°

A SIMULATED INVENTORY UPDATE:wISCONSIN'S 1979 TIMBER RESOURCES

• Gerhard K. Raile" and

W. Brad SmithAssociate Mensurationists

BACKGROUND METHOD

Current facts about the Nation's forest resources A tree growth projection subsystem of FREP wassuch as area, timber volume, biomass, ownership, and used to update the 1968 Wisconsin survey to 1979.prospective supply and demand are essential in the This subsystem of FREP is a distance-independentformation of management policies and practices. The individual tree growth simulator (Munro 1974) of rood-Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning ular design. It consists of an executive program and aAct of 1974 specifically requires the Forest Service to series of functional subroutines. Updated tree lists aremake and keep current a comprehensive inventory and generated through the simulation of growth and mor-analysis of renewable forest and rangeland resources, tality. Management routines are available to prescribe

In the past, resource evaluation techniques have and carry out silvicultural activities. A brief overviewprovided forest resource information that was often of FREP is available in "FREP 78: The Updated Treemonths, and, unfortunately, sometimes years, old Growth Projection System" (Hahn et al. 1979).before it waswidely available for use. To meet the need The Wisconsin update was conducted without thefor more current forest resource information, the use of new field or photo-interpretive work. New in-N0rth Central Forest Experiment Station (NCFES) ventory data from the Chequ_amegon (1976) and thebegan the Forest Resources Evaluation Program Nicolet (1975) National Forests were used as a starting(FREP) in 1975. _ point for updating the National Forest data because

Whenfu!ly developed, FREP will be a computerized the 1968 Wisconsin survey included National Forestresource evaluation system capable of evaluating eco- data adjusted from 1967 and 1964 inventories to 1968.

The term "update," as it is used here, is an estimate ofn0mic, ecologic-environmental, and sociocultural as-current forest statistics derived by modeling the dy-pects of timber, wildlife, recreation, water, forage, and

• special uses (Lundgren and Essex 1979). In an evalua- namic change in a forest from a known time in the past.tion of FREP asan inventory tool, the 1968 Wisconsin The four majorcomponents that define this change areforest survey (Spencer and Thorne 1972) was updated growth, mortality, regeneration, and removals.to the year 1979.

Growth and Mortality

_The FREPgrowth projection system was devel- Growth and mortality functions 2 were calibratedoped jointly by a team of researchers at the North and validated with data from throughout the LakeCentral Forest Experiment Station. Included wereRolfe A. Leary, Jerold T. Hahn, Roland G. Buchman,Gary Brand (working on a cooperative agreement 2The derivations of the FREP growth functionsthrough the University of Minnesota), Brad Smith, (Hahn and Leary 1979, Leary and Holdaway 1979,Margaret Holdaway, Jerrilyn La Varre Thompson, Holdaway et al. 1979) and mortality functions (Buch-and Linda Christensen. man 1979) are too long to present here.

States (Christensen et al. 1979). Test projections made that the final updated acreage would coincide by typein Wisconsin over a wide range of forest conditions with the 1977 estimate of commercial forest area. Be-produced reliable results when compared with the pre- cause stand-size class was determined by the projec-vious Wisconsin dal_a(Leary et al. 1979). tion, acres by size class will not agree with the 1977

estimate.

Regeneration The current version of FREP has no provision forsimulating actual removals. The system was modified

Although FREP regeneration routines 3for the Lake to set removals during the update to the levels estimat-States had not been developed by the time of the ed above. Computerized Lake States guides (Brandupdate, this did not significantly affect the projection. 1979) were used in the projection system to select aMost trees that became established on harvested land subset of plots that were eligible for silvicultural treat-during the l 1-year update period would not have ment during the update period. Lake States guidesgrown to merchantable size. Tables showing number of were used in lieu of detailed information on Wisconsintrees in thisreport include trees below the 6-inch diam- timber management strategies. The FREP projectioneter class.. Because there was no regeneration, these are system was then modified by adding a special removalstrees that were in the original 1.0-to 4.9-inch sample analysis algorithm. Each of the eligible plots wasand did not grow into the 6-inch diameter class, scanned by the algorithm to determine whether it

would be cut. The volume from cut plots was accumu-

Removals lated until the estimated volume of growing-stock re-movals by species was reached.

Timber removals for the update fall into two catego- Information on update costs and data requirementsties, product and nonproduct. Timber removals for are outlined in "FREP: Application of the Treeproducts was estimated using data collected by North• Growth Projection System for Inventory" (Smith andCentral's Renewable Resources Evaluation Project. Raile 1979).Project staff collect pulpwood data annually, saw logdata every 2 to 5 years, veneer log data every 2 years,

and data on total removals (including poles, pilings, UPDATE RESULTSfuelwood, and an estimate of nonproduct removals) at

the time of each State forest survey. For the update, Area Trendspulpwood, saw log, and veneer data were compiled foreach available year during the update period. Data for The total commercial forest area in Wisconsin hasmissing years were estimated by analyzing trends in declined 3percent since 1956 and will probably contin-wood consumption for the State (U.S. Department of ue to decline in the near future. It is estimated thatCommerce, 1967-1978). commercial forest land now accounts for 42 percent of

all land in the State.It was not possible to make an annual estimate of

n0nproduct removals-- the timber removals from cul- The aspen-birch' and maple-beech-birch foresttural operations and changes in land use. But esti- types make up 29 and 25 percent of the commercial

forest area, respectively. These types have dominatedmates of removals caused only by changes in land use• may be made by estimating the volume by forest type the forest area of Wisconsin as far back as the first

occurring on the commercial forest area lost since 1968. official survey in 1936, although the percentage ofThe area of commercial forest land in 1979 was as- northern hardwoods has been increasing while aspen-sumed -t0 be the same as a 1977 estimate made by the birch has been declining. The natural succession ofNorth' Central Forest Experiment Station and the aspen-birch stands to maple-beech-birch stands ac-Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (USDA counts for much of this shift. With the exception ofForest Service 1978). Area expansion factors used in aspen-birch, all hardwood types show modest in-the 196.8survey were adjusted for each forest type, so creases in acreage during the update period (table 1).

3Buchman, R. G. Lake States tree recruitment forthenorth central generalized forest tree growth pro- *In the 1956 survey the aspen and birch forestjection system. Unpublished Station study FS-NC- types were combined, so the 1968 and 1979 aspen4252(78-04), on file at North Central Forest Experi- and birch types were added together for

• ment Station, St. Paul, Minnesota. comparison.

2

Table 1. -- Area of commercial forest land by forest type,. Wisconsin, 1956, 1968, and updated 1979

Foresttype 1956 1968 1979

Thousand Percent Thousand Percent Thousand Percentacres of total acres of total acres of total

Jackpine 687 . 5 727 5 717 5Redpine 146 1 310 2 332 2Whitepine 172 1 178 2 159 1Blackspruce 207 1 236 2 215 1

..

