton Muck (seeAppendix A for more information)Average TreeDiameter:Stocking Level(trees per acre):Site Index:n/an/a56 (red maple)(see Appendix A for more SI’s)Species CompositionThe majority of this management unit is a swamp dominated by sedges, bulrushes, and forbs withseveral large clusters of buttonbush, and to a lesser extent winterberry, and black elderberry. This low,flat area transitions quite abruptly to the surrounding uplands. There are a few lowland hardwoods(primarily eastern cottonwood, silver maple and American elm) in this narrow transitional area.Stand Densityn/aWood Products Potentialn/aTopographyThis unit is extremely flat and transitions abruptly into the steep surrounding upland forests.Natural and Cultural FeaturesSee “General Site Description,” page 3.Roads and TrailsThere are no roads and trails in this management unit.Forest HealthThere is no significant wildfire or pest risk in this management unit.Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ElementsThe primary wildlife habitat element provided by this management unit is the surface water which ispresent in at least some of the unit perennially. Additionally cover from the grass and grass-like plantscan be important for a number of species. Ducks, geese, great blue herons, sandhill cranes, and manyother water birds have been seen using this area.Noxious and Invasive SpeciesSee “General Site Description,” page 3.Water FeaturesSurface water is present in most of this unit for several weeks in the spring and for shorter periodsfollowing significant rain events. The site is not known to have ever dried up completely There are noknown water quality concerns in this management unit.Existing Conservation PracticesSee “General Site Description,” page 3.9
Harvest HistoryThe harvest history of this management unit is unknown, although it is unlikely that commerciallyvaluable timber ever grew here.Desired Future ConditionThis unit will be largely unmanaged to maintain its current condition.Recreation, particularly bird (and other wildlife) watching will continue to be the key use of thismanagement unit.PLANNED CONSERVATION PRACTICESNo conservation practices are planned on this management unit.ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSMonitoringThis management unit should be monitored for invasive species on a regular basis, at least annually. Ifany new invasive species are noted, contact the NRCS office or the plan writer for information oncontrol. Also, refer to appendix C for general information on invasive species.Similarly, water quality, plant health, erosion and other potential concerns should be monitoredregularly.10
MANAGEMENT UNIT 3 FOREST (MIXED HARDWOOD FOREST)CURRENT CONDITIONSLand UnitAcres:Basal Area:Soil Type:41.3120 sq. ft./ ac.St. Clair Clay Loam (see Appendix A formore information)Average TreeDiameter:Stocking Level(trees per acre):Site Index:11.823666 (northern red oak)Species CompositionThis stand is very similar to Management Unit 1, described above. The majority of this stand of timbercan be classified as an oak-hickory forest, a forest type dominated by red and white oak, hickories,basswood, ash, and black cherry. This forest type is usually found in the drier soils in SouthernMichigan. As is fairly common in many stands in southeast Michigan, this stand also contains speciesmore typical of a mesic (moist) forest as well – sugar maple and American beech, specifically. Also, afair number of soft maples (red and silver maple) are here, commonly in the wettest forested areas.Other trees present include American elm, black cherry, black walnut, ironwood (hop hornbeam), pincherry, and spruce. It should be noted for the purposes of this forest inventory, some species weregrouped together. For example, black oaks were listed together with red oaks, bur oak is grouped withwhite oak, red maple and silver maple are grouped together as soft maple, and all the hickory speciesare grouped together.Stand DensityThe stand is in good with regards to stand density and tree distribution, although with a current basalarea of 120 sq. ft./ac., a light thinning could make it more productive. This stand has a slightoverabundance of pole-sized trees (8” to 12” dbh). The species mentioned above are fairly evenlydistributed throughout all size classes.Wood Products PotentialThis stand has a good potential for growing high quality hardwood sawtimber and veneer, particularlyred and white oak, black cherry, and sugar maple. Currently, there is an overabundance of hickorytrees, a lesser valued species, relative to the oaks. Management should strive to correct this.TopographyThe majority of this management unit is relatively flat to gently rolling. There is no evidence of erosionconcerns currently, but the site should be monitored regularly, especially along trials and wheremanagement has altered the stand. Any management activities should be done in accordance to“Sustainable Soil and Water Quality Practices on Forest Land,” the Michigan Department of NaturalResources’ Forestry Best Management Practices guide (see Appendix B).Natural and Cultural FeaturesSee “General Site Description,” page 3.Roads and TrailsThere is a loop trail that leads to three additional trails as indicated on the map. The trails are wideenough to accommodate vehicles if needed, but are primarily only used for foot and cross country skitraffic. There are no apparent erosion concerns, but the trails should be monitored. The steepest11
