EFFECTS OF FOREST AGE AND GROWTH ON THE AVAILABILITY OF FORAGE FOR DEER IN WHITE CEDAR SWAMPS‘ Thesis for the Degree 6f M. 'S. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE Lawrence 'Atwell Ryel 1953 ' v. r \ I "’:'.-( t. (, \ r, . ,V - ' - ' "11 Zafllw ) .'_>\;: .e‘h‘ Lwt O‘_J'..‘ ‘ ..t '7'." 5. I“ 3:"); “"4- {'v.“ ' “"""‘* ‘ ‘~ . ‘. I'.‘ . .I' ~ C‘ . gs .. - ,1 1.1 We? .‘ " ' - we“ 35139} _ 19419 2277 I ' " INJJJ‘ ____ This is to certify that the thesis entitled I ”The Effect of Forest Age and Growth on the , Availability of Forage for Deer in White Cedar Swamps" presented by ._ Laurence Atwell Ryel 2,; 5 has been accepted towards fulfillment 1;: of the requirements for -"' M. 3. degree mm 8: Wildlife (7% JW Major professor f‘fl ' Whitew- y . « -- " . ' '* ‘°"35£‘~<-e"¥‘? I "~ {2 e M. -- -. , .~ - .1 ~ w’ ~’ «.5 w ; « r “- « t ' ' I -‘ I 7" E; v. 35' ~11 ’. ‘- ‘ .. 5. El; , . s. o .'-— I . '9 K ' . , 4 wolf?“ ‘ "-"v-k) ‘1' a Q .~-- _¢... ‘- u. l . J. . T. T . .. IQ- A TA n . If Our p.“ I. I I . t ..T . . 0L. .i.’... T I. . .T: . I” .14 .2? ... ... at.» ., E .-.. ...; ... . ... T . u .a\ ‘V’ I. up»... 2:1. Tifns e V ’ e . . . I". n ”4‘ . . . T .T U... . .\\§.I _ . TI. io.aP.., . iii...» we? .T,. 7 s at we? . \T ‘\-u. if ..I .TT_ they‘vfi.f. ...T R .,.r. ‘n t . T. ...r:.. tr, . .l, T. Kr h . 4, , - . ’{ ITITTTl . )- , Til It 0 EFFECTS OF FOREST AGE AND GROWTH ON THE AVAILABILITY OF FORAGE FOR DEER IN WHITE CEDAR SWAMPS By Lawrence Atwell Ryel Ts," A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MAS 'IER OF SCIENCE Department of Fisheries and Wildlife 1953 LIST OF FIGURES. . LIST OF TAt-LES . . A CKNC‘ITL‘ED GLEN TS . . INTRODUCTION . . . Willi OF‘ CCN'DQI‘J’L‘S O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O IDCATIC‘T'S REID DLEICRIPTIOI‘ES OF SSALIFS STUDIED . . COL.POS l HON OF "'1 LL11 (13:; CE:‘!L- ST". qui‘l.‘i':S . g . g . g g . GERIEM’tAL ‘LIL'FJ mCJ-I'c U o o FACTORS INF L UE‘ICING EF.L WEE PRODUCTION. . . . . . Browse Production is Affected Ly Tree Size. Browse Froduc tion As Affected By Light. . . Browse Production is Affecfid 12y Age and Site {guality o o O o o o o o o O O O O LN.LI\:.£L C1331- :15 T L" LUL'LLQLLS ’N'D EU GEE: EON-c3. o o o o o e SU'LJTARY. . . . . . LITERATURE CITED . APPENDIXES APPEZWIX A: APPENDIX B: WHITE CLLJ TPLBES O O O O O O O O O O I O PUaNTE) FOUND ASSOCIATED WITh TAR. o o o o o o o o o o 9 o o ‘3: 1 ”$711)“? .111 . V . vi 9. 10. ll. 12. 130 1h. LIST OF FIGURES Heavily browsed edge at St. Helen Swamp. . . . . . . . . . . . . Location of swamps studied. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . heavy growth of American yew at the Fife Lake Outlet Swamp. . . Closeup of an unbrowsed white cedar branchlet showing the typical fan-shaped arrangement. (Squares are one inch on a Side.). 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O I O l 9 O O . O . Unbrowsed dead cedar branchlets showing the fine tips. (Squares are one inch on a side.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yhite cedar branchlets partially browsed by deer. (Squares are one inch on a side.) Compare these with branchlet in Eli.gl‘;lll“e h. C O C O O O C O O U C O O Q 0 O . . . O O . O O O O . Dead white cedar branchlets in various degrees of browsing. Compare these with unbrowsed dead branchlets in Figure 5. . . . American yew from the Lead Stream.Swamp. Individuals of this size are occasionally found in moderately browsed swamps and rarely in overbrowsed swamps. A museum special snap trap indicates scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Heavily browsed American yew in the Dead Stream Swamp. Indi- cations are that this Species was very prevalent in nearly all cedar swamps before deer became over abundant . . . . . . . . . heavily'browsed, "park-like" interior of St. Helen Swamp. . . . heavily'brcwsed young white cedar trees resulting from being placed in with penned deer at Ogemaw State Gare Refuge. These deer were well fed before the trees were placed in the enclo- sure 0 0 O O o o a o o o o O O I o a o O O O O O o o o O o o 0 0 Deer sometimes obtain foliage higher than they can reach by breaking off the brittle frozen branches and tips. Photo- graph taken in the Lead Stream Swamp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . mean browse per tree. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A portion of the Little Rapid River Swamp which had a stand of mature white cedars. Note the lack of available browse. The white cedar, diameter 23 l/h inches, in the foreground was the largest encountered during the study. . . . . . . . . . iii 3 . 6 .31 15. 16. 20. A stand of large vhite cedar six to 12 inches in diameter at the Fife Lake Lutlet Swamp showing the lack of cedar browse which resulted largely from natural pruning. Vote the Anmrican yew in the left foreground . . . . . . . . . . . Under relatively ideal conditions in the Open with little competition for light, cedar produces its highest browse yields. The above clipped tree from an upland site at the hellogg Bird Sanctuary yielded slightly over 51 pounds. . . . browse as related to size under conditions of 100 percent available light . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iverage number of trees per acre spaced without overlapping . Under conditions where relatively high amounts of light reach the zone of browse production, larger trees retain liv- ing branches within reach of deer. This white cedar of six inches diameter was located in the Little Rapid River Swamp.. Open edges, like this one at the Gould Creek Swamp, produce some of the higher yields of available browse . . . . . . . . iv VI VII VIII X IV XV XVI XVII XVIII LIST CF TEES SITE QUILITY Oi STATTLB STLJDLLD. . . . . . . . COLA "'SITICN CF LI FTLE AAFID nIVLR 81:!fo . . . CCLJCSI'IIOI‘I OF DEAD 31‘1ka Sl'iAiuP. . . . . . . quSlTIOIN CL“ ST. EELEIV S-"L}1I.TP. . o O o o o 0 mm 15905.. PER TREE, U‘I}: riouSL‘D cw ..mus. . . MILAN BE’LO‘XTSL :EF TREE, LLODEL‘UTIT'SLY BRO‘JSJ QWERA'IS LEAN BROLJSE PER TREE, OFERBFLOTT. BED sum 1'3 . TFEE AGE AND Bl I O-ISE o o o o o o o o o o o o o WEIC‘K‘T'I’S OF BF .330 SE F ROLE TREES IN THO STATES OF DI].i L‘EPL::I:T SITE HUJXLITY o o o o a o o o 0 LOCATION OF du‘rtsexm AND IIIDlVIDUAL TEES , , LJL» LLLLITLCLI Cl“ STU1;1I P 3,180 o o o o o o o o 0 RE LAT1 I'N‘TNIFS C). A33 A3. EL” 'Cli TU DIALC‘TTIJR, EMU IVU LAKLJ 815.3? a o o o o o o o o o o o RELATIONSHIPS OF AGE AND HEIGHT TO DIALLETER, LT‘IPIT; “LEE OUI‘IJEJT STUVJPLILP o o o o O o o o o RBIATIONSI LIPS OF AGE AND FREIGHT IO DIAluBTLQR, LJOULD CWK SVVAELPO o o o o o o o o o o o RELATIOI‘TSHIPS OF AGE. AND riEIGhT TO BUTLER, LITTLE RAPID RIVER Sk'sAth . . . . . . . . PEIhFIQN LIPS 01‘ AGE AND hEIC}. 1T TO D PETER, DEFJ) small SHAIJLPQ o o o o o o o o o o o hE-LA TIC NSHIPS OF A US AND {El-SH T TO DIANE TAR, BE}. R CILCE 1'; SEE-4A1 LP 0 O O O O O O O O O O O RELATIONS hII’S Or AG JA‘I HEIGFI T TO DIAL'EIETR, ST. FELEIJ SEIAALLPO o o o o o o o o o o o c 0 19 21 33 36 38 52 81 83 86 89 91 vi A CHIC-“LED GIEN '13 Gratitude is here expressed to the Game Division of the Michigan Department of Conservation for providing financial assistance while pursuing these studies. Grateful acknowledgment is made to R. A. haclfullan, biologist in charge, and the staff of the Houghton Lake Wildlife Experiment Station who gave constant encouragement and assist- ance, and provided facilities with which to carry on the project. Dr. G. A. Petrides of the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State College, largely directed the studies and gave many valuable suggestions on the writing of this manuscript. Dr. L. E. Gysel and Dr. A. E. Staebler, also of this department, are thanked for their advice and help during the course of the studies. Dr. D. W. Hayne of the Zoology Department and Dr. W. D. Eaten of the hathematics Department, Michigan State College, are thanked for their help in statistical problems. P. A. Hypio and G. W. Farmalee, graduate students in the Botany Department, Eichigan State College, identified most of the plants collected by the author during the time spent in the field. The author Wishes to thank his wife for her help in the field during the latter phases of the study, as well as typing the final copies of this manuscript and much of the preliminary drafts. IN 'IROD UC TION During the winter in northern Michigan, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus Erginianus borealis Miller) Subsist largely on woody browse. These ani- mals concentrate in dense stands of trees and shrubs usually in lowlands, when deep snow restricts their movements. Suitable deeryard winter con- centration areas usually are small as compared with the size of the summer range. In the northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan these deeryards must supply woody browse and protection during the winter for a deer population which, in the warmer months, occupies an area 12 to 13 times larger (Bartlett, 1950). A large proportion of Michigan deeryards are located in coniferous swamps, and northern white cedar ('Ihuja occidentalis L.) is perhaps the most important food and cover species found in these swamps. 