Spruce-fir 352 2 628 4 601 4Northernwhite-cedar 207 1 302 2 308 2Tamarack- 131 1 222 2 223 2Oak-hickory 2,461 17 2,665 18 2,681 19Lowlandhardwoods 840 6 1,158 8 1,163 8Northernhardwoods 2,634 18 3,522 24 3,551 25Aspen-birch 4,684 31 4,219 29 4,202 29Nonstocked 2347 16 370 3 326 2

All types 14,868 100 14,537 100 14,478 100J

Table 2.- Commercial forest land areas by stand-size class,Wisconsin, 1956, 1968, and updated 1979

Stan&size. 1956 1968 1979class .

• Thousand Percent Thousand Percent Thousand Percentacres of total acres of total acres of total

Sawtimber 2,054 14 3,098 21 3,235 22Poletimber. 4,822 32 6,580 45 6,664 46Seedling-

Sapling 5,645 38 4,489 31 4,253 30Nonstocked 2,347 16 370 3 326 2AllClasses 14,868 100 14,537 100 14,478 100

The area of jack pine and white pine forest types

has declined since 1968 -- an apparent reversal of the Volumetrend noted between the 1956 and 1968 forest surveys.

The red pine type, however, has shown a 127 percent Despite the decline in commercial forest area be-increase since 1956. Much of this increase is the result tween 1968 and 1979, total growing-stock volume in-of extensive plantings of red pine and the conversion creased 16 percent n from 11 billion cubic feet in 1968of white pine sites to red pine because of blister rust. to 12.7 billion cubic feet in 1979 (table 3). Softwood

• In the update, black spruce and spruce-fir types de- growing-stock volume increased 36 percent and hard-clined; northern white-cedar and tamarack types in- wood volume increased 10 percent. Softwoods contin-creased slightly, ued to gain, jumping from 20 percent of all growing-

stock volume in 1956 to an estimated 26 percent in-POletimber and sawtimber stands have shown a

steady increase in area since the 1956 survey, but 1979.

nonstocked and seedling-sapling stands have de- The maturing of Wisconsin'ssecond-growthforestscreased. The 1979 update estimates 9.9 million acres is shown by the upward trend in the area of sawtimberof c0mbined sawtimber and poletimber stands corn- stands and the increase in sawtimber volume. Saw-

pared to 9.7 million acres in 1968 and 6.9 million acres timber volume has risen 44 percent since the 1968in 1956. The area of nonstocked forest land has survey and has almost doubled since the 1956 survey.probably declined since the 1968 survey (table 2) Traditionally, hardwoods have been dominant, butalthough definition and procedural changes after the softwoods have begun to make up an increasing per-1956 survey hinder interpretation of the decrease. A centage of the total sawtimber volume. They are nowmore detailed breakdown of the 1979 area data is estimated to account for 33 percent of the sawtimbergiven in tables 4 and 5. volume (table 3).

3

" Table 3.- Growing-stock and sawtimber volumes forWisconsin, 1956, 1968, and updated 1979

Growing-etockvolume SawtimbervolumeSpecies 1966 1968 1979 1956 1968 1979

Mil.cu.ft. Percent Mil.cu.ft. Percent Mil.cu.ft. Percent Mil.bd.ft. Percent Mil.bd.ft. Percent Mil.bd.ft. Percent

Softwoods 1,670 20 2,475 23 3,368 26 4,783 30 6,497 30 10,318 33Hardwoods 6,768 80 8,521 77 9,363 74 11,049 70 15,259 70 21,052 67

Total_ 8,438 100 10,996 100 12,731 100 15,832 100 21,756 100 31,370 100

Further evidence of the effects of Wisconsin's ma-

turing-forests is the increase in growing-stock volume Growth and Mortalityper acre in all major forest types (fig. 1). A detailed

FREP's projected (1968-1979) average net annualbreakdown of all numbers of trees and volume data is

given in tables 6 l_hrough 12. growth of 346,500 cubic feet is an average annualgrowth rate of 3.1 percent. Net growth consists ofsurvivor growth, ingrowth, growth on ingrowth,growth on removals, and growth on trees that die,minus mortality (tables 26-33)"

i

Components of Thousand Percent of• growth cubic feet total net

1,400 - growth

' Survivor growth 312,326 90

Ingrowth 76,903 22

1,200- Growth on ingrowth 24,035 7

Growth on removals 33,525 10

w 1,000 Growth on mortality 24,192 7

- Mortality - 124,425 - 36

cott_:_ Total net growth 346,557 100¢j 800 This projected net growth averages 24 cubic feet per

acre for the update period compared with 34per year

_ cubic feet for 1967 and 20 cubic feet for 1955. s ,

s°°" Because there was no regeneration model in FREPat the time of this update and the original data onlyincluded d.b.h, measurements for trees 1 inch and

. larger, the ingrowth volumes may be slightly low over400 - the 11-year period. The effects of no regeneration can

be seen by looking at the original and current distribu-tions of trees by diameter class in tables 7 and 8. The

L distributions by diameter class of mortality and re-1968 ' 1979

moval trees are given in tables 10 and 11.

Figure 1. Growing-stock volume trends for major SThis is the unadjusted 1955 net growth rate. The

types and type groups in Wisconsin, 1968 and adjusted 1955 rate published in the 1968 survey is 26• updated 1979. cubic feet per acre per year.

4

The predicted average annual growing-stock mot- 2so/tality is 124.4 million cubic feet _ 1.1 percent of theoriginal "inventory or 8.6 cubic feet per acre per year. _2s

"The 1967 estimate of 4.1 cubic feet per acre per year isIiii III

about half this rate, and the unadjusted 1955 mortali- _ 200ty is 11.4 cubic feet per acre per year. The projected '

mortality rates by forest type are as follows:O 175

Projected

mortality _ 150

Forest type Cubic feet/ as a per-acre/year cent of in-

ventory _2sl mACTUAL• ---- PROJECTED

Jack pine 3.4 0.66 100"/ I I1967 1968 19169 19170 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

Red pine 4.3 ' .54White pine 6.8 .51

Figure 2.- Estimated growing-stock removals forBlack sprdce 5.1 1.36 products in Wisconsin, 1967-1979.Balsam fir-white

spruce 10.8 1.43• Northern white-cedar 10.7 1.10

Tamarack 6.7 1.58

Oak-hickory 7.1 .92 BiomassElm-ash-cottonwood 8.9 1.05

Maple-beech-birch 10.4 .97 Many of the equations for calculating individualAspen • 10.5 1.72 tree biomass by species (Young 1976) could not beBirch 5.0 .69 used in creating tables 34 and 35 because (1) usable

All types 8.6 1.11 equations are not available for many species in the

All the components of net growth are summarized State; (2) many equations use variables not availablefor both cubic feet and board feet in tables 26-33. in the 1968 Wisconsin inventory data; and (3) some

These tables give both periodic and average annual equations give unreliable estimates of biomass forlarge trees.values by forest type and species group.

