Forest Inventory of a Whole Tree Harvest: Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest Watershed 5, 2009, 25 years post-harvest
TITLE
Forest Inventory of a Whole Tree Harvest: Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest Watershed 5, 2009, 25 years post-harvest
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR(s)
John J. Battles
University of California, Berkeley
Environmental Science, Policy, and Management
137 Mulford Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-3114
USA

Phone: (510) 643-0684
Chris Johnson
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Syracuse University
151 Link Hall
Syracuse, NY 13244
USA
Steven Hamburg
Environmental Defense Fund
18 Tremont Street, Suite 850
Boston, MA 02108
USA
Tim Fahey
Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University
104A Bruckner Hall
Ithaca, NY 14853
USA
Charles Driscoll
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Syracuse University
151 Link Hall
Syracuse, NY 13244
USA
Gene Likens
Institute of Ecosystem Studies
Box AB
Millbrook, NY 12545
USA
OTHERS INVOLVED
Natalie van Doorn
ABSTRACT:
KEYWORD SET: Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study LTER
aggrading forest, biomass, diameter breast height, forests, HBEF Watershed 5, HBR, Hubbard Brook LTER, inventory, trees, vegetation, watersheds, whole tree harvest.
KEYWORD SET: LTER Core Research Areas
primary production, disturbance.
BEGIN DATE
2009
END DATE
2009
LOCATION
Watershed 5 is a 22.5-ha watershed extending from an elevation of 503-m at the weir to 755-m at the highest point on the ridge.
West bounding coordinate: -71.739853
East bounding coordinate: -71.687683
North bounding coordinate: 43.957100
South bounding coordinate: 43.939945
Elevation
Minimum: 503
Maximum: 755
(Unit: meter)
SAMPLING BACKGROUND
The watershed was surveyed in 1982 and clearcut in winter of 1983 - 1984. Post-cut tree surveys were initiated in 1990 and repeated in 1994, 1999 and at 5 year intervals after that. These data were collected in the summer of 2009. The hydrology has been monitored since 1962 and stream water chemistry monitored since 1963. In 1982, before the clearcut, the watershed was forested by typical northern hardwood species (sugar maple, beech and yellow birch) on the lower 85 % of its area and by a montane boreal transition forest of red spruce, balsam fir and white birch on the highest 15%. Surveying techniques were used in 1982 to install a grid system of 360 grid units, each 25 x 25-m square. These grid units serve as basis for the plot system. Please note: the sampling regime is modified over time to match the changes in forest structure. See the following webpages for more information:
Overview of the Harvest Operation: http://www.hubbardbrook.org/research/longterm/whole_tree/w5_overview/index.html
Map of Watershed 5 Vegetation Zones: http://www.hubbardbrook.org/watersheds/maps/w5_veg_map.htm
Map of Watershed 5 Grid System: http://www.hubbardbrook.org/watersheds/w5_grid_elevations.htm.
DATA DESCRIPTION
In 2009, we sampled a random subset of 101 of the grids in Watershed 5. We used circular plots using the grid point as the center. The larger plot was a 100 m2 circle (5.64 m radius) where all the standing trees greater than or equal to 7.5 cm in diameter at breast height (DBH, breast height = 1.37 m) were measured. Trees between 1.5 cm and 7.4 cm DBH were measured in a 2-m wide transect centered on the E-W diameter of the circular plot (~31 m2). For each tree, the data consist of the diameters (dbh), species assignment, and a vigor rating (live, sick, dying, standing dead, snag). There are a total of 4721 stems in this data set. Dead trees were recorded as standing dead trees (trees dead but retaining most of their fine branches) and as snags (trees broken off above dbh or with only their major large branches still intact). Live trees were classified as "sick" if they had very sparse foliage or yellowing foliage in the mid summer sampling. Live trees with severely declining vigor were classified as dying.
REFERENCES
  • Whittaker, R.H., Likens, G.E., Bormann, F.H., Eaton, J.S., and Siccama, T.G. 1979. Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study: forest nutrient cycling and element behavior. Ecology 60(1):203-220.
  • Whittaker, R.H., Bormann, F.H., Likens, G.E., and Siccama, T.G. 1974. The Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study: forest biomass and production. Ecol. Monogr. 44(2):233-254.
  • Bormann, F.H., Siccama, T.G., Likens, G.E., and Whittaker, R.H. 1970. Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study: composition and dynamics of the tree stratum. Ecol. Monogr. 40(4):373-388.
DATA ACCESS GUIDELINES
Data Use Policy



The re-use of scientific data has the potential to greatly increase communication, collaboration and synthesis within and among disciplines, and thus is fostered, supported and encouraged. Permission to use this dataset is granted to the Data User free of charge subject to the following terms:

1) Acceptable use. Use of the dataset will be restricted to academic, research, government or other not-for-profit professional purposes.

2) Redistribution. The data and metadata are provided for use by the Data User. The Data User will not redistribute the original Data Set or metadata to others without the explicit permission of the Principal Investigator.

3) Citation. It is considered a matter of professional ethics to acknowledge the work of other scientists. Thus, the Data User will properly attribute the Data Set in any publications or in the metadata of any derived data products that were produced using the Data Set. Citation should take the following general form: Creator, Year of Data Publication, Title of Dataset, Publisher, Dataset identifier.

Citation example: Holmes, R.T. 2012. Bird Abundances at Hubbard Brook (1969-2010) and on three replicate plots (1986-2000) in the White Mountain National Forest. Durham, NH. Hubbard Brook Data Archive [Database]. http://hubbardbrook.org/data/dataset.php?id=81 (23 July 2012)

4) Acknowledgment: The Data User should acknowledge any institutional support or specific funding awards referenced in the metadata accompanying this dataset in any publications where the Data Set contributed to its content. Acknowledgments should identify the supporting party, the party that received the support, and any identifying information such as grant numbers.