'Ihe impor— tance of white cedar as a winter deer food in Michigan is emphasized by Bartlett (191:8), who says that ". . . white cedar . . . (is) the most desired, most nutritous, and most abundant winter deer food present in deeryards . . .". Feeding experiments in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan (Davenport, 1937) indicated that white cedar was the only native browse species tested that, by itself, would support deer in winter. Howard (1937) found white cedar to be the principal winter deer food in Wilder- ness State Park, Emmet County, Michigan. Duvendeck (1952) listed white cedar as the second most preferred winter food in the northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Data from other states too indicate that its importance to deer is widespread in the Lake States. Frank (l9h0) lists white cedar as second in importance for providing winter food in the Adirondack region of New York. Swift (l9h6) in Wisconsin calls white cedar one of the principal winter deer foods and puts it fourth (first among tree species) in order of palatability of winter browse species there. Aldous and Smith (19h8) indicate that white cedar is much sought after by deer in northeastern Minnesota. Unfortunately, in many parts of the Lake States the supply of white cedar browse during the last twenty to thirty years has become far short of the amount needed to carry expanding deer herds through the winter (Swift, l9h6; Aldous and Smith, l9h8; and Bartlett, 1950). In the northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan, for instance, Bartlett (1950) estimated that in l9h9 only one-third of the yarding areas had good food conditions, and that during severe winters as many as 50,000 animals died of starvation. The causes of deer food shortages in Michigan and'Wisconsin are con- sidered by Bartlett (19h3, 1950) and Swift (19h6), respectively, to be over utilization of browse by high deer populations and maturing of the trees. Where deer over utilize a white cedar yard, a definite browse line (Figure 1) usually is obvious along the perimeter. But does the lack of a browse line mean that food necessarily is plentiful in the swanxp? Some quantitative work apparently has been done on the effects of the maturing of white cedar on the browse supply but it largely has been incidental to other goals. The Lake States Forest Experiment Station (l9h0) during a study to learn the quantities of browse that‘would be available from cedar cutting operations, computed the average amounts ..‘4 3% Wu. .... .fic. are! .. ’CJQFV A Helen Swamp Heavily browsed edge at St. Rim 1. of browse available to deer (that is below a height of seven feet) per tree. This was done for different trunk diameter classes. They found that the amount of browse on a tree increased up to a trunk diameter of about three inches but thereafter declined rapidly due to dying (self- pruning) of the lower branches. (All tree diameter references are aver- ages at.h 1/2 feet above the average ground level of the tree.) Nelson (1951) during a cedar reproduction study in the eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan determined that in a fenced and unbrowsed area the percentage of available browse had declined 10.8 percent.in 11 years as a result of snowshoe hare browsing and natural pruning despite the absence of deer. Aldous (1952) in northern Minnesota and northern.Michigan found that.due ‘ to self-pruning a series of unbrowsed trees seven feet to 15 feet in height had 51.1 percent less foliage below seven feet at the end of a six year period than they did at the start. Duvendeck (1952),‘working in the northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan in an area not damaged by deer, found that 32.3 percent of the white cedar trees had been self- pruned to a point where less than one-third of the estimated original available browse remained per tree. The presentnwork is an attempt to supplement these findings with more detailed data on the importance of self-pruning in white cedar in the deer yards of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS OF SWAMPS STUDIED Studies were conducted in seven cedar swamps in the northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Three were in Roscommon County, three in Kalkaska County, and one in Grand Traverse County (see Figure 2). The Houghton Lake Wildlife Experiment.Station, The Heights, Michigan, served as the work station. These swamps were located near the center of administrative Region II of the Michigan Department of Conservation (Lower Peninsula north of High- way'M-QO). This region contains about 12,000,000 acres of which 37 Per- cent is in agriculture. (The remaining 63 percent consists of pine lands 8.1 percent, upland hardwoods 60.3 percent, lowland hardwoods 2.5 percent, spruce-fir 3.7 percent, coniferous swamp (including white cedar) 3.8 per- cent, bogs and marshes 0.h percent, and deforested land 21.2 percent (Bartlett, 1950). About 180,000 acres of Region II are in stands of white cedar (Nelson, 1951), mostly swamps. The swamps studied were on soils with the organic portion extending to at least a depth of three feet in all areas'where intensive studies were made. The pH of the upper 12 inches of soil ranged from 6.0 to 7.5 as determined by'a Soiltex soil reaction test (Spurway and Lawton, 19h9). All of these swamps have been cut over to a greater or lesser extent resulting in uneven-aged stands, the trees varying in age by more than twenty years. Charred stumps indicated that all had been subjected to A fire at least once. Bartlett (1931) indicates that this is the general rule in the cedar swamps of Region II. 483 r . if”? Y) a f can .L . 8 to“ j 3 CHARLEVOIX Pnzsou: ISLE 8 0 § ANTRIM OTSEGO AW ALPCNAQ Lccuwu 3 GRAND KALKASKA CRAWFORD OSCODA ALCONA TRAVER 2 guests: wcxrono Fsswuthfiufirl OGEW Etio'J ARENAC MASON LAKE OSCEOLA CLARE GLADWIN BCNZIE‘ Ll. ocuua Who-Wm t== J Figure 2. Location of swamps studied. Region II 1. Fife Lake Outlet Swamp 2. Could Creek Swamp 3. Round Lake Swamp h . Little Rap id River Swamp 5. Dead Stream Swamp 6. St. Helen Swamp 7. Bear Creek Swamp a Houghton Lake Wildlife Experiment Station, The Heights ....... The relative ability of an area to grow trees, that is its site quality, is difficult to determine in such uneven-aged stands. Both Bowman (19M) and Nelson (1951), working in spruce-fir and white cedar stands reapectively, decided that the usual method of site quality deter- mination, the height attained by dominant trees (those taller than average receiving full light from above and some light from the sides) in rela- tion to their age, is not reliable in uneven-aged stands. Relative site quality in the present study was Judged by ring counts of the last one- half inch of radius of dominant trees in each swamp, as obtained by incre- sent borer at a height of ten inches, and by soil type. These methods are among those suggested by Bowman (191th) for use in spruce-fir stands, but similar standards have not been set up for white cedar stands. In the present study the stands appeared to divide logically into two groups which are arbitrarily called good and medium site quality, see Table 1. While these swamps served as deeryards in the winter, the relative degree of use by deer varied considerably. For this study it was neces- sary to classify them according to this utilization in order to compare the effects of self-pruning and deer use. Three general classes were set up similar to those used by Duvendeck (1952): 1. Areas unbrowsed or lightly browsed (referred to simply as un— browsed hereafter). These were characterised (1) by the absence of a browse line on white cedar, (2) Anerican yew (m @2- d_e__1_1_s._i£), most preferred food of this region (Duvendeck, 1952) usually present in the understory and largely unbrowsed (Figure 3), and (3) most live white cedar twigs unbrowsed (Figure 1;) and most dead white cedar twigs ending in fine tips and not broken or chewed off (Figure 5). TABLE I SITE QUALITY C‘l SJ‘LIPS ST‘JDIED ‘— ___. Good Quality Sites Ledium Quality :11tes Round Gould Fife Lake Dead Bear St. Little Lake Creek Outlet Stream Creek Helen Rapid River Swamp - Swamp Swamp Swamp Swamp Swamp Swamp Average no. of rings in last 1/2 inch of radius on dominant trees 5.3 6.5 7.1 903 905 905 100A} Soil type Lupto Lupto Lupto . Rifle Lupto Rifle,2 Lupto muck?l) muck? ) muck?3) peat<2> muck?2) peat2 )muck211) (1) Veatch, Schoenmann, Foster, and Lesh (1927). (2) Veatch, Schoenmann, and Moon (192h). (3) Unpublished soil survey field sheets, 1952, Soil Conservation Service, Traverse City, Michigan. Heavy growth of American yet at the Fife Figure 30 Lake Outlet Swamp. lO Closeup of In unbrOIeed white cedar Figure h. branchlet showing the typical fen-ehaped arrangement. (Squares are one inch on a side.) '- ' ‘ “fgfi’ -_..- '.""-'_'_' l-..'- - } / r——"1 \ \ \ I ‘ T Figure 5. ing the fine tips. L Unbroweed dead cedar branchlete show- (Squares are one inch on a side.) 11 l2 2. Areas moderately browsed. ‘Ihese were characterised by (1) many noticeably browsed white cedar twigs (Figures 6 and 7) but usually no distinct browse line, (2) American yew often present but living individuals less than six inches in height (Figures 8 and 9), and (3) second choice and starvation food species such as winterberry (Ilex verticillata), willow (an: spp.), speckled alder (Alnus rugosa), balsam fir (Abie_s_ balsamefi), and black spruce (£1392 mariana) (Duvendeck, 1952) were largely unbrowsed. 3. Areas overbrowsed. These were characterized by (1) distinct browse lines on white cedar (Figure 1) with most of the branch- lets broken or. chewed off, (2) moderately to heavily browsed on second choice and starvation food species, and (3) understory largely lacking or very open (Figure 10). 0f the swamps studied, Fife Lake Outlet Swamp, Gould Creek Swamp, Round Lake Swamp, and Little Rapid River Swamp were of the first class, Dead Stream Swamp was of the second type, and St. Helen Swamp and Bear Creek Swamp were of the third category. WALL} . E 1 I . ll___ I Figure 6. White cedar branchlets partially browsed by deer. (Squares are one inch on a side.) Compare these with branchlet in Figure 14. \ Figure 7. Dead white cedar branchlets in various degrees of browsing. Compare these with unbrowsed dead branchlets in Figure 5. Figure 8. American yew from the Dead Stream Swamp. Individuals of this size are occasionally found in moderately browsed swamps and rarely in overbrowsed swamps. A museum special snap trap in- dicates scale. . 15 16 e .r‘ i u . \ w T “5...?“ “a" . \qsl.wnv4\P , .e .\ I u ‘v\ ...w..- 3...er .4.. .. v . ..