The following method was developed for estimatingbiomass in Wisconsin: first, the estimated net cubic

foot volumes were converted to green tons by usingweight conversion factors for each species (Mark-

Removals wardt 1930). Then, the weight of the bole bark was

Growing-stock removals for products have in- computed using bark correction factors for individualcreased during the past 11 years (fig. 2), except for species and an average value of 37 pounds per cubicslumps in 1972 and 1975. The 1972 decline was due to foot. Tops and limbs for trees 5 inches d.b.h, and over

a drop in products Other than pulpwood -- a pattern were estimated as a percent of gross bole volume.• ' thatcontinued through the early 1970's. In 1975, the Above ground green tons for trees under 5 inches were

recession reduced all domestic production. The esti- computed from a regression equation fit to Young'smated average annual removals of growing stock for tree weight table (Young et al. 1976). This regression

equation uses d.b.h, to estimate total abovegroundproducts was 193 million cubic feet from 1968 through biomass as 80 percent of the above and belowground1978, increasing an average of 2.5 percent per year. At biomass.this rate, the predicted removal of growing stock forproducts _for 1979 is about 214 million cubic feet.

The tables of current statistics in the appendix LITERATURE CITEDshow growing-stock removals for products on the 1979commercial forest land base, but inadequate data Brand, Gary. 1979. Timber management guides andprevented tracking other removals on a yearly basis, marking rules. In A generalized forest growth pro-Removals from land use change are taken into account jection system applied to the Lake States region.by an adjustment in area expansion factors and there- U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service,fore do not appear in the tables. General Technical Report NC-49, p. 56-60. U.S.

°

5

Department of Agriculture Forest Service, North U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service,Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, General Technical Report NC-49, p. 79-89. U.S.Minnesota. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, North

Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul,Buchman, Roland G. 1979. Mortality functions. In A Minnesota.

generalized forest growth projection system appliedto the Lake States region. U.S. Department of Agri-culture Forest Service, General Technical Report Lundgren, Allen L., and Burton L. Essex. 1979. Forest

•NC-49, p. 56-60. U.S. Department of Agriculture resource evaluation systems- who needs them? InForest Service, North Central Forest Experiment A generalized forest growth projection system ap-Station, St. Paul, Minnesota. plied to the Lake States region. U.S. Department of

Agriculture Forest Service, General Technical Re-Christensen, Linda, Jerold T. Hahn, and Rolfe A. port NC-49, p. 1-4. U.S. Department of Agriculture

Leafy. 1979. Data base. In A generalized forest Forest Service, North Central Forest Experimentgrowth projection system applied to the Lake Station, St. Paul, Minnesota.States region. U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service, General Technical Report NC-49, Markwardt, L. J. 1930. Comparative strength proper-p. 16-21. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest ties of woods grown in the United States. U.S.Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin 158,St. Paul, Minnesota. 38 p.

Hahn, Jerold T., and Rolfe A. Leafy. 1979. Potential

diameter growth function. In A generalized forest Munro, D. D. 1974. Forest Growth Models- A prog-growth projection system applied to the Lake States nosis. Royal College of Forestry, Research Note 30,region. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Set- 379 p. Stockholm, Sweden.vice, General Technical Report NC-49, p. 22-26.

. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service,North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Smith, W. B., and Gerhard K. Raile. 1979. FREP:Minnesota. Application of the tree growth projection system for

inventory update. In Forest Resource InventoriesHahn, Jerold T., David M. Belcher, Margaret R. Workshop Proceedings 1:223-230. July 23-26, 1979.

Holdaway, Gary J. Brand, and Stephen R. Shirley. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.1979. FREP 78: Description of the updated treegrowth projection system. In 1979 workshop on Spencer, John S., Jr., and Harry W. Thorne. 1972.Forest Resources Inventories I:211-222. Wisconsin's 1968 timber resource -- a perspective.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Re-Holdaway, Margaret R., Rolfe A. Leafy, and Jerrilyn source Bulletin NC-15, 80 p. U.S. Department of

LaVarre Thompson. 1979. Estimating mean stand Agriculture Forest Service, North Central Forestcrown ratio from stand variables. In A generalized Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minnesota.

•forest growth projection system applied to the Lake

States region. U.S. Department of Agriculture For- U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1978.• est Service, General Technical Report NC-49, p. 27- Forest statistics of the United States, 1977 _ re-

30. U.S_ Department of Agriculture Forest Service, view draft. 133 p.North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul,Minnesota. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the

Census. Current Industrial Reports, LumberLeafy, Rolfe A., and Margaret R. Holdaway. 1979. Production and Mill Stocks. MA-24T(67-78)-1.

Modifier function. In A generalized forest growthprojection system applied to the Lake States region. Young, H. E. 1976. A summary and analysis of weightU.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, table studies. In Oslo Biomass Studies. p. 253-282.

•General Technical' Report NC-49, p. 31-38. U.S. Life Sciences and Agricultural Experiment Station,Department of Agriculture Forest Service, North University of Maine, Orono, Maine.Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul,

Minnesota. Young, H. E., L. E. Hoar, and T. C. Tryon. 1976. Aforest biomass inventory of some public land in

Leafy, Rolfe A., Jerold T. Hahn, and Roland G. Buch- Maine. In Oslo Biomass Studies. p. 285-302. Lifeman. 1979. Tests, In A generalized forest growth Sciences and Agricultural Experiment Station, Uni-

projection system applied to the Lake States region, versity of Maine, Orono, Maine..

,

APPENDIX.

DEFINITION OF TERMS Tree ClassesAll live trees.--Growing-stock, rough and rotten

Land-Use Classes trees I inch d.b.h, and larger.Gross area.--The entire area of land and water as

determined by the Bureau of Census, 1960. Growing-stock trees.--All live trees of commer-

Land area.--The area of dry land and land tern- cial species except rough and rotten trees.porarily or partially covered by water such as marshes, Desirable trees.--Growing-stock trees having noswamps, flood plains, streams, sloughs, and estuaries, serious defects in quality limiting present or prospec-Canals less than 1/8-mile wide, and lakes, reservoirs, tire use, and of relatively high vigor and containing noand ponds smaller than 40 acres are included as land pathogens that may result in death or serious deterio-area. These figures are from the Bureau of Census, ration before rotation age. These are trees that would1960. be favored by forest managers in sih_icultural

Forest land.--Land at least 16.7 percent stocked operations.by forest trees of any size, or formerly having such tree Acceptable trees.--Trees meeting the standardscover, and not currently developed for nonforest use. for growing stock but not qualifying as desirable trees.Includes afforested areas. The minimum forest areaClassified was 1 acre. Roadside, streamside, and shel- Sawtimber trees.--Growing-stock trees of com-terbelt strips of timber must have a crown width of at mercial species containing at least a 12-foot saw log or

two noncontiguous saw logs, each 8 feet or longer. Atleast 120 feet to qualify as forest land. Unimproved least 33 percent of the gross volme of the tree must beroads and trails, streams, and clearings in forest areas sound wood. Softwoods must be at least 9 inches d.b.h.were classed as forest if less than 120 feet in width.

