Advertisement

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 177, Issue 1–4, pp 419–436 | Cite as

Status and future of the forest health indicators program of the USA

  • Christopher William WoodallEmail author
  • Michael C. Amacher
  • William A. Bechtold
  • John W. Coulston
  • Sarah Jovan
  • Charles H. Perry
  • KaDonna C. Randolph
  • Beth K. Schulz
  • Gretchen C. Smith
  • Borys Tkacz
  • Susan Will-Wolf
Article

Abstract

For two decades, the US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, has been charged with implementing a nationwide field-based forest health monitoring effort. Given its extensive nature, the monitoring program has been gradually implemented across forest health indicators and inventoried states. Currently, the Forest Service’s Forest Inventory and Analysis program has initiated forest health inventories in all states, and most forest health indicators are being documented in terms of sampling protocols, data management structures, and estimation procedures. Field data from most sample years and indicators are available on-line with numerous analytical examples published both internally and externally. This investment in national forest health monitoring has begun to yield dividends by allowing evaluation of state/regional forest health issues (e.g., pollution and invasive pests) and contributing substantially to national/international reporting efforts (e.g., National Report on Sustainability and US EPA Annual Greenhouse Gas Estimates). With the emerging threat of climate change, full national implementation and remeasurement of a forest health inventory should allow for more robust assessment of forest communities that are undergoing unprecedented changes, aiding future land management and policy decisions.