\ i *1. ...xus... v. ... . ‘VP . 2. . \..LL...L1LL_.~.L ... \ . L ..I soav‘ 1"4V¢..... his at. L.. a... .. ‘IA. I‘.\.o VS...” . . - - W.” n .L L.. «H .1. e. . :le V...I£9...- ! 51’. . ...... ... m 29...»..- ......L‘uaisgfivL/I 1, 2 .-. L . .If.’ :1 . . .. .- z . .I . .- . r r......\mb.‘.‘.e.l. 4|~.\UH:.\‘L7;/..-NL L?#.k...,.al.. \ .. ......a .. . . . n L 4 v I .1’. .’ r. G x 7...». gi . . . I. I... .h§dfi“.fll8’l’fla . Muffin; . . . .. ... L .h'.L* (..1I.~I/|...o- .. we». ”.../awn”... .....sngxuflas? U . I 1 y 0 1r -21.... .. 4% .4..... .. aye“ ...... .... ..o ”a...” M\ Ywflfielk. , a... fin! W$Adiu r: «.3. . 1+... L. I, / b ‘ ...I, . a .. ... .4 .... v’ ‘9... . Indications Heavily browsed American in nearly all cedar swamps before deer became over abundant. Figure 9. yew in the Dead Stream Swamp. are that this species was very prevalent 17 _ 1a .. . ...rvg .1..... L-.... ..p». i I .. t. , ... . . .. .Kflhfiufti H. . (4... ......LL ... «$1.: . ...... ......LL .. . .. L....11.a 5a.... 011%» .4 . .Ld U lWhflg. I 5%.5......! .“Mpnl ..Wo «empty-Pr. ... 0.11710. V.‘ vthv (I'lft Heavily browsed, "park-like” inter- ior of St. Helen Swamp. Figure 10. 18 COKPOSITZON OF WHITE CEDAR SEAEPS Gates (19h?) indicated that all boggy areas in this region would theoreticalLy become covered in time with the white cedar type and remain as such as long as water conditions remain favorable. White cedar, however, is not the sole Woody occupant of this cover type. A survey of the relative abundance of various woody species in the white. cedar swamps used in the present investigation was carried out to locate possible study plots. Belt transects ten feet wide were placed in por- tions of the three most extensive swamps, the Little Rapid River Swamp, the Dead Stream Swamp, and the St. Helen Swamp. These were located mechanically east to west and placed so as to divide the swamps into equal portions but keeping the total transect length less than fifty chains (3,300 feet) long. 311 woody Species {we feet tall or above were tallied in diameter classes of inch intervals, i.e., O to 3/h inch (diameter "0" in this study includes all individuals from 2 to b 1/2 feet in height), 1 inch to 1 3/1. inches, etc. for each chain length (66 feet) of transect. The computed total trees per acre of all species were found to range from about 1,980 to 3,850, see Tables II, III and IV. Overall percent- ages of white cedar ranged from h9 percent to 65 percent with at least one white cedar tree recorded in every chain length in the Bead Stream and St. Helen Swamps and 29 out of 3b chains in the Little Rapid River Swamp. Chain lengths which were judged to be in pure stands of white cedar amounted to 60 percent in the Little Rapid River Swanp, Sh percent 19 MN 3% He N N a e OH a mH a a N me N s 0H e e 0H NN OH N N m NNH ea NH N N e N mH ewe NH HN mm mmH ; . NH . OH Ne em ooN a N N e mH HN on.H m mH mH mm Ne aHH amH o m o N N mH 0 NH «H mm ee as Hm mN Hm MNN eon m» magma lumen pom www hmflHm eeereem mH m.Heee eem a comwm MQflxmnd e genes open; 83 81.... NNH new cwoflumea @ Meadaom ma mzohma ceoHume¢ NH oosumm xomam mm hHm sewamm mam “meme eeaee Hemmw ee>o eee 0H 4\m a:a e\m mum e\m ale e\m e.e exm mgm e\m 4-4 e\m m-m a\m NuN e\m HuH .emum monoca CH heemamwm mowomdm H miHx QHm¢m mABHHA mo ZQHHHmomAOQ HH mqmea 20 (\l 3 OHH NH .m xavcmdde mew mucoae>finwm owwflpcofiom hex .m .mmpom Hm. mcwwfleaeoo mpommcmnp pawn poomroa know no women amnem you meSUfl>flwsfi nopsQSOo one menswem .H CV OH H w huumneov lam :oeaoo Hm hhnonmndw mm hhhono ohfim e eeH loom admawm mm hghmn I. H S C ..H-...... moa mowoomw koaafig N eoezmee umwwOIUom : nooemon em>eoH -BeEBHe m maxodm theme: haw mfimiw mo wands campCSOA NH e3 handyman Heeee eeeo eee eH e\m a-a e\m m-e s\m e-e e\m e.e axe m-m s\m 4.; e\m m.m s\m N-N s\m.H-H e\m.o menocH CH hmpoewflm noaooom Essence HH Baa. 21 .mopoe ow. mdflmHHmEoo maoemcmhp pawn uoomtoa oz» so comma «meow nod maesvfl>flvca UePSQEOo ohm mwhsmfim.# me me new; NMN.N ; N OH m (‘4 m 0 mm m@ ma mm 35H \0 mm 00H eH omH 0mm '3 Q) U\ (‘J r! NAN Hmm w mmw eHm NH» 00 ¢"\ NH Nam 40m xenon I H 3 G 1% ......r mmflommm KOHHHa noosMOU emanciwwm madman 6mm Sagan Quwzb mean 33...... zoned ceOflheaa eczema xomam Ham Emmamm heeee eeHee HmwOB peso ece OH g\m mum a\m wnw 4\m an» monoca :H.ampmamfia exm cue exm mum e\m an: :\m mum :\m NuN e\m HuH a\mno moaooam $m3¢$m aamxam admm mo ZOHBHmomzoo HHH mqmH©CH voPSQEOU mam woesmHm * m m hhhoan:w m m anyone mhflh w m m mmfiommm :eHHHe amN.H eNH mMH.H eeeHe eeeream mm m m HH m N m eHeee eem ON m m m m m n modem memeee mmH w m NN aH H4 mm H; HH eeeHn means m m ocHa meHee gem V MN we eOH eeH me e eeteH cmoHpme¢ ma m m m m m modemm eeeHm 04 m m HH N m m m eHd.eeeHem :NN.H m HH aN e4 Nm oNH amN amN emm mHH heeee eeHee Henge gees eee OH e\m ale g\m w-N e\m a-» e\m one g\m mum 4\m 4.4 e\m mum exm NnN e\m HnH s\m-o a; mogocH1£H noamewwm weave a *MMfimw zmumm .Bm mo ZOHHHwQHAoU 3.. Ema. in the Dead Stream Swamp, and 1.2 percent in the St. Helen Svamp. Aggre- gations of trees having 80 percent of the main crown canopy composed of white cedar were classed as pure stands. Other important tree species were American larch (Larix laricina), balsam fir, black spruce, and white birch (Betula papyrifera). These occurred regularly, but in varying amounts. be major shrub species present were speckled alder, winterberry, various willows, and mountain maple (Acer spicatum). Speckled alder was the only shrub present in abundance, computed to vary from about 675 to 1,335 stems per acre. The other species were computed to average less than 75 stems per acre. Herbaceous plants were not surveyed to determine relative abundance, but the majority of the more common or conspicuous species in all seven swamps studied were collected and placed in the herbariun at the Houghton Lake Wildlife EXperiment Station. A list of these occurs in Appendix B. GETSERLL lL TFCIS In order to determine the effects of age and growth on browse pro- duction it was necessary to meisure browse abundance, diam.ter, height, age, and amount of light received for a number of trees in various types cf stands. To accomplish this, 37 quadrats were established in the major types of pure white cedar stands which were found in the swamps under study. Quadrats used in this study Were circular and l/lOOth-acre in size. These quadrats for the most part were placed in closed stands of trees, that is, where the crown canopy appeared to be 7) percent or more com- plete. In addition, a number of single trees from more open stands were examined. Trees below two feet in height were not considered since these were generally unavailable to deer during the yarding season in this latitude. Aldous (19LL), Davenport, Shapton, and Sewer (lQLL), Krefting (1951), and Nelson (1951) are among biologists who used volume estimates to deter- mine bronse abundance. Clipping and weighing as done by Dalke (l9hl), Haugen (19L8), and Aldous (1952), although slev and tedious, appears to be the most reliable means of securing actual measureuents of the amount-of browse present. This technique was utilized in the pres- ent study. On the trees studied, available winter browse was consid- ered as being all living leaves and twigs up to a diameter to one- fourth inch between the heights of two and seven feet from the average ground level of the tree. Field observations indicated that these limits T‘O \J'I :ere the usual maximum limits of winter deer browsing on white cedar in the deeryards under study, although in some cases deer do browse foliage above seven feet, below two feet, and twigs beyond one-fourth inch diam- eter (Figures ll and 12). Clippings from each tree were removed with pruning shears and placed in'a numbered paper bag. The contents of these bags were weighed on a beam balance within the same day clipping was done since weight changes through water loss were found to be quite rapid. Figure 11. Heavily browsed young white coder trees resulting from being placed in with penned door at Ogom State Gun Refuge. mono door were roll fed before the trees were placed in the enclosure. Figure 12. Door sometimes obtain foliage higher than they can reach by breaking off the bri ttle frozen branches and tips. Photograph taken in the Dead small 8'8”. 27 28 F A C 'IORS 1N FLUEN GIN G BEiO‘.’.’SE PROD UC TlQN Browse Production As Affected By Tree Size The Lake States Forest Experiment Station (19h0) has published some figures on the average amount of browse available from various sized unbrowsed white cedars from ground level to a height of seven feet. torking near Dukes in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, they (EXperizent Station personnel and markers of the C.C.C.) found the peak of browse production was reached by trees of three inches diam- eter. No data were given as to type of stand or what was considered available browse. It became evident, however, in the early phases of, the present study that amount of browse as related to tree size was somewhat different in the swamps under study. In the present study trunk diameters were measured to the nearest one-fourth inch usually with tree calipers, averaging the smallest and largest diameters. Hhere trunks were irregularly shaped or very large the average diameter was computed from the circumference as measured With a steel tape. heights of individuals 12 feet or less were measured directly to the nearest foot with yardsticks. For larger trees, a num- ber of individuals of representative sizes in each quadrat were measured to the nearest foot using an Abney combination hand level or Christman- type hypsometer and the heights of others were estimated from those measured. Procedures used in clipping browse are given previously. 