and hardwoods at least 11 inches.Commercial forest land.--Forest land that is

Poletimber trees.--Growing-stock trees of corn-producing or is capable of producing crops of industri- mercial species at least 5 inches d.b.h, but smalleral wood and that is not withdrawn from timber utiliza-

than sawtimber size and of good form and vigor.tion by statute or administrative regulation. This in-cludes areas suitable for management to grow crops of Saplings.--Live trees of commercial species I to 5industrial wood generally of a site quality capable of inches d.b.h, and of good form and vigor.producing in excess of 20 cubic feet per acre of annualgrowth. This includes both inaccessible and inoper- Seedlings.--Live trees of commercial species less

than I inch d.b.h, that are expected to survive accord-able areas, ing to regional standards (examples of seedlings not

Noncommercial forest land.--(a)Unproduc- expected to survive are those that are diseased ortive forest land incapable of yielding crops of indus- heavily damaged by logging, browsing, or fire). Onlytrial wood because of adverse site conditions, (b) softwood seedlings 6 inches and hardwood seedlings

• Productive-reserved_forest land withdrawn over 1 foot in height are counted.from commercial timber use through statute or ad-ministrative regulation, or exclusively used for Christ- Rotten trees._Live trees (any size) of commer-mas tree production, cial species that do not contain a merchantable 12-

foot saw log or two noncontiguous 8-foot or longer sawNonforest land.--and that has never supported logs, now or prospectively, because of rot (that is,

forests, and land formerly forested where forest use is when more than 50 percent of the cull volume of the•prec!uded by development for nonforest uses, such as tree is rotten).cropland, improved pasture, residential areas, and

I city parks. Also includes improved roads and adjoin- Rough trees'--Live trees that do not contain atI least one merchantable 12-foot saw log or two noncon-ing rights-of-way, powerline clearings, and certain

tiguous 8-foot or longer saw logs, now or prospectively,areas of water classified by the Bureau of Census asland. Unimproved roads, streams, canals, and because of roughness and poor form, as well as all livenonforest strips in forest areas must be more than 120 noncommercial species.feet wide, and clearings in forested areas must be more Short-log (rough) trees.--Sawtimber-sizedthan 1 acre in size, to qualify as nonforest land. trees of commercial species that contain at least one

7

merchantable 8- to 11-foot saw log but not a 12-foot Nonstocked areas.--Commercial forest land on

saw log. which stocking of growing-stock trees is less than 16.7

Stocking percent.The degree of utilization of land by trees as mea- Other Classifications

sured in terms of basal area and/or the number of Site index.--An expression of forest site qualitytrees in a stand compared to the basal area and/or based on the height of a free-growing dominant ornumber of trees required to utilize fully the growth codominant tree of a representative species in the

potential of the land. forest type at age 50.

A stocking percent of 100 indicates full utilization Site classes.--A classification of forest land in

of the site and is equivalent to 80 square feet of basal terms of inherent capacity to grow crops of industrialarea per acre in trees 5 inches d.b.h, and larger. In a wood expressed in cubic-foot growth per acre per year.stand of trees less than 5 inches d.b.h., a stockingpercent of 100 would indicate that the present number Stand-age.--Age of the main stand. Main standof trees is sufficient to produce 80 square feet of basal refers to trees of the dominant forest type and stand-_area per acre when the trees do reach 5 inches d.b.h, size class.

Stocking of all live trees, growing-stock trees, and Basal area.--The area in square feet of the crosssection at breast height of a single tree. When thedesirable trees are recorded separately and stands are

grouped into the following stocking classes, basal area of all the trees in a stand are summed, theresult is usually expressed as square feet of basal area

Stocking Classes per acre.

Overstocked stands.--Stands in which stocking Forest Typesof trees is 133 percent or more.A classification of forest land based upon the spe-

Fully-stocked stands.--Stands in which stock- cies forming a plurality of live-tree stocking. Majoring of trees is from 100 to 133 percent, forest types in Wisconsin are:

Medium-stocked stands.--Stands in which Jack pine.--Forests in which pine species corn-

stocking of trees is from 60 to 100 percent, prise a plurality of the live-tree stocking, with jackpine the most common. (Common associates include

Poorly-stocked stands.--Stands in which aspen, white birch, maple, balsam fir, cherry, andstocking of trees is from 16.7 to 60 percent, oak.)

Nonstocked areas.--Commercial forest land on Red pine.--Forests in which pine species comprisewhich stocking of trees is less than 16.7 percent, a plurality of the live-tree stocking, with red pine the

Stand-size Classes most common. (Common associates include aspen,white birch, maple, balsam fir, and red oak).Stand.--A growth of trees on a minimum of I acre

of forest land that is stocked by forest trees of any size. White pine.--Forests in which pine species com-

Sawtimber stands.--Stands at least 16.7 per- prise a plurality of the live-tree stocking, with easternwhite pine the most common. (Common associatescent stocked with growing-stock trees, with half or

• more of this stocking in sawtimber or poletimber trees include hemlock, aspen, white and yellow birch, andand with sawtimber stocking at least equal to pole- maple.)

timber stocking. Balsam fir-white spruce.--Forests in whichbalsam fir or white spruce, singly or in combination,Poletimber stands.--Stands at least 16.7 per-

cent stocked with growing-stock trees, and with half comprise a plurality of the live-tree stocking. (Corn-or more of this stocking in sawtimber and/or mon associates include white-cedar, black spruce,poletimber trees and with poletimber stocking tamarack, maple, birch, hemlock, and aspen.)

exceeding that of sawtimber. Black spruce.--Forests in which swamp conifers

Sapling-seedling stands.--Stands at least 16.7 (black spruce, tamarack, and northern white-cedar)

percent stocked with growing-stock trees and with comprise a plurality of the live-tree stocking, withsaplings and/or seedlings comprising more than half black spruce the most common.

Iof this stocking. Northern white-cedar.--Forests in which J

i

. .

swamp conifers comprise a plurality of live-tree stock- bark or to the point where the central stem breaks intoing, with northern white-cedar the most common, limbs.

Tamarack.--Forests in which swamp coniferscomprise a plUrality of live-tree stocking, with tama- Growth and Mortalityrack the most common.

Net volume growth of growing stock.--TheOak-hickory.--Forests in which upland oaks or annual change in volume of sound wood in live grow-

hickories, singly or in combination, comprise a plurali- ing-stock and sawtimber trees and total volume ofty of the live-tree stocking. (Common associates in- trees entering these classes through ingrowth, less

I clude aspen, cherry, balsam fir, elm, maple, and white volume losses resulting from natural causes.birch.)