Keywords

Criteria and indicators Forest health Forest inventory Forest health monitoring Forest health indicators 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ambrose, M. J., & Conkling, B. L. (Eds.) (2007). Forest health monitoring: 2005 national technical report (p. 76). Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-104. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station.Google Scholar
  2. Ambrose, M. J., & Conkling, B. L. (Eds.) (2009). Forest health monitoring 2006 national technical report. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-117. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station.Google Scholar
  3. Amundson, R. (2001). The carbon budget in soils. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 29, 535–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anonymous (1995). Sustaining the world’s forest: The Santiago agreement. Journal of Forestry, 93, 18–21.Google Scholar
  5. Applegate, J. R., & Steinman, J. (2005). A comparison of tree health among forest types and conditions at Fort A.P. Hill, Virginia. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, 29, 143–147.Google Scholar
  6. Barrett, T. M., & Christensen, G. A. (Tech. Eds.) (2010). Forests of southeast and south-central Alaska, 2004–2008 (# p). Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-xxx. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station (in press).Google Scholar
  7. Bechtold, W. A., & Patterson, P. L. (Eds.) (2005). The enhanced forest inventory and analysis program—National sampling design and estimation procedures (p. 85). Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-80. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station.Google Scholar
  8. Bechtold, W. A., Tkacz, B., & Riitters, K. (2007). The historical background, framework, and application of forest health monitoring in the United States. In Korea forest conservation movement, 2007. Proceedings of the international symposium on forest health monitoring; 30-31 January:2007; Seoul, Republic of Korea (233 p.). Available at http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/27570.
  9. Bechtold, W. A., Bohne, M., Conkling, B. L., Friedman, D. L., & Tkacz, B. M. (Eds.) (2010). A synthesis of evaluation monitoring projects sponsored by the forest health monitoring program (1998–2007). Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-xxx. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station (in press).Google Scholar
  10. Bytnerowicz, A., Godzik, B., Grodzinska, K., Fraczck, W., Musselman, R., Manning, W., et al. (2004). Ambient ozone in forests of the central and eastern European mountains. Environmental Pollution, 130, 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Campbell, S., Wanek, R., & Coulston, J. (2007). Ozone injury in West Coast forests: Results of 6 years of monitoring (p. 53). Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-722.Google Scholar
  12. Chappelka, A. H., & Samuelson, L. J. (1998). Ambient ozone effects on forest trees of the eastern United States: A review. New Phytologist, 139, 91–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed., p. 428). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Conkling, B. L. (Ed.) (2010). Forest health monitoring 2007 national technical report. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-xxx. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station (in press).Google Scholar
  15. Conkling, B. L., Coulston, J. W., & Ambrose, M. J. (Eds.) (2005). Forest health monitoring 2001 national technical report. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-81. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station.Google Scholar
  16. Conkling, B. L., Hoover, C. M., Smith, W. D., & Palmer, C. J. (2002). Using forest health monitoring data to integrate above and below ground carbon information. Environmental Pollution, 116, S221–S232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Connor, R. C., Adams, T., Butler, B. J., Bechtold, W. A., Johnson, T. G., Oswalt, S. N., et al. (2004). The state of South Carolina’s forests, 2001 (p. 67). Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Resour. Bull. SRS-96.Google Scholar
  18. Coulston, J. W., Ambrose, M. J., Riitters, K. H., & Conkling, B. L. (2005a). Forest health monitoring 2002 national technical report. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-84.Google Scholar
  19. Coulston, J. W., Ambrose, M. J., Riitters, K. H., Conkling, B. L., & Smith, W. D. (2005b). Forest health monitoring 2003 national technical report. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-85.Google Scholar
  20. Coulston, J. W., Ambrose, M. J., Riitters, K. H., & Conkling, B. L. (2005c). Forest health monitoring 2004 national technical report. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-90.Google Scholar
  21. Coulston, J. W., Riitters, K. H., & Smith, G. C. (2004). A preliminary assessment of the Montreal process indicators of air pollution for the United States. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 95, 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Coulston, J. W., Smith, G. C., & Smith, W. D. (2003). Regional assessment of ozone sensitive tree species using bioindicator plants. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 83, 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fenn, M. E., Baron, J. S., Allen, E. B., Rueth, H. M., Nydick, K. R., Geiser, L., et al. (2003). Ecological effects of nitrogen deposition in the Western United States. BioScience, 53, 404–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Geiser, L. H., & Neitlich, P. (2007). Air pollution and climate gradients in western Oregon and Washington indicated by epiphytic macrolichens. Environmental Pollution, 145, 203–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Heath, L. S., Smith, J., Skog, K., Nowak, D., & Woodall, C. W. (2010). Managed forest carbon stock and stock-change estimates for the U.S. greenhouse gas inventory, 1990–2008. Journal of Forestry (in press).Google Scholar
  26. Heinz Center (2008). The state of the nation’s ecosystems 2008. Island Press. ISBN: 9781597264716.Google Scholar
  27. Hinds, J. W., & Hinds, P. L. (2007). The macrolichens of New England. Memoirs of the NewYork botanical garden, v 96 (p. 584). NY: New York Botanical Garden Press.Google Scholar
  28. Huebner, C. D., Morin, R. S., Zurbriggen, A., White, R. L., Moore, A., & Twardus, D. (2009). Patterns of exotic plant invasions in Pennsylvania’s allegheny national forest using intensive forest inventory and analysis plots. Forest Ecology and Management, 257, 258–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jovan, S. (2008). Lichen bioindication of biodiversity, air quality, and climate: Baseline results from monitoring in Washington, Oregon, and California (p. 115). Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Gen.Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-737.Google Scholar