29 Data from clipping 61h white cedars from eighteen unbrowsed l/lCOth— acre quadrats were grouped into diameter classes of inch intervals as O to 3/h inch, 1 to l B/h inches, etc. The average browse present was -then determined for each diameter class. Results indicated that the greatest amount of available browse was found on trees in the diameter class 1 to l B/h inches (Figure 13). Other important diameter classes, in order, were 2 to 2 B/L inches, 0 to 3/L inch, and 3 to 3 3/h inches. Above a diameter of 7 B/h inches almost no browse was present (Figures 13, lb and 15). The graph of the data (Figure 13) presents a regular curve except for data for the size classes 5 to S 3/L inches and 9 to 9 3/h inches which appear higher than they should. These two irregularities may indicate that the samples were not large enough to secure a completely representative group of trees in every case. It seems probable that the general prOgress of self-pruning in relation to tree size in the swamps studied would approximate that curve drawn through these data so that it smooths out these two irregular humps. Examination of the data from the individual quadrats separately revealed that in most cases this same general browse trend was present (Table V). however, since these unbrowsed quadrats represented a vari- ety of stand types, the total weight of forage present varied from none to 30,581 grams (Appendix A, Table x1). This, together with the fact that two quadrats had no trees below a dianeter of 3 inches and nine had none below 1 inch, is no doubt responsible in large part for the general browse curve, as described above, not being evident in the data from.every quadrat. Furthermore, there was a relatively small number of trees present in the various size classes per quadrat 3o F IGURE 13 MEAN BROWSE PER TREE 200 -——- unbroueed quadrats r-----. moderately browsed quadrats ... overbroweed quadrats 150 \‘ \“‘ ‘ “ “ R\\ ' II I "’ II I _ ~ \ \‘Q \\\ ‘ \\ \\ On\ I III II II \\ \ \\ flxx - O . C a ... 100 ...-ohm no '98 10 Inches Diane ter 31 ;..saacsa S a afiuatavw e L“. (‘3’... .... .C ‘ . ...... ... . A. .. u . . . . ... ... . .. . . up. . . . . . . . .. we“ ....a . u t. .. ’v n ...e...‘ a . . yh‘u -"\ e . a a . S ‘9: ...I I'.I. .0 Note the lack of the foreground was “me white cedar, diam- A portion of the Little in 23 l/h inches, the largest encountered during the study Figure 11;. Rapid River Swamp which had a stand of nature white cedars. available browse. eter 32 ,..§.£eak.r, . vital. if. (is. . he? «mafia.» ,Fev. - .... / 7f; ‘ Ll tweed...“ Figure 15. A stand of large white cedar six to 12 inches in diameter at the Fife Lake Outlet Swamp showing the lack of cedar browse which resulted largely from natural pruning. Note the American yew in the left foreground. IhBIE V MEAN BROWSE PER TREE, Diameter In Inches Quadrat o-3/h 1-1 3/h 2-2 3/h 3-3 3/h h—h 3/h .g 5-5 3/u 6-6 3/h A1 39.2 0 0 0 I 0 A2 6.0 0 .2 0 3.0 0 A3 0 11.0 0 o 0 Ah .5 1.8 0 15 81.0 95.h 75.2 1.0 6.5 0 Bl 176.5 188.3 75.5 7.0 18.8 0 01 L.0 0 0 0 D2 0 o 0 El 9h.6 t8.0 19.u 5.9 0 E2 91.1 217.2 203.9 267.5 33.0 F1 h.0 0 0 0 2.0 F2 0 36.0 0 0 o 0 F3 103.5 9.2 13.0 22.0 72.3 Fh 0 hh.1 .7 0 0 0 0 F5 75.0 107.3 6.3 0 .8 F6 103.5 169.0 329.2 68.h 0 265.0 0 F7 177.3 773.6 572.0 716.0 1,230.0 F8 109.8 622.6 1,351.8 667.6 559.0 196.0 TKBLE V continued UNBROWSED QUADRATS 3h Diameter In Inches 7—7 3/u 8-8 3/h 9-9 B/h 10-10 3/h 13-13 M. 15-15 M. O O O O h.0 O 0 O O O O O O 0 O 22.0 when compared to the combined totals from all quadrats which increases the chance of getting unrepresentative individuals. For comparison the data from 287 trees in the ten moderately browsed quadrats and 307 trees in the nine overbrowsed quadrats were also grouped by diameter claSses and graphed (Figure l3 and Tables 6 and 7). The browse curve as related to size exhibited by the trees from the moderately browsed quadrats was very irregular and failed to show any definite trends. The height of the curve from the moderately browsed trees lies below correSponding points of that for the unbrowsed quadrats in the diameter range from O to 6 B/h inches. Beyond seven inches diameter, however, the height of the former's curve surpasses that of the latter in all instances but one, where they both are zero. No positive explanation could be found for the failure of the moder- ately browsed trees to produce a browse curve that even approximates the trend established by the unbrowsed trees. Probably some of this discrepancy is the result of the typical haphazard feeding of deer under relatively good food conditions as described by'Burt (l9h6). In addition it appears from the data that moderate browsing by deer may actually stimulate browse production. Aldous (1952) found this to be true. In his studies annual clipping of 25 percent and 50 per- cent of the foliage present below seven feet on two groups of trees, averaging fifteen feet tall, produced 25 percent.and 12.3 percent more browse respectively over a six year period than was present at the beginning of the study. Furthermore this stimulation of browse pro- duction might be even more apparent if there was not an annual removal on all trees such as doubtless happens in the wild under conditions of moderate browsing. It is logical to assume that trees having the TABLE VI MEAN BROWSE PER TREE, Diameter In Inches Wm“ o—3/h 1-1 3/h 2-2 3/h 3-3 3/h 11-11% 5-5 3K 01 h6.8 62.3 21.0 3.6 02 71.0 62.5 2h.8 0 13.2 0 G3 3h.5 26.b 15.5 0 o 0 at 108.0 6.0 189.0 19.8 0 05 68.6 39.8 13.6 83.5 2.5 06 108.0 27.0 0 1.9 G7 33.3 39.3 68.3 66.0 08 19.1 16.0 1.3 1.2 7.0 0 G9 30.h 3.9 0 0 0 H1 136.8 3h7.3 207.5 303.1 191.0 201.0 TABLE VI continued MODERA TEL! BRO'ASED QUADRA'IS Diameter In Inches 6~6 3/h - 7-7 3/h 8-8 3/h 9-9 3/h 10-10 3/h 11-11 3/h 10.0 0 o 0 0 211.0 0 0 50.0 5.0 91.8 0 0 0 28.0 0 0 0 228.0 37 38 o o o o o. mm o o o o o o 0 mm o o o o o 0 mm o o a. H.H mm o o o N. ~.H an o o o o o.oa m.m 4H o o o o m.m MH 0 o o ~.H o o a.; 0.; NH o.H o o ~.m H.ma o.s~ HH ;\m one :\m 5.5 ;\m one ;\m mnm a\m an; ;\m mum ;\m mum ;\m and axmuo «0:05 5 no» «335 page meamnaeo awesommemso .mmms mam mmgomm 24m: HH> Baa. 39 most browse present normally, that is those smaller than seven inches in diameter, would be subject to heavier browsing. Small trees, especially those below seven feet tall, seared unable to withstand even moderate browsing. Half of the study quadrats had no trees below one inch in diameter. The browse curve (Figure 13) for the overbrowsed trees was uni- formly low with the peak in the smallest size class and a progressive decline to the size class 3 to 3 3/h inches. Only one tree was present in the nine quadrats below a diameter of one inch so that in all proba- bility size class 1 to l 3/h inch was of greater overall importance. Virtually no browse was present in trees larger than a diameter of 3 3/h inches. Aldous (19L1) also found that in white cedars of two inches or greater diameter most of the regeneration of browsed or clipped branches occurred above the seven foot line. Thus where the foliage on virtually all trees is severely browsed annually there is little chance for larger trees to maintain available browse. Adverse influence of deer browsing is well illustrated by comparison of the browse curves of the unbrovsed and overbrowsed trees (Figure 13). host of the difference in magnitude between these curves can be attri- buted to deer browsing. Comparison of the unbrowsed and moderately' browsed trees also shows the adverse effect of deer, but not as well because of the irregular character of the data from the moderately browsed trees in the fore part of the curve. As mentioned above, moderate browsing may stimulate browse production. however, trees above seven inches in diameter, where this was especially apparent, were of little overall importance in the area studied because of their rela- tively low numbers and relatively low amounts of browse present per tree. he Relationship of tree height to browse production was not attempted because the relationship between diameter and height was found to be essentially the same in all swamps studied (Appendix A, Tables XII to XVIII). Only those trees examined from the Fife Lake Outlet Swamp were found to differ in the height to diameter relationship from trees in the other swamps. A statistical F test (Snedecor, 1950) of the heights of trees 3 to 3 3/h inches diameter from each swamp indicated a highly significant difference between swamps. Subsequent statistical T tests (Snedecor, 1950) showed trees from Round Lake to be signifi- cantly higher than the trees from other swamps. Browse Production As Affected by Light Light readings were made to measure the amount of light which reached the available browse zone in the quadrats for the purpose of determining the effects of light on browse production. The instrument used was a Weston Master II photOgraphic eXposure meter to which an Invercone was attached. The Invercone is a plastic diffusing cone which allows taking of incident light readings with this meter. Infor- mation supplied by the Weston Electrical Instrument Corporation indi- cated.the Weston meter with Invercone registers light on the scale in units equal to one twenty—fifth foot candles and has an angle of accept- ance of light slightly over 180° (Kenton, 1952). This angle would tend to allow for some changes in position of the sun and still give com- parable readings. In general the procedures of Sather (1951) were followed here in taking the readings. The instrument was held horizontally (light- receiving surface pointed upward) at a height of about 6 l/2 feet with five readings being made in each quadrat, the center and where the four L'l cardinal compass directions intersected the quadrat boundaries. A reading was then taken in a nearby opening as soon as possible there— after to determine the maximum possible light which could be received at that time. Using these figures the percentage of available light for each quadrat was computed for each as: 100 x sum of 5 readings in quadrat 5 x reading