Net annual growth of sawtimber.--The annu-Elm-ash-cottonwood.DForests in which low- al change in volume of live sawtimber trees and the

land elm, ash, or cottonwood, singly or in combina- total volume of trees reaching sawtimber size, lesstion, comprise a plurality of the .live-tree stocking, volume losses resulting from natural causes.(Common associates include maple, basswood, andriver birch.) These forests may be subtyped cotton- Mortality of growing stock.--The volume ofwood when it is the most common species, sound wood in growing-stock trees dying annually

from natural causes. Natural causes include fire, in-Maple-beech-birch.- Forests in which maple, sects, disease, animal damage, weather, and

beech, yellow birch, or upland elm, singly or in combi- suppression.nation, comprise a plurality of the live-tree stocking.(COmmon associates include hemlock, elm, basswood, Mortality of sawtimber.--The net board-footwhite pine, and white and yellow birch.) Locally this volume of sawtimber trees dying annually from natu-type is called "northern hardwoods." ral causes.

Aspen.--Forests in which a mixture of quaking orbigtooth aspen or balsam poplar, singly or in combina- Timber Removalstion, Comprise a plurality of the live-tree stocking.(Common associates include maple, white birch, bal- Timber removals from growing stock.--Thesam fir, red and northern pin oak, and cherry.) volume of sound wood in growing-stock trees removed

annually for forest products (including roundwoodPaper birch.--Forests in which paper birch corn- products and logging residues) and for other removals.

prises a plurality of the live-tree stocking. (Common Roundwood products are logs, bolts, or other roundassociates include aspen, maple, balsam fir, red and sections cut and used from trees. Logging residues arenorthern pin oak, and cherry.) the unused portions of cut trees plus unused trees

killed by logging. Other removals are growing-stock

Timber Volume trees removed but not utilized for products or treesleft standing but "removed" from the commercial

Volume of growing stock.--The volume of forest land classification by land use change--exam-. sound wood in the bole of growing-stock trees 5 inches pies are removals from cultural operations such as, d.b.h, and over, from a 1-foot stump to a minimum of timber stand improvement work, land clearing, and

4-inch top diameter outside bark, or to the point changes in land use.

where the central stem breaks into limbs. Growing- Timber removals from sawtimber.--The netI

stock volumes are shown in cubic feet. Conversion to board-foot volume of live sawtimber trees removed for_ standard Cordsmay be accomplished by a factor of 79 forest products annually (including roundwood prod-

cubic feet per solid wood cord. ucts and logging residues) and for other removals.

Volume of sawtimber.--Net volume of the saw Timber products output.--All timber productslog portion of live sawtimber trees in board feet, cut from roundwood, and byproducts of wood manu-International 1/4-inch rule, from stump to a minimum facturing plants. Roundwood products include logs,

•7 inches top diameter outside bark for softwoods and 9 bolts, or other round sections cut from growing-stockinches for hardwoods, trees, cull trees, salvable dead trees, trees on nonforest

Upper stem portion.--That part of the bole of land, noncommercial species, sapling-size trees, andsawtimber trees above the merchantable sawtimber limbwood. Byproducts from primary manufacturingtop to a minimum top diameter of 4 inches outside plants include slabs, edgings, trimmings, miscuts,

.

9IiI

sawdust, Shavings, veneer cores and clippings, and Northern pin oak ................. Quercus ellipsoidalispulpmill screenings that are used as pulpwood chipsor other products. Hickory:

Bitternut hickory ....................... Carya cordiformisPlant byproducts.--Wood products, such as Shagbark hickory .................................. Carya ovata

pulpwood chips, obtained incidental to production ofYellow birch ............................. Betula alleghaniensis

other manufactured products. Plant residues.--Woodmaterials from manufacturing plants not utilized for Hard maple:some product. Black maple .......................................... Acer nigrum

Sugar maple ................................... Acer saccharum

PRINCIPAL TREE SPECIES Softmaple:Red maple ............................................ Acer rubrum

IN WISCONSIN Silver maple ................................ Acer saccharinum

Softwoods: American beech ............................... Fagus grandifolia

White and red pines Ash:Black ash.......................................... Fraxinus nigra

Eastern white pine ............................ Pinus strobus White ash ................................ Fraxinus americanaRed pine ............................................ Pinus resinosa

Green ash ......................... Fraxinus pennsylvanicaJack pine ................................. Pinus banksiana

Cottonwood and aspen:Spruce and balsam fir: Balsam poplar ....................... Populus balsamifera

White spruce ....................................... Picea glauca Bigtooth aspen .................. Populus grandidentataBlack spruce ..................................... Picea mariana Quaking aspen ....................... Populus tremuloidesBalsam fir ....................................... Abies balsamea Eastern cottonwood ................... Populus deltoides

Eastern hemlock ............................ Tsuga canadensis American basswood .......................... Tilia americana

Other eastern softwoods: Black walnut ......................................... Juglans nigraTamarack ............................................ Larix laricina Black cherry ...................................... Prunus serotina

Northern white-cedar ............... Thuja occidentalis American elm ................................. Ulmus americanaRock elm ............................................ Ulmus thomasii

Other softwoods: Slippery elm ............................................ Ulmus rubraScotch pine ..................................... Pinus sylvestris Paper birch ..................................... Betula papyriferaEastern redcedar .................. Juniperus virginiana Butternut ............................................. Juglans cinereaNorway spruce........................................ Picea abies

Other hardwoods:Hardwoods: Hackberry ................................... Celtis occidentalis

White oaks: American sycamore ..............Platanus occidentalis

White oak ............................................. Quercus alba Red mulberry ....................................... Morus rubraBur oak................................... Quercus macrocarpa Blackgum ......................................... Nyssa sylvaticaChinkapin oak ................... Quercus muehlenbergii Black willow ........................................... Salix nigraSwamp white oak .......................... Quercus bicolor Boxelder .............................................. Acer negundo

Honeylocust ........................... Gleditsia triacanthosSelect red oaks: Black locust ......................... Robinia pseudoacacia

Northern red oak ............................ Quercus rubra River birch ............................................ Betula nigra

Other red oaks: Northern catalpa .......................... Catalpa speciosa

Black oak ...................................... Quercus velutina

10

11

14-

15

16|

+O• ,-_OCDC) C) (D C) C) CD C _ (D,-_C) C)(DOCDCDOOOOOOOOOOP-40 O O,I oO

_ho r,9

' N

OOh 04 C) (_ O C) (D o,J C) (D (D _ O CO C) (D ,-_ _D 04 C_ (D O O C) C) O C) O C) O r-- C) (D• • ¢%1 Owl 04 04 ,.-4 r--

(mOO0400

OO"I o91x)(DCCDOO%OC)C) I-.- ,_l"tXb C) (D Ckl ,--llx_ 0414% ,::l"c%IOOC),_C)C)O ohC) (D _ c,9• • 0"_ ,-4 ,-4 04 ,--i0_. cxJC) ,--i 04 oh ,--

(',')co ,--4 ,--i ,.-4 ,--4 ,_- qjckJ t'kJ >

4-,0

I'.- 0 "_oO (I)

Oh (DOh O0,--_OC) OO_DOOO _ ,_'COoOC) OO--4¢'9Oc'_OOC)r--_I-OOOr-- e,_ (D cO (m.,-4 • , Ix_04 f'_ ,--4 O4{%j {kl %O ,--I ,-4 od O vl

C_ ,--.icxJ ,--4 Ckl ,--4 IX_ 0JcxJ c%1 K.%O

,--4l 0%

" 00% O0_nO,_l'OO,_l'OOO O IX_OOOCOCOOOO0CklOO,_',_I'%OOOO00¢_ O OO ,.--4e- • • ,_I"_" IX') I._ 040 ¢,_ (',9 ,-4 Oh _ 0%;•,- Oh O ,--4 04 _ ,-4 ,--4 O0 OW ,-4 O4 e,t ("C: ,--4 _IO-U U_g,) f._•'- 0%

IOO"I _D f,_,-_tnOO,-4OOO IX') ,_t I'- C) O OC%l,_r _ O,lf,_oo,-4 uc} f,9000Ckl,_l- 0 I-,. ,..-4

,, • • _I_r,. ,--e _ I.,. ,_I-,-4 i-..(:_ i._ (',,'),--4 04 _:I-('0 0%,--4 f,9 ,.-4! i::g'_ r-,O0 ._ ,-_ ,--4 L.,') ,--o kO ,..-4 o4 IX) ,--i 0

i

u

5.- .__J I w

, 4-' ' O_ r,-C),_-OOr--ohOO_C) _D O_o uDr.- OO_tnC),_'OOO0,_l-,-4,_-Oh_D C) tntn,-_ O r-- _ (IJ_J • • i.I')ix_Ix_ ,--i _O ix_ ('_iO ,-4 Oh O Ix_ u')o4 ,--II',-I--.O ,--4,_I-,--4 (v')j O,,_i

I._D 04(") ,..-4 _ Od ,--0 t'_ ,ml" ,-4 Ll_ ,--0 0O_

• • ,-i _ _, ,,i ,,, LI_• ,- ,--4 ('_i (')

tO"10 ('-c- 0

.,--!

OO_ _D_z:}r-.tnOu_tnoh,_-O _o o4,_o0o_tn,-_,-_uno4,_,-_r-.umC) f,_o0OOhoo_ O f,9(_D o_O 4-)qJ ('_t U_ I_ t_l _ O0 0404 _=-I I._ _-I C_I _0 t_l _ Z

u .-_ _ --: _ _o ,-- _-OJ

v)

0

(U

4=) C) O_ Oh,-4,--a_0_l- l-..IX_eO,--40 0% Of_o414%oOt/_,--4%O f,9OO, IIx_ CO_O_'_(D,_-oOOJ (D I"-I r--• • Oh Oh f'-.C) t'_Jr--_ ,--4C'_ _I" IX_ ,W" Oh O,I O_ _O _ O,I _I" IX_ O0 Ckl OO L"} ,--I _I" O ,--I LID ,-4 _r

'-- _J ,---4 ,--4

4--* 4-) (--in

• I- £" I0 tO OOh IX_(_OO0C,_OOr-.OC_Ir-.O _ O4r-- _'OOOf-- _IDl._l-,--l,--01"--O _D O (D C) ,--I,--I C) O f,9W-- u,l • , ,-4 O00_ _:I-O_I I--.,_I-O4 _ _ r,, o4 o% I'..,_I-_O _O ,--Ic%1 ,-4 _O O f,9 ,-¢ I-, O% ,--ioh o,i oo ,--

:3 ohO oh O k(D ,--0,--_I_,)O0 _ _ I'..Oh ,--4 IX__ID O4 O_oO I'--O ,_I"f'_ (",40 O

= ,-4o0 ,...-I GO ,--I t'kJ "O

,--4 ,--IoO kO ,--4 .,-•,- _ ,-4 _l'i(.J

_J_J ,--, . e-l:: .__ 4-)

O I _fO00Ol._O_ll.C, O0040 _ID OO_OOOO%O404_CO,--I,_I-I-..CO0000,--alX'}_DOCO O r-- C,_ L(..) 00_ t"- 0 ,_" ,_t" O_ ,-.4 0 ,._ t'.- _ 0") t'.- O0 I._ L_ t"9 eO _00d ('_ (_0 ,_t"U,9 U_ O0 04 O,J r-. ,-4 ,,_t- O_ _ 0

• . • ,--_I"- O% (v_ O0 _D f") O4, -_ f'9 _ID t_ ,-4 ,--IIX_,--IO IX_ ,_" '_I"_ O c/b _O I'-. IX') Oh

o .-, _ o_ _..-, o., ._,_ _ ._-',.,:;_ _

f,.- u')

,'- 00'_ ¢'0 eO 0 Ur) ',::t" ('_00d t'.-. ,_0 I".. (X) r-.. (_ r... ,--a ('x.i ,_0 o-. 0., (X) o,4 (xJ ('xj ckJ _0 ,--4 oO (DO _ :_• • ,,_t"C 0 0", ,_1"%0 04 0,.I ,"_ ,-4 _m")I'., _0 00%00 I-.. I.'_ _0 ',ml"O_ t'... ('_1_ O,J _ ,-- •

o _._ _o_ _ .C_" _,C ,-9 _-_ _ _ ,-.-,,-t ::_

K. _'0,-" 0

v .._ K.

W"_ 00_ _D(X)_OOI'..O_U_Un,-_ _ CO(v_,_l" O_un('_,--._ O, ICO0 ,,O ,--0 _ ,--0 ,--_ un ,--0 0X_')

• , _C) I'.-_',9(X)Co')O_',')%o,_r _,_ ,--0CO0_ID,_'_9(kJq_-_ ,_,_e,'_o_c_,e_i ,_I-,_i-o_ O_ _ 0

o_ ,W,/_oC,X__.-, ,9.oco0oo,--,m._ _.-, o_._-,-..-,,-9,,, ,_ &,_-•,-- Owl ._

I I"- 0% 0%0_:I" O_II_-_'_I"-'_J" CO O_X:).-404t"),_I'O',I'.. _OCk_O00_O_I'-. O(X) O U') 04 O_ _

0 • , 00,--0¢'_")OC.. (x..I,'-_CO ("')1.'_ I._ L_,_O,--Ior..,,_I- ¢',_ O_ 0_('%1 0"_,_ ,..-0 ,.-g o,.i _0O0,,_- _'_ _ __),, 0(D _ ,-4 r-- e'_O O0 _ ,-_ O', _ O

_, ,--&¢ ' I _ C_e_%£: e_OumO_OCO_ o_I I'.- u_ _")04,-._,_D,_O O%,-._,r, Oo4_t O,::t'o_lO_ ur_O_.t-- CO 04 _r_l I-. _-).,-

-- _ _C-. ,_t" ,--0 0% ,--0 _OI.") 00, lO.I C_ r-- _00'_Od,--a_O0,,:::l- _')o4r-, %0t_9,-00o.,o,.!o0,4_ 0 C_ ,-4 ,-_ 0 _:,--4 W ,--.004 I.'% r..,,_t- O00".r',. L.'%0'_ ,-.-I _O,-_,--q,--a 0'% tx.lr-, ,_-,--IO,--0,_t- I'_ 0". O_ o,_0"_ _0 _ ,--0 o,J 4-* 0

,-.._,.-;e,_ ,-.-_oo o,s _ c_,,::t.,-_,,_ un,,.o ,_ o'_,_-un,-_ o,u ,,::r _o .__J ,--,-- (.J 04 _-I ,-4 I_ (Dh _J

qJ _ "(30 O _ e- tO (D. (U ._ _ O _ _ 5-(.J(.J (IJ _ 0 _J ,-- e- W O. --_ L _.,- (D.

_J -_ _ 5- (.J4-) "10 K. (D (IJ l:_.'_ (J _ u') e" K. "I_ (.J _J

•..,- _J {= (D. CD.W- v Qj 0 _ .. _ &. _J X:_ ID.I_. ID.O ",-(- "0 "_ _e- _ _ (IJ rO _J .(D4_U'} _e-.,- u_ u_ -_ 04..) cn 4-) tl_ 0 K. _ _ _ _4:_4.) _0 e- _ _ e- _.,- 4-) ",- cO

tJ I-- e" _J _ (",-- _ -- (:_ (" _J 4._.,- _ _ 0 qJ g') tO 0 _"- -_ _ ::},--,--,-- 4.a 0

0 ,_ ,--

19

19

20.

|

+

• n'> un ¢0 ooo'b cO i-,. un I._

_-i I-ii',.

i--ii

¢:::•,- 0'_¢0 M'_ ,-4 _0 nqur) u_O0 ¢¢ ,¢1" ,-< f_ 0'_

¢' 0ul.n

•,- i

. • r,,, u') _ _ ('o o.,') _ .--o r,,. O_ oO _0 od 0',_ _ ur)(',")CO 0"_ ,-.4 ,-.01 ¢_1_ O_ O_ ¢1- 0'_ ¢_- tZ) CX:) ¢I" I',,. _ M')

• , v) C_l ¢_1 ,_ ,, a, •

p.-u

fh. . I

gd_ _ d _ m

c !

• • n') ¢0 _ _z) _'- ¢1- C) o'_ u') _D _0 _¢) un ,¢1- ou 0

0_. _ !

(I;

|0 m

• e_ e e o_

0 ChC) _J _ _ ¢_J_ ¢_u

0

¢3

•_ 0GI e_

. 0 S,-_ "," 1=: _I _0 ¢1,-, !- (lp I=: 0 ,__

_ 0 (u _.. _ ,,, o s- I-- 0 _ u s-. o o .c o s- o..- _.._.._ s.. o I--

•,-_ _. _ _•," "_3 ¢.)',- _,-" "-_.,-,-- e- t.),'- S.._- ¢) _",-- .I-_ _.0")_ tn .1._ I=._: C:: U') U1_._ _ • _C__" el) .I-_.,-- Q.) _:_ 0 _ U_ _ 0 ¢1",-- _ _ _,--,'-,-" .I-_ 0

28

OOOOO_'_9OOOO ") OOOOOO,-_OOOC) OOOOOOOOO O ,....4 _'_ >

O_ 04 O4 _ ,-I ,_" 4--*OO U

a.W

I Qj

I_- O_C0 09 O,_ O4_ 04 04 _ o,_ _ O _ %0' O_ 040') ,_ ,, _ ,_

7 .... .-T d _ m Q.CO

I n _O0% ! c•-4 OO_ ooOOOOOO_OOO 04 t'-O_OOU'_'_'O_O0%OOOOOOO_Oo4 O O o_l

• • CO r... ,_D ,.-_,,_t"O0 ,,_t-,_- r.. ,,-.__ ,,_t" O ,--iO40 ¢0

C: O4OJ

C

_ u

• • _r_ r-. ¢'O _O _'O4 ,-4 _') o4 t-. o4 O0 _" oO t-. O40 O _O,-IO4 t_. (%J OJ 04 O_(X) _O (X) O4 r...o4 _ _o ,-_ ,_I-_ _o

,.-4 ,-.4 ¢/I

u O

4-) ,--' O_O O 0% O,I 04 _I" ,-_ O CO CO O% (X) LO ,-_ ,--_UO ,_t",-_ _ (X) O

C_ ,,-4 _ ",--

"'- _: 4-,*"_ I ' z

• • CO %0 04 t--. ; C,9 0'_ e_l O_ ¢_ _ID ,--I ¢_J_O_ ,---I O C) Od O% _O ,--_LO I_

cn ,--4,-4 ,, _ ,_ ,, (])

_ ,1_ ' _"

_J • • _O O_" _oa3 ur% o4 o% cO t--,--__- o4 o_ _o u% _o ,-_ o4 o0 ,_- o_ ur_t-. t-. o_ _-

",:, --. = ,-: _ g ,-2 ..... ,_,C " =

' • ,1_ i 0

"- J:_ ,,.,, ¢'_ "¢1" t.O 0,1 f'-. _ ,,_" I_ f,,, ,_- ,.-I _ I._ _ (%1 04 O_ CO ,--I P',- 0'_ O_ O _O ,--_¢"_ OO P-.LO ,--¢ 0% _ Z,% m_ o, ._,--m _m.= ,,,,._4 ,W,Z-9_ .-,o _o_ C: "

t,) _ I

_J O , , rO O40_ _') 0,_ _O ,_- _O _'- t,_ O (:O P.- t'--_O O O9 _ t_- ,--40J _ C0 CO CO O,_ _ _ _,% ,-4 _O

rO r- ,-4 O4_ ,-4 O') LO "10_" ,--4 ,--4

O

• • _" _'9 ,-__ OJ t'- %O (X)r-. t-.. C) _O _ ,--I_O ,--_,-40u O% LO O O oO m- o_ Of-CO 04 O ,--

4J 04 LO ('%.I,--i,-.I,,.-ir-. ,_- oO ,W- ro _0 cO C) ,--_ ,_- _0 u-) Lo ,--_ r,_ _,, (X) _ .,-04 ,-4 040", _ 04

4..,.,-

i ,-- i _'_(DO', P-.,--4,-40,-4_O_LO_OO t'-. O_OO'*C)("_'W" %O_"_O4_OU_tX_%OC) t'.-O00_O0,--_ O O_ _O _-"

0 ,_ _ ,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,_ ,_ _ _ _ ,_ _ _ _ _ _CO CO

,--_¢,9,--I ."4 ,_" 0%q-" ,"4 04 Od ,-' O

t_D O0 0", t.") 0% O_ 0"* _0 e_l 0 e_l ,--_ t"- _ID _ _ 0"_ r'-. CO ,--i ,_t" f,90U CO ,,_1-,,_t"OJ 0 14") u') _, 0 " " 0

_- "- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ '_ '_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0. .,-- ,,_ _ (%1,._ QO IX') _ r.-, Lf) 0 ¢_,) t"kl 00 ,--i ,-4 L._ I._ ,--i _0 r_ O_ 00 ,--i O_ i-.. _0 (kl r-, oj %ID0 (:_ _ 0 4-_

,--. ,--i _ r'_ ,--.i o4 ,--_ cO ,-.i _1o (',,') e_l i._ t._ _ o,i ¢_1,-i re:t- 040", (:0 I-.,.o U ,'-4 ,-.-I ,_" 0 O, II 0

• _ -,, 4-*

.'I0

e e-o'_ . ,

.,--I _-'0 v _ "0 >b0 _-_ $- _ I::: 0'-"

I _ e- _J _ K.',- / q.. ,.-- v (I.l'I:_ .,-,--,-- 0 0 _- _ 4._,"- _ &. _ v) ,--- w ,.--

I--- ..-,-- (I) c- O. CI._- v 0J 0 cO ,. ,:_K. _ "_ O.O. _-O "'2__" "_ ::__c- _ _j _ _ _ ._

(_ 04-* -_4-) _ tn,--- tO 04J (1.1QJ '-,',--'0 4-* U V* 4..) Q) 4-_.._ V) 4-* (J t,J _ (.2 _. _.

,_ ou" :_ ,',," ,-_ :_ m m -r I-- =': 0 ,_ -_ m O :z: >- -,- m m < m (.) a. ,_ o'ao a_ ao a= _ o z ,--'-"

25

26

-r---

29

Table 25.--Net volume of all live trees on commercial forest land by tree class and species,Wisconsin, 1979_1

(In thousand cubic feet)

Tree class

AlI Rough Short-log RottenSpecies classes Desirable Acceptable cull cull cullSOFTWOODS- o

White pine 525,006 26,211 470,715 17,302 8,708 2,070Red pine 453,147 16,641 433,319 2,405 529 253Jack pine 616,064 5,353 580,517 26,029 2,295 1,869

. White spruce 155,152 0 154,238 665 200 49Black spruce 147,030 1,597 144,103 1,035 106 190Balsam fir 552,472 1,335 548,138 2,453 117 429Hemlock 366,835 19,041 339,132 3,891 2,249 2,522Tamarack 148,925 1,535 143,810 1,735 1,190 657N. white-cedar 500,544 4,255 476,043 9,366 3,719 7,161Other softwoods 2,332 0 1,757 451 0 124

Total 3,467,508 75,968 3,291,773 65,332 19,113 15,322• HARDWOODS"

White oak 544,778 12,087 441,012 58,156 28,781 4,742Select red oak 1,115,306 66,721 981,236 39,331 20,451 7,567Other red oak 600,068 9,163 435,144 115,039 30,704 10,018

. Hickory 133,873 3,232 122,574 5,596 1,332 1,138Yellow birch 233,347 8,577 202,177 8,589 3,874 10,131Hard maple 1,264,949 38,245 1,105,429 70,896 27,237 23,141Soft maple 903,752 20,472 783,416 67,433 16,087 16,344Beech 24,985 498 18,032 2,484 2,764 1,207Ash 567,116 20,886 517,047 21,252 5,093 2,838Balsam poplar 24,586 1,781 20,095 1,080 556 1,074Cottonwood 26,486 945 22,482 886 1,635 539Paper birch 974,797 17,267 904,089 42,685 4,463 6,292Bigtooth aspen 506,412 39,706 454,114 7,443 1,733 3,416Quaking aspen 1,762,798 36,431 1,597,801 87,358 6,180 35,028

• Basswood 701,185 51,087 599,112 30,999 12,180 7,807Butternut 23,891 254 13,967 6,857 1,601 1,212Black walnut 9,859 574 6,562 2,103 192 428Black cherry 102,006 1,245 72,035 24,924 1,515 .. 2,288Elm 796,920 26,740 675,845 56,405 31,574 6,355

• Other hardwoods 43,369 1,508 33,083 6,662 1,439 677• Noncommercial

species 38,976 0 0 38,700 0 276

Total 10,399,459 357,419 9,005,253 694,877 199,392 142,518

A11 species 13,866,967 433,386 12,297,026 760,209 218,505 157,840

_/Table may not add to total due to rounding.

30

4

33

r

34

o ,

35

o %

36

3T

T-

Table 34.--AII live tree biomasson commercialforest land by species and Component,Wisconsin,19791_/

(In thousand green tons)

\

" component 'IT

I AI1 Growing- Growing-stock CulI CulI tops 1- to 5-inch

I Species components stock boles tops and limbs boles • and limbs treesSOFTWOODS"i White pine_ 19,173 11,140 5,214 741 556 1,523

I Red pine 22,354 11,991 6,582 122 141 3,517jack pine 37,851 17,383 8,280 1,202 1,368 9,619Wh}te spruce 5,934 3,100 1,545 25 37 1,226B1ack spruce 11,674 2,734 1,339 33 38 7,530Balsam fir 33,155 14,108 6,817 105 147 11,978

. Hemlock 15,112 9,157 4,356 296 319 983Tamarack 8,098 3,769 2,075 107 145 2,002N. white-cedar 18,943 8,079 4,276 434 484 5,670Other softwoods 149 46 21 18 15 49

. Total 172,442 81,508 40,504 3,083 3,250 44,097HARDWOODS-White oak 32,954 16,246 7,245 3,667 2,807 2,990Select red oak 60,561 37,025 16,951 2,611 2,027 1,946Other red oak 37,682 16,013 7,372 6,126 4,435 3,736|

. Hickory . 8,533 4,572 1,952 330 255 1,423Yel low birch 14,127 6,845 3,377 880 953 2,072Hard-maple 83,817 36,346 16,864 4,224 3,325 23,058

. Soft maple 54,849 22,064 10,071 2,999 2,311 17,404Beech " 1,217 539 239 208 149 81Ash 29,731 15,545 7,400 943 784 5,059Balsam pOplar 990 529 270 73 56 62Cottonwood 1,132 657 309 86 41 39Paper birch 52,830 26,025 12,642 1,613 1,185 11,364Bigtooth aspen 20,779 12,920 5,888 376 275 . 1,320Quaking aspen 80,908 42,095 20,467 3,705 2,814 11,828Basswood 29,237 17,071 7,489 1,453 912 2,311Butternut 1,159 435 191 308 167 58B1ack waInut 440 217 95 85 42 0

B1ack cherry 6,100 2,252 977 gO7 449 1,515EIm 40,955 21,627 g,725 3,123 2,201 4,280Other hardwoods 2,158 1,016 452 297 235 158Noncommercialspecies 8,994 0 0 1,218 672 7,105, , ,

• . .. Total _ 569,155 . • 280,040 L 129,977 . . 35,233 26,093 97,812L.

p_ All species 741,597 361,548 170,481 38,316 29,343 141,909

' ' _l/Tablemay not acldto total due to rounding.I

.jI

139

0 C) CO C) O_ n') 0 _=" C_ f_ CO 0 :O_ r,- qa- Ch 0 ¢_ qa"

e-d

C) C) ur) u_ f_ _ f_ ur) _I" ur) f_ f_ :

,.-.4 ¢_

' 40 II, U.S. GOVE_NT PRINTINGOFFICE". 1982-565-846/ 194

-=