Acknowledgment example: Data on [topic] were provided by [name of PI] on [date]. These data were gathered as part of the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study (HBES). The HBES is a collaborative effort at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, which is operated and maintained by the USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA. Significant funding for collection of these data was provided by [agency]-[grant number], [agency]-[grant number], etc.

5) Consultation and questions. Data users are strongly encouraged to consult with the Principal Investigator(s) who collected these data for further information. Also, when appropriate, Data Users should consider including the Principal Investigator as a collaborator and/or co-author in the use of these data.

6) Notification. The Data User will notify the Principal Investigator of any publication or derivative work based on the Data Set. The Data User will also provide the Principal Investigator and/or the administrator of the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study with a pdf or two reprints of any publication(s) resulting from use of the Data Set.

7) Disclaimer. While substantial efforts are made to ensure the accuracy of data and documentation contained in this Data Set, complete accuracy of data and metadata cannot be guaranteed. All data and metadata are made available "as is". The Data User holds all parties involved in the production or distribution of the Data Set harmless for damages resulting from its use or interpretation.

8) Terms of Agreement. By accepting this Data Set, the Data User agrees to abide by the terms of this agreement. The Data Owner shall have the right to terminate this agreement immediately by written notice upon the Data User's breach of, or non-compliance with, any of its terms. The Data User may be held responsible for any misuse that is caused or encouraged by the Data User's failure to abide by the terms of this agreement.



CONTACT PERSON

Information Manager, Hubbard Brook LTER
234 Mirror Lake Road
North Woodstock, NH 03262
USA

Phone: (603) 726-8902
Email: hbr-im@lternet.edu

Data file: w5_2009veg.txt
Description: Tree inventory data for Watershed 5, 2009, at the Hubbard Brook LTER, 20 years after the whole tree harvest. Vigor codes 1 and 2 (beech bark disease assessment) are deprecated for 2004 and later data with overall beech health recorded using codes 3 - 6.
Notes on Data: The data is physically located at the Battles Laboratory, Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley and was last updated in July 2013.
ColumnVariableDescriptionUnitsCoded?Missing value label
1Plotplot numbernoneynone
2Zonevegetation zone. These zones were defined pre-harvest and although the post-harvest regrowth does not necessarily reflect the same vegetation composition for each plot, we have kept the original zones for the sake of continuity.noneynone
3Speciesspecies acronymnoneynone
4SppNumspecies numbernoneynone
5SeqSequence number. Unique number for each tree. Multiple stems of same tree have same sequencenoneynone
6TagTree tag number; placeholder for when trees on Watershed 5 are tagged at some point in the future.noney
0
7Dbhdiameter at breast height, in cmcentimeternnone
8Vigorvigor codenoneynone
9AbvBmssaboveground biomass in kilograms estimated for each stemkilogramnnone
10BlwBmssbelowground biomass in kilograms estimated for each stemkilogramnnone
11AreaArea for plot on which trees >=1.5 cm dbh were measuredmeterSquarednnone
12Notes2009Field notes from 2009 surveynoneynone

CODES

Variable: Plot
Description:
An integer representing the plot
Variable: Zone
Code
Description
1
primarily spruce/fir forest on the ridge top - 73 plots (24 plots)
2
pocket of spruce/fir forest on east side of watershed- 15 plots (4 plots)
3
high elevation hardwoods - 33 plots (8 plots)
4
middle elevation hardwoods - 146 plots (45 plots)
5
lower elevation hardwoods - 93 plots (20 plots)
Variable: Species, SppNum
SppNum
Species Code
Species/SppNum description
1
ACSA
Sugar maple (Acer saccharum)
2
FAGR
American beech (Fagus grandifolia)
3
BEAL
Yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis)
4
FRAM
White ash (Fraxinus americana)
5
ACSP
Mountain maple (Acer spicatum)
6
ACPE
Striped maple or moose wood (Acer pensylvanicum)
7
PRPE
Pin or fire cherry (Prunus pensylvanica)
8
PRVI
Choke cherry (Prunus virginiana)
9
ABBA
Balsam fir (Abies balsamea)
10
PIRU
Red spruce (Picea rubens)
11
BEPA
White or paper birch (Betula papyrifera)
12
SOAM
Mountain ash (Sorbus americana)
13
ACRU
Red maple (Acer rubrum)
14
TSCA
Eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis)
15
UNKN
unknown, used for unidentifiable rotten snags
16
POTR
Quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides)
17
PRSE
Black cherry (Prunus serotina)
18
AMSP
Shadbush (Amelanchier sp.)
19
POGR
Big-tooth aspen (Populus grandidentata)
20
SASP
Willow (Salix sp.)
21
COAL
Alternate-leaved dogwood (Cornus alternifolia)
22
PRSP
Cherry (unspecified) (Prunus sp.)
23
SARA
Red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa)
Variable: Seq
Description:
A positive number representing the sequence number of an individual tree
Variable: Tag
Description:
Not applicable for this data set
Variable: Vigor
Code
Description
0
healthy
3
sick (trees with crown in decline)
4
standing dead tree
5
standing dead snag (no limbs left)
6
a downed dead tree including any dead tree that is broken or detached below dbh
Variable: Notes2009
Description:
Field notes from 2009 survey

MISSING VALUE CODES
Variable
Missing Value Code
Code Explanation
Tag
0
Tree did not have a tag