in Open This procedure, as described above, measured the amount of light coming through the overhead canopy of leaves and reaching the top of the zone where deer browse is produced, thus allowing sona comiarisons between browsed and unbrowsed quadrats. there openings existed adja- cent to the quadrats, however, light which entered the quadrat below 6 1/2 feet was not measured accurately and therefore percentages of available light as computed above for such quadrats does not give a true picture. No method was devised which seemed to correct for this. Since equipment was not available earlier, all readings were made during July, August, and early September of 1952, except in two quadrats (El and E2) where readings were made in January, 1953. Time of the readings for 25 quadrats were between 11 A.h. and 2 P.M., seven were between 2 P.k. and 3:25 P.L. and one was at h:30 P.M. Readings in eight quadrats were made with the sky partially obstructed by uniform haze so that readings in the Open were only about one-third that on a cloudless day, seven were done when the sky was uniformly cloud covered and only about one-sixth normal brightness, with the remaining eighteen on bright cloudless days. No readings were made in four quadrats. Sather (1)50) indicates that comparative values for percentage of total sunshine may be obtained on either clear days or those with uniform h2 cloud cover and this seemed to be true in the present study. Despite the differences in time during the taking of readings in the various quadrats the values obtained are objective and believed to be much more accurate than could be gotten from a subjective appraisal of the crown density. It should be kept in mind that any conclusions regarding the effects of light intensity may also be the result in part of other factors. Oosting (1950) points out that differences in root competition for water and minerals can influence growth under the sane light conditions. Furthermore, Daubenmire (19h?) says that reduction of light by a canopy of vegetation also results in changes in wind, relative humidity, soil moisture, and temperature. Because of the complexities involved no attempts were made to measure these other factors in this study. The maximum browse per tree was produced where the available light was 100 percent. Under these conditions there was almost no natural pruning and limited clipping studies indicated the larger the tree the more the available deer browse. Since no unbrowsed trees above a diam- eter of three inches were found growing in the open in the swamps studied.only one individual larger than this size was clipped. A tree 5 1/2 inches in diameter from an upland site at the Kellogg Bird Sanc— tuary in Kalamazoo County yielded slightly over 51 pounds of browse when clipped and its associates appeared to have about the same amount (Figure 16). The Sanctuary tree appears to have more browse than the trend of curve established by the smaller trees suggests trees of this size would have (Figure 17). Nevertheless, examination of a greater number of trees in the larger diameter classes would of course be necessary to determine the actual trend of the browse curve. ~ , F“_.- ., ‘,,'. . - ,_ 'o. '. . ‘h ‘. .' ‘ 4 - b 'I '0‘ ,11“ ._. - 7" .3... _-_ . -..- ~-. I- , ~-.-. ...fi ._.-.-, .l .' O, . . - s ,. . ' ‘-, - , I r _ ‘ n .. ‘ '_ -‘ . . ': \ a . ‘ ' ‘ “w 4‘ .-‘?.4. .' ~ I 1 l.‘ -..- - ', 4. ' g I ‘ -'. ' .iif‘fi . #4“; Figure 16. Under relatively ideal conditions in the open with little com- petition for light, cedar produces its highest browse yields. The above clipped tree from an upland site at the Kellogg Bird Sanctuary yielded slightly over 51 pounds. 113 Grams 01' Browse 211,000! 22,000 20,000 18,000 16,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 h,000 2,000 Tv—rT V j ff FIGURE 17 BROWSE AS REU'IED T0 SIZE UNDER CONDITIONS OF 100 PERCENT AVAILABLE LIGHT LS A series of seven trees from 1 to 1 3/h inches in diameter under conditions of 100 percent available light were found to average h.0 times as much available deer browse as twenty trees in this size range where the available light was about one-half (52 percent) the maximum. The single Sanctuarytree had 75.6 percent as much browse as the entire l/lOOth-scre area of quadrat F8 which had 93 trees above two feet tall. A series of measurements were taken to determine the average number of trees of different sizes which could occupy an acre without overlap- ping or adversely shading adjacent trees. These data were then graphed (Figure 18). From this graph it can be computed, for instance, that trees of one inch in diameter equally spaced would average about 1,L00 trees per acre. Using figures obtained from clipping two trees of this size an acre would contain 3,983 pounds of available deer browse. Simi- larly an acre of trees 5 l/2 inches in diameter, each having as much browse as the Sanctuary tree, would contain about 11,985 pounds. Light was able to penetrate the crown cover to a much greater extent in quadrats of dense young stands with 5,000 to 9,000 trees above two feet in height per acre than in quadrats located in more mature stands with only 900 to 1,900 trees per acre. The crown cover in both types of stands, however, appeared almost as dense to the eye. For example, in quadrat F8 with 93 white cedars above two feet tall, 52 percent of the available light penetrated the crown to a height of 6 1/2 feet while in quadrat Ah with nine white cedars, only 0.6 percent of the available light was recorded. Correlation analysis (hagood and Price, 1952) between the number of trees per quadrat and the percentage of available light (percent transformed to are sin after Snedecor, 1950) Trees Per Acre 3.000 2,600 2,200 1,800 1,uoo 1,000 200 FIGURE 18 AVERAGE HUIBER 0F TREES PER ACRE SFACED WITHOUT OVERLAPPING 2 3 h 5 6 7 Inches Diameter 146 L7 on the unbrowsed quadrats revealed a highly significant association (r - .8hl**). That is, there was a direct relationship between the number of trees per quadrat and the relative amount of light received at 6 1/2 feet from the ground level. Results also pointed to a direct relationship between the amount of available light which a quadrat received and the amount of browse present. Correlation analysis between the amount of light (percent transformed to arc sin) and browse on the unbrowsed quadrats showed a highly significant association between these two variables (r I .768**). Light readings and browse present for the various quadrats is shown in Appendix A, Table XI. Major exceptions of the unbrowsed quadrats to the general axiom stated above, that the more light received through the crown cover the more the available browse present, are quadrats B1 and F6. Quadrat Bl had 13.6 times the average amount of browse present in the six other unbrowsed quadrats with available light below two percent, while quadrat F6 had 68.2 times the average amount of browse present in the three other unbrowsed quadrats with available light between two percent and three percent. The apparent reasons for their relatively high browse production seemed to be close proximity to openings. F6 actually had open edges on about one—third of its periphery, while about one-half the circumference of quadrat Bl was approximately ten feet from an extensive clearing. These data support field observations which indi- cated the favorable effect of Open edges on browse present (Figures 19 and 20). For comparison correlation analyses were made on the amount of light (percent transformed to arc sin) received and the browse present Figure 19. Under conditions where relatively high amounts of light reach the zone of browse production, larger trees retain living branches within reach of deer. This white cedar of six inches diameter was located in the Little Rapid River Swamp. 148 Figure 20. Open edges, like this one at the Gould Creek Swamp, produce some of the higher yields of available browse. 1:9 50 on six moderately browsed and nine overbrowsed quadrats. Light readings and browse present for the various quadrats are shown in Appendix A, Table XI. In the moderately browsed quadrats no significant association was found (r = .656). The cause of this lack of association is difficult to explain. The four moderately browsed quadrats receiving less than ten percent of the possible light actually averaged 3.3 times as much browse as did the eleven unbrowsed quadrats (not including B1 or F6)in this light range. This again, though, lends support to the supposition that moderate browsing by deer may stimulate browse production as was suggested previously when discussing tree size and browse relationships. The overbrowsed quadrats likewise did not show a significant asso- ciation, the correlation coefficient being relatively small and negative (r = -5076). These swamps had been so severely overbrowsed that little or no foliage below seven feet was present, even where the available light reached h9.6 percent (quadrat 83). Browse Production As Affected By Age And Site Quality The ages of small trees were determined by cutting the stems at a height of ten inches and counting the annual rings in the field. Ages of trees about one-fourth inch diameter and above were determined by increment borings. Cores were taken at ten inches from the average ground level on each tree. This was the lowest height at which the instrument could be used conveniently. Usually cores were extracted and placed in numbered envelopes. Ages were then determined in the laboratory with hand lens or binocular microscope. It was not possible 51 to age all individuals, since some trunk centers were rotten, very large, or irregular and the centers could not be located. An increment borer was found to be quite satisfactory for age deter- mination in white cedar. The dark winter wood is easily istinguished from the lighter colored spring wood. Although harloW'(l927) indicates that ring counts are unsatisfactory because heart rot occurs in about eighty percent of the older trees, in the present study only six percent of the total trees examined had butt rot severe enough so that they could not be totally aged. As might be eXpected, it is generally true that in a given location the larger a white cedar is the greater its age (Appendix A, Tables All to XVlll). 