portion of the trail (and highest erosion risk) is the switchback portion of the trail just south of thewetland (Management Unit 2).Forest HealthThere is no significant wildfire risk in this management unit.There are a few red pine trees scattered along the steep hillside south of the wetland that are exhibitingsigns of decline (pine bark beetle activity, tree mortality), primarily due to competition from hardwoodtrees, and having been planted on a poor site for this species. Due to the abundance of hardwoods,and the small number of pines, these will be allowed to die on their own. There is a minor white ashcomponent scattered throughout the uplands, as well as some green ash in some of the lower areas.These are likely to succumb to emerald ash borer in the next few years. These will be targeted forremoval as appropriate during Forest Stand Improvement activities.Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ElementsFrom a wildlife standpoint, the species composition is quite good. The oaks, hickories, beech, andwalnut all provide an important hard mast food source for deer, turkey, squirrels (all regularly seen inthis management unit) and other species. Many of the other trees provide additional food source fromsoft mast (such as the cherries) and/or from buds, leaves and twigs.Noxious and Invasive SpeciesA few scattered areas of garlic mustard were identified in this management unit. These will beaddressed with Invasive Species Control (797) (see below).Additionally, regular monitoring for invasive species should be conducted. See Appendix C forinformation on invasive species management.Water FeaturesThere are a few isolated seasonal wetlands throughout the stand. Forest Stand Improvement activitieswill be conducted in such a way as to minimize disturbance to the site. See “Sustainable Soil andWater Quality Practices on Forest Land,” in Appendix B and the Forest Stand ImprovementSpecifications for more information.Existing Conservation PracticesSee “General Site Description,” page 3.Harvest HistoryA light selective harvest of red and white oak, and black walnut (and likely a few other species) wasdone in the early 1980s.Desired Future ConditionThis unit will be managed both for recreational value and to increase the timber production. A reductionof basal area down to approximately 70 sq. ft./ ac. through crop tree management will help toencourage oak regeneration. A reduction of hickories and an increase in all oak species, as well asblack cherry, and black walnut is desired.This will provide both good hard and soft mast for wildlife and maintain the high visual quality of thestand as well.PLANNED CONSERVATION PRACTICESForest Stand Improvement (666) – 36.0 acres, Jan. 2013Install practice according to the attached Forest Stand Improvement (666) Job Sheet.12
Herbaceous Weed Control (315) – 2.0 acres, March 2013This practice is the control of invasive plant species whose presence is or is likely to cause economic orenvironmental harm or harm to human health.This practice will be used to control garlic mustard which occurs in only a few isolated “islands” alongthe west property boundary. The primary method of control will be hand pulling. This can be doneanytime that second year plants are present. Pulled plants should be disposed of in a heavy duty blackgarbage bag. If left out in the sun, the garlic mustard in the bag will be killed by the heat. First yearplants (rosettes) may be killed using a targeted application of herbicide. This can even be done in earlyspring (before native wildflowers emerge), provided the temperature is within the herbicide labelsallowance. Consult with Michigan State University Extension at 555-555-5555 for productrecommendations.Since the plants occur in low density clusters, surrounded by
Forest Management Plan Landowner and Site Information Landowner Name: Joseph K. Landowner Landowner Phone: 555.555.5555 Landowner Address: 1234 Center Rd., Maplewood, MI 12345 Landowner Email: jkl@example.com Alternate Phone: 555.555.5556 Property Location: Part of the SE ¼ of Sec. 12, T0N, R0E (Maplewood Twp., Northwoods Co., MI) Plan Date: 1/1/2013
(A) boreal forest º temperate forest º tropical rain forest º tundra (B) boreal forest º temperate forest º tundra º tropical rain forest (C) tundra º boreal forest º temperate forest º tropical rain forest (D) tundra º boreal forest º tropical rain forest º temperate forest 22. Based on the
The Allegheny National Forest (ANF) Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP or Forest Plan) (USDA-2007a) provides a 10 to 15 year strategy for managing forest resources on the ANF. All applicable laws, regulations, policies, and national and regional direction, as detailed in the Forest Service Manual and Handbook, are part of Forest Plan .
USDA. Project Team Jane Duffield, MPA Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Food and Nutrition Service, USDA Jackie Haven, MS, RDN Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, USDA Sarah A. Chang, MPH, RDN Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, USDA Maya Maroto, MPH, RDN Child Nutrition, USDA. Pilot Schools Thurgood Marshall Academy Public
Mike Galvin, Maryland Department of Natural Resources Forest Service Mark Green, City of Topeka, Kansas Dudley Hartel, Southern Center for Urban Forestry Research and Information Lisa D. Hoover, USDA Forest Service Phillip Rodbell, USDA Forest Service Richard Pouyat, USDA Forest Service/Baltimore Ecosystem Study
Mike Galvin, Maryland Department of Natural Resources Forest Service Mark Green, City of Topeka, KS Dudley Hartel, Southern Center for Urban Forestry Research and Information Lisa D. Hoover, USDA Forest Service Phillip Rodbell, USDA Forest Service Dr. Richard Pouyat, USDA Forest Service George Strnad, URS Corporation
D. Mixed Evergreen/Deciduous Forest 38 1. Salt Dome Hardwood Forest * 38 2. Coastal Live Oak-Hackberry Forest * 39 3. Barrier Island Live Oak Forest * 39 4. Shortleaf Pine/Oak-Hickory Forest * 39 5. Mixed Hardwood-Loblolly Forest * 40 7. Slash Pine/Post Oak Forest * 40 8. Live Oak-Pine-Magnolia Forest * 40 9. Spruce Pine-Hardwood Flatwood * 41
The case for using forest biomass . 6. 7. 10. 11. Ontario's forest biomass advantage. 12. Leadership in the green economy . Spotlight: Integrating biomass in Resolute Forest Products' Northwestern Ontario operations . Sustainable forest policy framework . Spotlight: Forest biomass and the Managed Forest carbon cycle .
The Plan aligns with state and federal plans and mandates that call for increasing the pace and scale of forest management including Nevada's Cohesive Strategy Implementation Plan and Forest Action Plan, California Executive Orders B-52-18 and N-05-19, and USDA Forest Service Region 5's Ecological Restoration Leadership Intent.