  30. Jovan, S., & McCune, B. (2006). Using epiphytic macrolichen communities for biomonitoring ammonia in forests of the Greater Sierra Nevada, California. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 170, 69–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Manning, W. J. (2005). Establishing a cause and effect relationship for ambient ozone exposure and tree growth in the forest: Progress and an experimental approach. Environmental Pollution, 137, 443–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mazaika, R., Lackey, R. T., & Friant, S. L. (Eds.) (1995). Ecological risk assessment: Use, abuse, and alternatives (p. 458). Amherst: Amherst Scientific Publishers.Google Scholar
  33. McCune, B., Grenon, J., Mutch, L. S., & Martin, E. P. (2007). Lichens in relation to management issues in the Sierra Nevada national parks. Pacific Northwest Fungi, 2, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McWilliams, W. H., Butler, B. J., Carroll, L. E., Griffith, D. M., Hoppus, M. L., Lautsen, K. M., et al. (2005). The forests of Maine: 2003 (p. 158). Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Resour. Bull. NE-164.Google Scholar
  35. Monleon, V. J., Azuma, D., & Gedney, D. (2004). Equations for predicting uncompacted crown ratio based on compacted crown ratio and tree attributes. Western Journal of Applied Forestry, 19, 260–267.Google Scholar
  36. Montreal Process Working Group (2006). The Montreal process. Ottawa, Canada: Montreal Liaison Office: http://www.mpci.org/home_e.html. Accessed July 2009.
  37. Montreal Process Criteria and Indicators (2009). Montreal process home page. http://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/mpci/. Accessed August 2009.
  38. Morin, R. S., Prichard, T., Iverson, I., Westfall, J. A., & Scott, C. T. (2009). Wisconsin state forests continuous forest inventory: A look at the first year. In W. McWilliams, G. Moisen, & R. Czaplewski (Eds.), Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) symposium 2008; 21–23 October, 2008; Park City, UT. Proc. RMRS-P-56CD (p. 10). Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.Google Scholar
  39. NPN (2010). National phonological network. Tucson, Arizona, U.S. http://www.usanpn.org/. Accessed July 2010.
  40. O’Neill, K. P., Amacher, M. C., & Perry, C. H. (2005). Soils as an indicator of forest health: A guide to the collection, analysis, and interpretation of soil indicator data in the Forest Inventory and Analysis program (p. 53). St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-258.Google Scholar
  41. Oswalt, S. J., Johnson, T. G., Coulston, J. W., & Oswalt, C. M. (2009). Mississippi’s forests, 2006 (p. 78). Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Resource Bulletin SRS–147.Google Scholar
  42. Perry, C. H., & Amacher, M. C. (2007). Soil carbon. In M. J. Ambrose & B. L. Conkling (Eds.), Forest health monitoring: 2005 national technical report (pp. 67–72). Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-104.Google Scholar
  43. Perry, C. H., Woodall, C. W., Amacher, M. C., & O’Neill, K. P. (2009). An inventory of carbon storage in forest soil and down wood of the United States. In B. J. McPherson & E. Sundquist (Eds.), Carbon sequestration and its role in the global carbon cycle (pp. 101–116). Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, AGU Special Monograph 183.Google Scholar
  44. Potter, K. M., & Conkling, B. L. (Eds.) (2010). Forest health monitoring 2008 national technical report. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-xxx. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station (in press).Google Scholar
  45. Randolph, K. C. (2007). A comparison of tree crown condition in areas with and without gypsy moth activity. In R. E. McRoberts, G. A. Reams, P. C. Van Deusen, & H. McWilliams (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh annual forest inventory and analysis symposium (pp. 107–113). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 3–6 October 2005; Portland, ME. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-77.Google Scholar
  46. Randolph, K. C., & Moser, W. K. (2009). Tree crown conditions in Missouri, 2000–2003 (p. 11). Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-113.Google Scholar
  47. Riitters, K., & Tkacz, B. (2004). Forest health monitoring. In B. Wiersma (Ed.), Environmental monitoring (pp. 669–683). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  48. Rose, A. K., & Coulston, J. W. (2009). Ozone injury across the southern US 2002–2006 (p. 25). Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-118.Google Scholar
  49. Schomaker, M. E., Zarnoch, S. J., Bechtold, W. A., Latelle, D. J., Burkman, W. G., & Cox, S. M. (2007). Crown condition classification: A guide to data collection and analysis (p. 78). Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-102.Google Scholar
  50. Schulz, B. K. (2010). Vegetation diversity. In B. L. Conkling & M. J. Ambrose (Eds.), Forest health monitoring 2007 national technical report (Chap. 4). Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-xxx Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station (in press).Google Scholar
  51. Schulz, B. K., Bechtold, W. A., & Zarnoch, S. J. (2009). Sampling and estimation procedures for the vegetation diversity and structure indicator (p. 53). Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-781.Google Scholar
  52. Skarby, L., Ro-Paulse, H., Wellburn, F. A. M., & Shepperd, L. J. (1998). Impact of ozone of forests: A European perspective. New Phytologist, 139, 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Skelly, J. M., Yuska, D. J., Savage, J. E., Ferdinand, J. A., Orendovici, F., & Stevenson, R. (2003). An FHM evaluation monitoring project: Investigation of factors associated with ozone-induced foliar injury within biomonitoring plots in southwestern Pennsylvania forests. PSIE 2003-5. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Institute of the Environment.Google Scholar
  54. Smith, G. C., Smith, W. D., & Coulston, J. W. (2007). Ozone bioindicator sampling and estimation (p. 34). Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-20.Google Scholar
  55. Smith, G. C., Coulston, J. W., & O’Connell, B. M. (2008). Ozone biomonitoring users guide (p. 100). Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, General Technical Report NRS-34.Google Scholar
  56. Smith, J. E., & Heath, L. S. (2008). Carbon stocks and stock changes in U.S. forests. Appendix C, pp. 65–80, C-1-C-7 in: U.S. Department of agriculture. U.S. Agriculture and forestry greenhouse gas inventory: 1990–2005. Technical bulletin no. 1921. Washington, DC: Office of the Chief Economist.Google Scholar