1ndividual white cedar trees, however, may survive for long periods without hardly any perceptible diameter growth. For example, in the Dead Stream.8wamp a tree 1 3/h inches in diameter was found to be 111 years old and another two inches in diameter was 107 years old. Both trees were about twice as old as the average of similar sized trees from this swam . Less extreme cases of age differences for similar sized trees were often found in the same l/lOOth-acre quadrat. Age ranges of twenty years were commonly found so that where a number of similar sized trees were present in a quadrat some consideration of the age factor alone in influ- encing browse production was possible. Correlation analyses were made on age and browse production of 11 groups of similar sized trees from various quadrats, Table VIII. highly significant associations between age and browse production were found only for those groups of trees from quadrats F7 and F8 of zero diameter, 2‘ the respective correlation coefficients being r = .655** and r I .826**. TABLE VIII TREE AGE AND BROWSE Quadrat Tree Diameter . Tree Age Browse F7 0 (2 - h.5 feet tall) 6 years 3 grams 7 n 8 n 8 n h n 9 .. 111 .. 10 " 13 u 12 n 19 n 13 " 33 " 21 w 157 n 15 ' 105 " 15 .. 13 .. 15 " 60 " 16 n 52 n 16 " 6O " l6 " 8 " 17 1' s .. 17 " 32 " 17 " 7h " 18 " Sb " 19 " bl " 21 " 391 " 28 " 116 " 29 " 106 " TABLE VIII continued .... _ A Quadrat ’Iree Diameter Tree Age Browse F7 0 (2 - 11.5 feet tall) 33 years 27 grams 39 " 391 " hl " 111 " 116 " 282 " F8 0 (2 - 11.5 feet tall) 9 years 0 grams 9 " 18 " 9 " 32 " 9 n 18 n 9 1* nu " ll " 13 " 13 " 37 " 121 .. 35 .. 11. n 13 w 111 " 20 " 15 " 35 " 15 " 37 " 15 " 16 .. 15 " 3 " 15 " 10 " l6 " 23 " l6 " 36 " 17 n 111 n 17 n L10 n TABLE VIII continued Quadrat Tree Diameter Tree Age browse F8 0 (2 - 11.5 feet tall) 18 years 112 grams 18 n 33 . n 18 " 143 " l9 " 36 " 19 " 29 " 20 " 55 " 2O " 6O " 20 " 13 " 21 " 9 " 22 " 110 " 22 " 1511 " 22 n u, n 2h " 511 " 211 " 63 " 26 " 7O " 26 ' .. 97 .. 27 " LS " 27 " 39 “ 28 " 187 " 30 " 119 " 32 " 189 " 33 " 106 " 33 " 97 " 35 " 1311 " Sh ThBIE VIII continued Quadrat Tree Diameter Tree Age Browse F8 0 (2 - h.5 feet tall) 36 years 86 grams h2 " 206 " h3 ' 187 ” £3 " 180 " E1 1/2 inch 12 years 82 grams 21 " 3h ” 22 " 12 " 27 n as .. 29 n 229 n 30 n 65 " 31 " 106 " 35 " 156 n 35 " 7h " F8 1/2 inch 21 years 179 grams 33 " 2h8 " 3S " 18h " 37 " 361 " 37 " 160 " 38 " 370 " 39 “ 251 " E1 1 inch 28 years 1 grams 37 n 11 .. 37 " 163 " TABLE VIII continued Quadrat Tree Diameter Tree Age Browse E1 1 inch 38 years hb grams h1 " 10h " h? " 27 " LS " 22 " E1 1 1/h inch 33 Years 28h grams 39 " 55 " 39 " 17 " L2 " 8 " LB " 91 " hh " 12h " F8 1 l/h inch 25 years 721 grams 27 " 512 " 38 " 320 " h1 " 186 n 111 " 209 " D3 " 586 " LB " 391 " LS " 805 " h? " 910 " E1 1 1/2 inch 38 years h grams h3 " 28 " Lu .. 2 .. hS " o " 56 TABLE VIII continued Quadrat Tree Diameter Tree Age Browse E1 1 1/2 inch hS years 8 grams 118 " o " F6 1 1/2 inch 36 years 188 grams 36 " 113 9 “ 39 " O " 3 9 " 389 " M4 " 33 " L5 " o " 116 " 2 7 " 118 " 3h " 119 " o a 52 " 15 " AS 2 to 3 inches h3 years 16 grams 119 " 52 " 53 " 60 " 51 13 .. S 8 " 17 " 5 8 " 2 7 " 5 9 " ll " 61 " h " 63 " 13 " 63 " ll " 63 " 0 " 66 I! S I! \ II KJ TABLE VIII continued Tree Diameter “auadrat Tree.Age Browse E1 2 to 3 inches 36 years 0 grams 39 " O " 111 " S " L2 " 53 " M1 " 6 " M1 " 38 " 116 " 0 ” 116 " 11 n h? " 67 " 118 " 111 " 59 In addition a significant association was found in the 1 1/2 inch trees in quadrat F6, the correlation coefficient being r ' -t698*. With all other groups of trees tested there were no significant asso- ciations. The correlation coefficients for these were: quadrat El, 1/2 inch trees, r * .379; quadrat F8, 1/2 inch trees, r = .b39; quad- rat El, 1 inch trees, r = .13L; quadrat E1, 1 l/h inch trees, r I -.5313 quadrat F8, 1 M; inch trees, r a .0117; quadrat E1, 1 1/2 inch trees, r = -52O93 quadrat AS, 2 to 3 inch trees, r = -.OOS; and quadrat E1, 2 to 3 inch trees, r = .352. 'Possibly in the two size classes where highly significant asso- ciations were found, minor height differences caused by differences in age, rather than age itself, were responsible since heights of trees of zero diameter, as defined, vary from 2 to h 1/2 feet in height. Small variations in height would be of much greater importance in trees averaging three or four feet in height than those of larger size. Variations in height, however, do not seem to account for the signifi- cant association between age and browse for trees of 1 1/2 inch diameter in quadrat F6. here the correlation coefficient (r) is negative, mean- ing that a decrease in browse was associated with an increase in age. The reverse situation was found in the two groups of trees where highly significant associations were found and in five of the eight groups where no significance was found. Vhile in some instances age itself may appear to influence browse production, overall it does not seem to be an important factor in this respect. Where site quality differed (see Section on ICCAIION AND CLASSI- FICATICN OF STADFS STUDIED) the ages of trees of the same size, of course, did differ. That is, for a given size the averase age of trees from b 60 medium sites were greater than trees from good sites (Appendix A, Tables XII to XVIII). It is conceivable, therefore, that rate of growth due to site quality differences might modify the amount of browse present per tree. To determine if site quality differences affected browse production on similar sized trees portions of two swamps of different site quality, Little Rapid River and Round Lake, were selected for study. Twelve trees from the Little Rapid River Swamp and 16 from the Round Lake Swamp were clipped, aged, and measured. These trees, three to six feet tall, were on previously clear-cut areas and were growing with little competition for light or root Space so that differences in growth rate were most likely due to differences in site quality. The trees from the medium quality site required an average of 2.1 times as long to reach a given size as did those from the good quality site (Table IX). Data were grouped in three diameter classes of one—fourth inch intervals. Although the mean browse per class was somewhat higher for the Little Rapid River trees (poorer site) in two of the three classes, statistical F tests indicated that for a given diameter within the ranges studied there was no significant difference between the two swamps in the weights of browse from trees of comparable size. From these data, then, site quality differences, like tree age differences, do not appear to be important in influencing browse pro- duction except indirectly as they influence tree size. TABIEIX WEIGHTS OF BROWSE FROM MES IN NO Diameter Classes 0 Inch l/h Inch Little Rapid River Round Lake Swamp Little Rapid River Swamp fiamp Browse Age Browse Age Browse Age 132 grams 15 years 96 " 12 " 81 " 16 " lh3 " 16 " LSB " 16 ' 236 n 1h n 77 grams 8 years b9 " 8 " 1h3 " 8 " 119 " 9 " h72 gram 12 year! 173 " 18 ” 150 n 17 n 231 " 16 " Mean: 191 grams 15 years 97 grams 8.2 years 256 grams 15.7 years 62 TABLE IX continued SWAEPS OF DIFFERENT SITE QUALITY Diame tsr Classes l/h Inch 1/2 Inch Round Lake Swamp Little Rapid River Round Lake Swamp Swamp Browse Age Browse Age Browse Age 188 grams 7 years 187 n 7 n 295 " 9 " 313 " 9 " 210 n 9 ~ 156 " 9 " h39 " 10 " h73 " 9 ” 3142 " 9 " 333 grams 8.7 yearé 885 grams 39 years h00"1h" 6142 grams 2h years 775 grams 9 years M72 " 12 " 671 :1 1h n 639 grams 11.7 years 63 - T n?“ T’\’ ‘n ".H’ 71 T.“ r: ‘1‘.‘\ c A rrxrv- ‘~ Irrr “.7 ‘ L‘fIBIA'JuIL-Jii l I ls‘upLgJJLL/ 11-I.'J ._) u'v 121-”! .L_L :15 management of white cedar for deer browse production encompasses two major problems. Probably the foremost is that of controlling deer numbers. No management of w.ite cedar for browse production seems possible where deer are so numerous as to overbrowse their range. In the present study the overbrowsed swamps had virtually no white cedar foliage remaining while forage amounts in the moderately browsed areas were noticeably less, at least in trees smaller than six inches in diameter. Duvendeck (1952) found in the overbrowsed areas of Lichigan's Region II that white cedar had become so heavily eaten as to produce little or no available browse through growth, regneration, or reproduction. Similarly Aldous (1952) found in his clipping studies of trees averaging seven and 15 feet tall in closed stands that even when only 25 percent of the foliage was removed annually, there was a decline in the browse present over a six—year period. He concluded that white cedar trees under seven feet tall could maintain a constant food supply only if the annual removal of foliage was something less than 15 percent. In trees larger than seven feet tall, however, even light annual clipping of the foliage, while it did stimulate browse production somewhat, vaused a steady decline in the browse present. A second major problem is one of forest economics. Smith (l9h8) states that in hichigan the main uses of white cedar are for posts and poles. Sevenefoot posts require a tree of at least six inches dianeter. U watson (1936) indicated that while six-inch trees would produce posts, 6b the stumpage value per tree increased markedly in value with increases in diameter and height. he pointed out, for instance, that the stumpage value of a tree 10 inches in diameter is five cents while that of a tree 6 inches in diameter is only one cent. Above a diameter of ten inches, however, the increase in value with increased size is relatively much smaller. Personal conversations with foresters of the Houghton Lake and Ogemaw State Forests reveals that at present stumpage values for 6 and lO-inch trees is approximately ten and twenty cents respectively. From the game management standpoint trees above a dianeter of six inches in closed stands have small amounts of available deer browse. In fact it was found in the present study that the browse supply declines quite rapidly with increases in size beyond a diameter of l 3/h inches even where unbrowsed. On the average, for good quality site, from ten to twenty years was required beyond 1 3/h inches diameter, or hS to 55 total years to produce seven-foot posts. Trees on medium sites required twenty to thirty years or 65 to 75 total years to reach this size. There was, therefore, a considerable gap in years from the peak of browse pro- duction to the time a tree can be cut for a seven-foot post. On public land where income to surrounding communities from sports- ncn and tourists may be greater than frouxposts, management of white cedar as an aid in maintaining relatively high deer pepulation levels may well be economically Justifiable. In managing white cedar swamps primarily for deer food, trees in closed stands should be out soon after they reach two inches in diameter so that younger individuals of greater browse regeneration powers can take their place. For best results trees should not be allowed to grow beyond four inches in diameter. Trees of four inches were found to averaoe approximately the same browse per tree as those only zero to three-fourths inches diameter. Thus beyond four inches diameter there would be less browse than could be gotten from much younger trees. Furthermore, these young trees have their most productive period ahead of them. Probably trees from zero to four inches diameter could be used for some products such as various types of stakes, which would held defray cutting expenses. Nelson (1951) has suggested cutting methods to use in different types of white cedar stands when management is for browse production. From.field observations and clipging studies, it appears that small openings placed in closed stands of trees would result in substantial increases in deer browse. For best results, openings should be main- tained and not allowed to grow up into undesirable species. However, where pure stands of young white cedar present themselves it would be best, of course, to allow these trees to grow. The most efficient size, shape, and spacing of openings will have to be determined by further study. For this purpose Aldous (l9hl) has suggested Openings of one- eighth to one-fourth acre in size spaced one-fourth to one-half mile apart, these openings to be gradually cleared over three to five seasons. In open stands where it was found that larger trees tended to have more browse, the rate of foliage regeneration after removal by clipping or deer is not known. Perhaps light browsing would allow a continuous food supply until the trees were grown large enough to cut profitably for forest products. For maximum deer browse in such open stands the trees would have to be periodically thinned so that the branches of adjacent trees do not shade each other. Frequency of thinnings, of course, would be dependent on the growth rate. 66 Some distinction should perhaps be made between swamps of different site quality in regard to management. medium quality sites under light deer utilization apparently will supply deer browse fer a longer period than will those from good quality site, because trees from the former sites would be in the more productive size classes for a longer period, the growth rate being slower. Wherever possible poorer quality sites should be managed primarily for deer food rather than forest products since the slower average tree growth appears to benefit browse production but not wood production. 7. 57 smdARY Deer browse clipping studies to determine the effects of age and growth on foliage production were carried out in seven cedar swamps located in northern Lower Michigan. Four swamps were relatively unbrowsed, one was moderately browsed, and two were overbrowsed. All white cedars in thirty—seven l/lOOth-acre quadrats and a number of individual trees were clipped, aged, and measured in diameter and height. Light readings were taken to determine the light reaching the browse producing zone. In the unbrowsed closed stands the peak in browse production per tree was found to be in trees 1 to l B/h inches in diameter with little browse present beyond eight inches diameter. Noderately browsed and overbrowsed trees did not follow this trend because of the effects of deer utilization. Results suggested that moderate browsing stimulated browse pro- duction. Erowse present on trees growing under conditions of 100 percent available light was directly related to tree size. A highly significant association was found between the amount of light received and browse production under unbrowsed conditions. Cpenings adjacent to quadrats caused relatively more browse to be present. No significant associations between light and browse were present under moderate or overbrowsed conditions. Tree age or site quality differences alone were found to have little influence on the browse present. 8. 9. There was a considerable gap in years between the point of maximum deer browse production and the time when a tree could be cut for seven—foot posts. lanagement to provide more deer food should aim toward cutting trees after they reach two but before they reach four inches in diameter, creating small Openings throughout closed stands, and continual thinning in more Open stands to prevent branches of adjacent trees from overlapping. Poorer quality sites specially should be ed prinsrily'for deer food wherever possible. mans w. y L: Ll TEE} TUBE C I TED Aldous, Shaler E. l9hl. Deer management suggestions for northern white cedar types. Jour. Vildl. Mgt. S: 90—9L. 19Lb. A deer browse survey method. Jour. ham. 25: 130-1360 1952. Beer browse clipping study in the lake states region. Jour. Kildl. Lgt. 16: LOl-LOQ. and C. F. Smith. 19h8. Fall and winter food habits of deer in northeas 'rn hinnesota. U. 8. Fish and Lildl. Serv., hjldl. Leaflet 310. . bartlett, 110 H. 1931. Forestry in relation to deer propagation. hich. Lept. of Cons., Game Div., Lansing, lich. Report 822. 19L}. Timber management for deer in northern Michigan. kich. Kept. of Cons., Game Div., Lansing, hich. Report 735. l9L8. Cedar swamp management and deer. Proc. Soc. Amer. For. testing l9h7: 210-21h. 1950. Lichigan deer. Rich. Dept. of Cons., Came Liv., Lansing, liich. Bowman, A. B. 19LL. Growth and occurrence of spruce and fir on pulpwood lands in northern Hichigan. Rich. State 001., Agric. Exp. Sta., E. Lansing, Rich. lech. Bul. 188. Burt, Killian H. 19L6. The nmnmsls of hichigan. Univ. of hichigan Press, Ann Arbor, Lich., 288 pp. Dalke, Paul D. 19hl. lhe use and availability of the more common winter deer browse plants in the hissouri Ozarks. irans. N. A. hildl. Conf. 6: 155-160. 7O Daubenmire, R. F. 19h7. Plants and environment. John'Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, hZh pp. Davenport, LaVerne A. 1937. Find deer have marked food preferences. Mich. Cons. Vol 7: h-S, 6, ll. , W. Shapton and W. C. Gower. 19hh. A study of deer yards as determined by browse plots. Trans. N. A. Wildl. Conf. 9: lhh-1h9. Duvendeck, Jerry P. 1952. Sons effects of deer browsing on northern Michigan forest plants. Unpublished M. S. Thesis. Mich. State 001., E. Lansing, Mich. 2h numb. leaves. Fernald, Merritt L. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. ed. 8, American Book Co., New York. 4 Frank, W. J. l9h0. The food producing capacity of the Huntington Forest with respect to deer browsing. Unpublished thesis. N. Y. State College of For., Syracuse. Cited in Webb, Wm. L. l9h8. Environ- mental analysis of a‘winter deer range. Trans. N. A. Wildl. Conf. 13: th-hSO- Gevorkiantz, S. R. and W. A. Duerr. 1939. Volume and yield of northern white cedar in the lake states. Lake States For. Exp. Sta., St. Paul, Minn. Hagood, H. J., and D. 0. Price. 1952. Statistics for sociologists. Henry Holt and Co., NeW'York. Harlow, William.M. 1927. The effect of site on the structure and growth of white cedar, EEEQE occidentalis L. Ecol. 8: h53-h70. Haugen, Arnold O. 19h8. NSC students measure lack of deer food. Mich. Cons. Vol. 17, p11. 71 Howard, William J. 1937. Notes on the winter foods of Michigan deer. Jour. ham. 18: 77-80. Krefting, Laurits W. 1951. 'what is the future of the Isle Royals moose herd? Trans. N. A. Wildl. Conf. 16: 1.61-1.72. Lake States Forest.Experiment,Station. 19h0. White cedar for deer food. U. S. Dept. of For., St. Paul, Minn. TBCh. Note 159. menton, Francis J. 1952. Personal correspondence, Weston Elsc. Inst. Corp., Photo Div., Newark, N. J. Nelson, Thomas C. 1951. A reproduction study of northern white cedar. Mich. Dept. of Cons., Game Div., Lansing, Mich. Costing, Henry J. 1950. The study of plant communities. W. H. Freeman and 00., San Francisco, Calif. Sather, John H. 1950. A light meter for cover density measurements. Jour. Wildl. ugt. 11.: 138-110. Smith, Norman F. 19h8. Michigan trees worth knowing. Mich. Dept. of Cons., Game Div., Lansing, Mich. Snedecor, George W. 1950. Statistical methods. ed. h, Iowa State Col. Press, Ames, Ia. Swift, Ernest. 19b6. A history of Wisconsin Deer. Wis. Cons. Dept., Madison, Wis. Publ. 323. Veatch, J. 0., L. R. Schoenmann, and L. W. Moon. 192h. Soil survey of Roscommon County, Michigan. U. 8. Dept. of Agri. Bur. of Chem. and Soils. Veatch, J. 0., L. R. Schoenmann, 2. C. Foster and F. R. Lesh. 1927. Soil survey of Kalkaska County, Michigan. U. 8. Dept. of Agri., Bur. of Chem. and Soils. Watson, Russell. 1936. Northern white-cedar. U. S. For. Serv., Kil- wankee, Wis. Lumeo hhpp. APPENDIXES APPEIfllIX A : TAELES TABLE X IOCATION OF QUADRATS AND INDIVIDUAL TREES 72 Location Swamp Quadrats County Sub- Sec- T R division tion Fife Lake Outlet Swamp D1, D2 Grand Traverse SW l/h SE 1/!. 21. 25N 91; Could Creek Swamp E1, 152 Kalkaska sw 1/1. SW'l/h 19 25W 8W Round Lake Swamp Bl, Indi- vidual trees " NE l/h 517 1/1. 21 28N 8?: Little Rapid River Swamp A1, A2 " NW 1/1. 51? 1/1. 8 27m 7w " " " F1, F2 " NW 1/h 3w 1/1. 8 2m 7W n n '1 A3, Ab, A5 " NE l/h SW'l/h 8 27N 7W " " " F3, Fh, F5 " NE l/L SE 1/h 7 2m 7W :1 n a F6 :9 NW U}, SE 1/h 7 2m 7v? a II n F7 I! NE l/h NW 1/h 7 27M 7W " " " F8, Indi- vidual trees " SE l/L NW 1/h 7 27N 7"! Dead Stream.Swamp 01, G2, 03, Gh, GS Roscommon SE 1/L NW l/h 33 21m 1m TABIE I continued 73 Location Swamp Quadrats County Sub- Sec- ‘1‘ R division tion Dead Stream Stamp 06 Roscommon NW l/l. NE 1/1. 1. 2311 m n s " G7, 08, G9 " NE 1/1. NW 1/L 33 21.17 m n n n Hl " S”! 1/11 SE Ms 3!. 21m m: Bear Creek Swamp ll, 12, I3, 114 " SE 1/1. . SE 1/1. 30 22m 177: St. Helen Swamp 31, $2, 33, SE 1/1. 51. " SE m. 15 2311 1w 7! n n 35 '0 NE 1”, SE l/h 15 23M 1w 7h a sum m.H 0H . g oom me = and 4.N ow . = wad me = ma e.H am g a sea as g owe.0H 0.:4 as = = oNa mm . mam.m w.HH as g = Had Hm . NH m.H NH . a Hmm mm . o H.H OH = g mmm Ha . mmm.~ w.a mm . g mom am . «no.4 o.mH me a a New ma . o o. m g . mmm as . Ha m.o ma . . onm ma . 4a 4.~ ma . . ”ma «a madam mad 4.“ ma .aa .en mm as sameness: flea mused uses magnum pause manuaas>< opaae.mQa mea>ag do appease usage Heaps unooaom npaq co nonaaz awa<_aamam macaw Mgem .mo zoEmHmommm HM and; 7S . ome.a o.mm mm . g woe as x 5mm Coxdu was mH : c «mm 00 . NH~.H .apMQp poo mm a .. wmm mo = mam. dwxda 00c mH : : H04 :0 a N2. Aom 4.3 z : mhm mo : me M.N 5N : 2 Ohm No usage as» m.g mm .:a .o» Hem as nausea 332302 . Hmm.on o.~m mm a = mmfl we . mma.ma o.em om g . NHH as .. mode as. mm .. . as E .. 08 Tm 4m .. .. mom me peace me: ;.~ mm .:a .em sow as consumed: sawed madame steppe omxoum cacao oanmaws>< opaaa.wna wea>ag do antenna 323 H309 pcmohom .53 no 3852 no.2 Howam cog—fined HM a; 76 .. m mém an .. .. Sm mm .. o in ma .. .. RN .3 c o w.mg mm 3 3 ohm mm .. .3 m3 3 .. .. 08 mm .. Hm N3 mm .. .. 8H 8 .. mfi 0.3 mm .. .. RN fi .. E o.m 2 .. .. $m Q .. .3 m3 om .. .. mmm NH macaw we: m.0H mm .GH .wm 4mm HH vomacunho>o .. :8; fish so: an .. .. «S S .. m: 04H Nu .. .. can mo Ream Ham «J 3 .fi .3 «Z we neurons 382802 . unwed oedema nuance mass and 32332 Sass was Mania .8 page oufl£a_acpoa unsound I>wq mo Honssz woa< Homem vofigcoo Hx mag 77 m.H mNuoN N.N.N a 0.N mmdm 0.Nm a on pmwmmwnv can: .02 coHudwbon omcom can!” ooz Anogocw ca e530 Ream usage ¥§§ :33 . to... ..H Emacs 93.» £me _ 982.3 gem and 950m image 2. $881 a: 84 so Egoflfimm HHN Hangs 78 .noouv condone one ddsvw>dnnu Add nouaaonH * 0.Hm H 0.0: H QH 0 0.5 H 0.4m H 0 0.0N H 0.Hm H in a “poem coauquon peonwocv can: .02 . noupua>oo omcom can: .02 nwmmuouquwV 03.30 05m phage as. .53 aoom_nH.pamHom undo» nH and 03:38» HHN Ema 79 0.3 H tm H A} m .3 3.3m 9% N .3 Sumo 0.8 N .3 a 0.3 H 0:: H H. o.Hm H 9% H .3 o 9% H o.$ H «\H 0 9% H o.$ H N Hangs APPENDIX B: 93 PLANE FOUND ASSOCIATED WITH WHITE CEDAR ' Scientific Name Common Name Abies balsama (L.) Mind! Acer rubrum L. Acer aaccharinum L. Acer egicatun Lam. Actaea rubra wit.) Willd. Adiantum Edatum L. Alnus rugosa (Du Roi) Spreng. Ambrosia artemiaifolia var. elatior (L.) Discourtila Amelanchi er laevis Wieg. Anemone guincmefolia L. var. interior Fern. Aralia nudicaulis L. Arisaema trighyllum (L.) Schoot Asclepias incarnate L. Aster lugciformia Rydb. fiber laevia L. Aster lateriflorus (L.) Britt. Aster Eunicegg L. Aster 'n'adescanti H L. Balsam fir Red maple Silver maplo Mountain maple Red baneberry Maidenhair fern Speckled alder Hogweed Juneberry Wood anemone Wild sarsaparilla Small jack-in-the-pulpit Swamp milkweed Asher Smooth aster Calico aster Purple-a temmed aster As tar * Plant name after Femald (1950). APPENDIX B continued W Scientific Nana Common Name Betula lutea Michx. F. . Yellow birch Iigtula pagyrif era Harsh. Paper birch B33323 connata Muhl. Beggar tick Botrychium virginianum (L.) Sn. Rattlesnake fern Calgpogon gulchellus Salisb., R. Br. Grass-pink Caltha Elustris L. Marsh marigold Caxgganula aparinoides Pursh. Marsh bluebell Cardamine pratensis L. var. Balustris Winn. and Grab. Cuckoo flower Care: spp. Sedge Chamaedaphne calyculata var. angustifolia (Ait.) Rehd. Leatherleaf Chelone £13313 L. Turtlehead m bulbifera L. Water hemlock Circaea alpine L. Enchanter's nightshade Cirsium altissinmm L. Spreng. Tall thistle Cirsium muticum Michx. Swamp thistle Clintonia borealis (Ait.) Raf. Corn-lily 99813.8. groenlandica (Oeder) Fern. Goldthread Corallorhiza maculata Raf. Spotted coral-root Corallorhiza trifida Chatelain Early coral-root 9312113 alternifolia L. f. Alternate-leaved dogwood C_ornus canadensis L. Bunch berry APPENDIX B continued Scientific Name Common Name Cornus obligua Raf. Cornus racemosa Lam. Cornus Eugosa Lam. Cornus stolonifera Michx. Corylus cornuta Marsh. gzpripedium calceolus L. var. pariflorum (Salisb.) Fern. gypxjpedium reginae Walt. Decodon verticillatug (L.) Ell. Dierville Lonicera Mill. Dryopteris cristata (L.) Gray Drygpteris disjuncta (Ledeb.) C. V. Mort. Drygpteris spinulosa (O. F. Huell.) Watt Epigaea repens L. Spildbium,leptophlllum.Raf. gguisetum.fluviatile L. Eguisetnmrpalustre L. Egpatarium.fistulosum‘Barrett Fragaria virginiana Duchesne Fraxinus nigga Marsh. Galium asp:ellum.Michx. Galium trifidum Lo Silky dogwood Gray dogwood Round-leaved dogwood Red-osier dogwood Beaked hazelnut Small yellow lady's slipper Showy lady's slipper Swamp loosestrife Bush honeysuckle Crested wood-fern Oak fern Florist's fern Trailing arbutus {illow-herb Water horsetail Marsh horsetail Joe-pyedweed Wild strawberry Black ash Rough bedstraw Small beds tra! ‘0 O\ APPENDIX B continued Scientific Name Common Name Galium triflorum kichx. Gaultheria hispidula (L.) higel Gaultheriagprocumbens L. Centiana crinita Frocl. Gentiana rubricaulis Schwein Habernaria hvnerborea (L.) R. Br. Egbernaria obtosata (Pursh.) Richards Hieracium canacense Michx. Ilex verticillata (L.) Gray Inraféens rallidn Nutt. Larix laricina (Du Roi) K. Koch Ledum groenlandicum Oeder Lilium philadelphicum L. Linnaea borealis L. var. americana (Forbes) Hehd. Lobelia inflate L. LOleia Kalmii Lo Lobelia spicata Lam. Lonicera canadensis Bartr. Lonicera oblongifolia (Goldie) Hook. var. altissima (Jennings) Rehd. Licopodium annotinum L. Lyccpodium obscurum L. Small bedstraw Creeping snowberry Checkerberry Fringed gentian Closed gentian Northern green orchis Blunt leaf orchis Canada hawkweed Winterberry Jewelweed American larch Labrador tea ‘5'; 00d lily Twinflower Indian tobacco Kalm's lobelia Pale spiked lobelia American fly honeysuckle Swamp fly honeysuckle Bristly clubmoss Flatbrand groundpine 97 APPENDIX B continued Scientific Name Common Nam licggus unit‘lorus Michx. Lycopus virginicus L. Lysimachia ciliata L. Iggsimachia thyrsii'lora L. Haianthemum canadense Desi. Mirabilis nyctaginea (Michx.) Mac M. Mitchella m L. Mitella nude L. Monotrgpa uniflora L. 2:222 92-; 1.. Nemgpanthus moronata (L.) 'Irel. Onoclea sensibilis L. Orchis rgtundifolia Banks Osmunda cinnammea L. Osmunda regalis L. Parnassia £19333 Raf. P_i_gga_ g_1_a_1_1_c_§ (Moluch) Voss P_i_c_e_§_ mariana (111111.) BSP. P3291 Strobus L. Polyg ala gaucifona Willd. Polygonum sagittatum L. Populus balsamifera L. P_opulus tremuloides Michx. Water horehound Water horehound Fringed looses trife Tufted loosestrife Lily of the valley Umbrella-wort Partridge-berry Miterwort Indian pipe Sweet gale Mountain holly Sensitive fern Small round-leaved orchid Cinnamon fern Royal fern Grass of Parnassus White spruce Black spruce White pine Fringed milkwort Arrow-leaved tearthunb Balsam poplar Quaking aspen 98 APPEXLlX B continued Scientific Name Common Name' Prunes pennsylvanica L. f.v Fteridium aguilinum var. latiusculum (138817.) Under". Eyrola elliptica Nutt. ola ndnor L. Pyrola secunda L. var. obtnsata Turcg. Fyrus americana (Marsh.) DC. Eyrus melanccarpa (Michx.) Willd. Quercus ellipsoidalis E. J. Hill Ranunculus septentrionalis Poir. Hhamnus alnifolia L'her. Rhus typhina L. Ribes americanum will. Ribes lacustre (Pers.) Poir. Rosa palustris harsh. Rubu§_idaeus L. hub"s pubescens Raf. “-3 ma.“ Salix lucida huhl. Salix sericea Marsh. Sambucus canadensis L. Sanieula marilandiea L. Sarracenia purpurea L. Scutellaria epilobiifolia A. Hamilton Fire cherry Bracken fern Shinleaf Shinleaf One—sided pyrola Mountain ash Black chokeberry Jack oak Swamp buttercup Alder-leaved buckthorn Staghorn sumac Wild black current Swamp black current Swamp rose Red raspberry Dwarf raSpberry Shining willow Silky willow Common elderberry Black snakeroot Pitcher plant Skullcap 99 APPENDIX B continued Scientific Name Common Nana Smilacina trifolia (L.) Desr. Solidago altissima L. Solidagg Lugosa Ait. Solidago uliginosa Nutt. Spiranthes cernua (L.) Richard Spiranflxfi Eomanzoffiana Chem. Symplocarpus foetidug (L.) Nutt. Taxus canadensis Marsh. Tilia'americana L. Trientalis borealis Raf. Trillium gernuum L. Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carr. Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait. Vaccinium myrtilloides Michx. Vaccinium.0xycoccus L. var. ovalifolium Michx. Viburnum cassinoides L. Viburnum trilobum.Harsh. Viola nephrophylla Greene Viola renifolia Gray var. Brainerdii (Greene) Fern. Bog solomon—plume Goldenrod Rough-stemmed goldenrod Goldenrod Common screweauger Slender lady's tresses Skunk-cabbage American yew Basswood Star flower Nodding trillium Hemlock Large cranberry Canada blueberry Small cranberry Wild raisin Highébush cranberry Blue violet White violet emue _ n- Ausz‘ . W HICHIGRN STQTE UNIV. LIBRQRIE llIBIIWNIlllzllll"lallllllllllllllfllllllHIHIIIIIHI‘IIIIHII 104192277