  57. Stolte, K., Murdoch, P., Jenkins, J., Birdsey, R., & Evans, R. (2004). Multi-scale evaluation of watershed health in the Delaware River basin and CEMRI. In K. G. Renard, S. A. McElroy, W. J. Gburek, H. E. Canfield, & R. L. Scott (Eds.), First interagency conference on research in the watersheds; 2003 October 27–30; Benson, AZ (pp. 235–241). Tucson, AZ: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Southwest Watershed Research Center.Google Scholar
  58. Turner, D. P., Koerper, G. J., Harmon, M. E., & Lee, J. J. (1995). A carbon budget for forests of the conterminous United States. Ecological Applications, 5, 421–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (2003). Forest health monitoring: A national strategic plan. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Health Protection. http://fhm.fs.fed.us/annc/strategic_plan03.pdf. Accessed November 2006.
  60. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (2004). National report on sustainable forests—2003. FS-766 (p. 139). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.Google Scholar
  61. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (2009). Forest inventory and analysis national core field guide (Phase 2 and 3), version 4.0. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Inventory and Analysis. http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/field-guides-methods-proc/. Accessed December 2009.
  62. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (2010a). Forest inventory and analysis fiscal year 2009 business report. FS-949. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.Google Scholar
  63. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (2010b). National report on sustainable forests—2010. FS-xxx. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. xxx p. Draft report available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/research/sustain/ (in press).
  64. Westfall, J. A. (2009). FIA national assessment of data quality for forest health indicators (p. 80). Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-53.Google Scholar
  65. Westfall, J. A., & Scott, C. T. (2009). Monitoring state forest lands in standardization with a national forest inventory program. In: International union of forest research organizations meeting: Extending forest inventory and monitoring over space and time. http:/blue.for.msu.edu/meeting/index.html. Accessed 15 June 2009.
  66. Will-Wolf, S. (2010). Analyzing lichen indicator data in the Forest Inventory and Analysis Program (p. 61). Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-818.Google Scholar
  67. Will-Wolf, S., & Jovan, S. (2008). Lichens, ozone, and forest health—Exploring cross-indicator analyses with FIA data. In W. McWilliams, G. Moisen, & R. Czaplewski (Eds.), 2008 Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) symposium; 21–23 October 2008; Park City, UT. Proc. RMRS-P-56CD. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 1 CD. Available online at http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/33326.
  68. Woodall, C. W. (2007). Down woody materials as an indicator of wildlife habitat, fuels, and carbon stocks of the United States. In M. J. Ambrose & B. L. Conkling (Eds.), Forest health monitoring: 2005 national technical report (pp. 41–50). Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-104.Google Scholar
  69. Woodall, C. W. (2010). Carbon flux of down woody materials in forests of the north central United States. International Journal of Forestry Research, 2010, 413703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Woodall, C. W., & Nagel, L. M. (2007). Down woody fuel loadings dynamics of a large-scale blowdown in northern Minnesota. Forest Ecology and Management, 247, 194–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Woodall, C. W., & Liknes, G. C. (2008a). Climatic regions as an indicator of forest coarse and fine woody debris carbon stocks in the United States. Carbon Balance and Management, 3, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Woodall, C. W., & Liknes, G. C. (2008b). Relationships between forest fine and coarse woody debris carbon stocks across latitudinal gradients in the United States as an indicator of climate change effects. Ecological Indicators, 8, 686–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Woodall, C. W., & Miles, P. D. (2008). Reaching a forest land per capita milestone in the United States. The Environmentalist, 28, 315–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Woodall, C. W., & Monleon, V. J. (2008). Sampling protocols, estimation procedures, and analytical guidelines for down woody materials indicator of the forest inventory and analysis program (p. 68). Newtown Square, PA: U.S. department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Gen. Tech . Rep. NRS-22.Google Scholar
  75. Woodall, C. W., Heath, L. S., & Smith, J. E. (2008). National inventories of dead and downed forest carbon stocks in the United States: Opportunities and challenges. Forest Ecology and Management, 256, 221–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Woodall, C. W., Johnson, D., Gallion, J., Perry, C. H., Butler, B. J., Piva, R., et al. (2005). Indiana’s forests, 1999–2003 Part A (p. 95). St. Paul, MN: USDA Forest Service North Central Research Station, Resource Bulletin. NC-RB-253A.Google Scholar
  77. Woodall, C. W., Conkling, B. L., Amacher, M. C., Coulston, J. W., Jovan, S., Perry, C. H., et al. (2010). The forest inventory and analysis phase 3 indicators database 4.0: Description and users manual. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-61.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© US Government 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher William Woodall
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michael C. Amacher
    • 2
  • William A. Bechtold
    • 3
  • John W. Coulston
    • 4
  • Sarah Jovan
    • 5
  • Charles H. Perry
    • 1
  • KaDonna C. Randolph
    • 4
  • Beth K. Schulz
    • 6
  • Gretchen C. Smith
    • 7
  • Borys Tkacz
    • 8
  • Susan Will-Wolf
    • 9
  1. 1.Northern Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceSt. PaulUSA
  2. 2.Rocky Mountain Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceLoganUSA
  3. 3.Southern Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceAshevilleUSA
  4. 4.Southern Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceKnoxvilleUSA
  5. 5.Pacific Northwest Research StationUSDA Forest ServicePortlandUSA
  6. 6.Pacific Northwest Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceAnchorageUSA
  7. 7.University of MassachusettsAmherstUSA
  8. 8.USDA Forest ServiceWashingtonUSA
  9. 9.University of WisconsinMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations