Soil quality monitoring for assessing sustainable forest management

The Contribution of Soil Science to the Development of and Implementation of Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management

Volumn 53, Issue , 2015, Pages 17-52

  Burger, James A ^a   Kelting, Daniel L ^a  

^a VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

D. L. Karlen and D. E. Stott's soil quality model; Forest soil quality model; Productivity index model; Soil quality baseline; Soil quality monitoring program; Soil based indicators; Sustainable forest management; Traditional growth response measurement

Indexed keywords

EID: 85102914434     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.2136/sssaspecpub53.c2     Document Type: Chapter

References (67)

1. American Forest and Paper Association. 1995. Sustainable forestry initiative. AFPA, Washington, DC.
2. Andrews, J .A. 1992. Soil productivity model to assess forest site quality on reclaimed surface mines. M.S. thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State Univ., Blacksburg.
3. Aplet, G.H., N. Johnson, J.T. Olson, and v.A. Sample. 1993. Prospects for a sustainable future. p. 309-314. In G.H. Aplet et al. (ed) Defining sustainable forestry. Island Press, Washington, DC.
4. Aune, J.B., and R. Lal. 1995. The tropical soil productivity calculator:A model for assessing effects of soil management on productivity. p. 499-520. In R. Lal and B.A. Stewart (ed) Soil man-agement:Experimental basis for sustainability and environmental quality. Adv. Soil Sci. Lewis Publ., London.
5. Aust, W.M. 1989. Abiotic functional changes of a water tupelo-baldcypress wetland following dis-turbance by harvesting. Ph.D. diss. North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh.
6. Aust, W.M., S.H. Schoenholtz, T.W. Zaebst, and B.A. Szabo. 1997. Recovery status of a tupe10-cypress wetland seven years after di sturbance:Silvicu1tural implications. Forest Ecol. Manage. 90:161-169.
7. Ballard, R., and S.P. Gessel (ed.). 1983. IUFRO Symp. Forest site and continuous productivity. USDA For. Servo Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-163. U.S. Gov. Print. Office, Washington, DC.
8. Beck, D.E. 1971. Polymorphic site index curves for white pine in the southern Appalachians. USDA For. Servo Res. Pap. SE-80. U.S. Gov. Print. Office, Washington, DC.
9. Bouma, J. 1989. Using soil survey data for quantitative land evaluations. Adv. Soil Sci. 9:177-213.
10. Boyer, E.L. 1990. Scholarship reconsidered:Priorities of the professoriate. Spec. Rep. The Carnegie. Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton, NJ.
11. Brendemuehl, R.H. 1967. Loss of topsoil slows slash pine growth in Florida sandhills. USDA For Servo So. For. Exp. Stn. Res. Note SO-53. U.S. Gov. Print. Office, Washington, DC.
12. Burger, J.A. 1994. Cumulative effects of silvicultural technology on sustained forest productivity. p. 59-70. In M.K. Mahendrappa et al. (ed.) Canadian For. Servo Maritimes Region Inf. Rep. M-X-19IE.Micromedia, Hull, QU.
13. Burger, J.A. 1996. Limitations of bioassays for monitoring forest soil productivity:Rationale and example. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 60:1674-1678.
14. Burger, J.A. 1997. Conceptual framework for monitoring the impacts of intensive forest management on sustainable forestry. p. 147-156. In O. Hakkila et al. (ed.) Forest management for bioener-gy. Res. Pap. 640. Finnish Forest Res. Inst., Helsinki.
15. Burger, J.A., J.E. Johnson, J.A. Andrews, and J.L. Torbert. 1994. Measuring mine soil productivity for forests. p. 48-56. In Int. Land Reclamation and Mine Drainage Conf. Vol. 3. Reclamation and revegetation. USDOI Bureau of Mines Spec. Publ. SP 06C-94. U.S. Gov. Print. Office, Washington, DC.
16. Carmean, W.H. 1975. Forest site quality evaluation in the United States. Adv. Agron. 27:209-269.
17. Crocker, R.L., and J. Major. 1955. Soil development in relation to vegetation and surface age of Glacier Bay, Alaska. J. Ecol. 43:427-448.
18. de Silva, A.P., B.D. Kay, and E. Perfect. 1994. Characterization of the least limiting water range of soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58:1775-1781.
19. Daniels, W.L., and D.F. Amos. 1984. Generating productive topsoil substitutes from hard rock over-burden in the southern Appalachians. Environ. Geochem. Health. 7:8-15.
20. Davis, J.E. 1986. Statistics and data analysis in geology. 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
21. Doran, J.W., D.E. Coleman, D.F Bezdicek, and B.A. Stewart. (ed.) 1994. Defining soi l quality for a sustainable environment. SSSA Spec. Publ. 35. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI.
22. Doran, J.W, M. Sarrantonio, and M.A. Liebig. 1996. Soil health and sustainability. Adv. Agron. 56:1-55.
23. Dyck, WJ., and M.F Skinner. 1990. Potential for productivity decline in New Zealand radiata pine forests. p. 318-332. In S.P. Gessel et al. (ed.) Sustained productivity of forest soils. Proc., 7th N. Am. Forest Soils Conf. Faculty of Forestry Publ., Vancouver, Be. 24-28 July 1988. Faculty of Forestry, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver.
24. Dyck, WJ., D.W. Cole, and N.B. Comerford. 1994. Impacts of forest harvesting on long-term site pro-ductivity. Chapman & Hall, New York.
25. Ford, D.E. 1983. What do we need to know about forest productivity and how can we measure it? p. 1-12. In R. Ballard and S.P. Gessel (ed.) Proc. IUFRO Symp. on Forest Site and Continuous Productivity. USDA For. Servo Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-163. USDA For. Servo Pacific Northwest For. and Range Exp. Stn., Portland, OR.
26. Franklin, J.F 1993. The fundamentals of ecosystem management with applications in the Pacific Northwest. p. 127-144. In G.H. Aplet et al. (ed.) Defining sustainable forestry. Island Press, Washington, De.
27. Gale, M.R., and D.F Grigal. 1987. Vertical root distributions of northern tree species in relation to successional status. Can. J. For. Res. 17:829-834.
28. Gale, M.R., D.F Grigal, and R.B. Harding. 1991. Soil productivity index:Predictions of site quality for white spruce plantations. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 55:1701-1708.
29. Gessel, S.P., D.S. Lacate, G.F Weetman, and R.F Powers (ed.). 1990. Sustained productivity of for-est soils. In Proc. 7th North Am. Forest Soils Conf. Faculty of Forestry Publ., Vancouver, Be. 24-28 Ju ly 1988. Faculty of Forestry, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver.
30. Greacen, E.L., and R. Sands. 1980. Compaction of forest soils. A review. Aust. J. Soil Res. 18:163-189.
31. Greenland, DJ., and I. Szabolcs (ed.). 1994. Soil resilience and sustainable land use. CAB Int., Oxon, England.
32. Halvorson, L.L., J.L. Smith, and R.I. Papendick. 1996. Integration of multiple soil parameters to eval-uate soil quality:A field example. BioI. Fert. Soils 21:207-214.
33. Helsinki Process. 1994. Helsinki process. In Proc. of the ministerial conferences and expert meetings. Liaison Office of the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Helsinki, Finland. 16-17 June 1993. FIN-DO 171. Office of the Ministerial Conf. on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Helsinki.
34. Johnson, D.W. 1994. Reasons for concem over impacts of harvesting. p. 1-12. In WJ. Dyck et al. (ed.) Impacts of forest harvesting on long-term site productivity. Chapman & Hall, New York.
35. Karlen, D.L., and D.E. Stott. 1994. A framework for evaluating physical and chemical indicators of soil quality. p. 53-72. In J.W Doran et al. (ed.) Defining soi l quality for a sustainable envi-ronment. SSSA Spec. Publ. 35. SSSA and ASA, Madison, WI.
36. Karlen, D.L., MJ. Mausbach, J.W. Doren, R.G. Cline, R.F Harris, and G.E. Schuman. 1997. Soil quality:A concept, definition, and framework for evaluation. Soil Sci. Soc. of Am. 1. 61:4-10.
37. Karr, J.R. 1993. Measuring biological integrity:Lessons from streams. p. 83-104. In S. Woodley et al. (ed.) Ecological integrity and the management of ecosystems. St. Lucie Press, New York.
38. Kelting, D.L., J.A. Burger, S.E. Patterson, WM. Aust, M. Miwa, and E.E. Trettin. 1999. Soil quality assessment in domesticated forests-A southern pine example. Forest Ecol. Manage. (In press).
39. Kimmins, J.P. 1996. The health and integrity of forest ecosystems:Are they threatened by forestry? Ecosyst. Health 2:5-18.
40. Kiniry, L.N., E.L. Scrivner, and M.E. Keener. 1983. A soil productivity index based upon predicted water depletion and root growth. Missouri Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 105 1. Columbia, MO.
41. Kozlowski, T.T., PJ. Kramer, and S.G. Pallardy. 1991. The physiological ecology of woody plants. Academic Press, New York.
42. Lal, R., and FJ. Pierce. 1991. The van ishing resource. p. 1-5. In R. Lal and FJ. Pierce (ed.) Soil man-agement for sustainability. Soil and Water Conserv. Soc., Ankeny, IA.
43. Lal, R., and B.A. Stewart (ed.). 1995. Soil management:Experimental basis for sustainability and environmental quality. Advances in soil Science. Lewis Publ., Boca Raton, FL.
44. Larson, W.E., and FJ. Pierce. 1994. The dynamics of soi l quality as a measure of sustainable man-agement. p. 37-51. In J.W. Doran et al. (ed.) Defining soi l quality for a sustainable environ-ment. SSSA Spec. Publ. 35. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI.
45. Monserud, R.A. 1984. Problems with site index:An opinionated review. p. 167-180. In J.G. Bockheim (ed.) Forest land classification:Experiences, problems, perspectives. Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison.
46. Montreal Process. 1995. Criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests. Canadian Forest Servo Catalogue F042-238/1995E. Canadian Forest Serv., Hull, Quebec.
47. Morris, L.A., and R.E. Miller. 1994. Evidence for long-term productivity change as provided by field trials. p. 41-80. In W.J. Dyck et al. (ed.) Impacts of forest harvesting on long-term site pro-ductivity. Chapman & Hall, New York.
48. Nambiar, E.K.S. 1996. Sustained productivity of forests is a continuing challenge to soil science. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 60:1629-1642.
49. Noss, R.F 1990. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity:A hierarchical approach. Conserv. BioI. 4:355-364.
50. Oldeman, L.R. 1994. The global extent of soil degradation. p. 99-118. In DJ. Greenland and I. Szabolcs (ed.) Soil resilience and sustainable land use. CAB Int., Oxon, England.
51. Olsen, S.R., and L.E. Sommers. 1982. Phosphorus. p. 403-430. In A.L. Page et al. (ed.) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. 2nd ed. Agron. Mongr. 9. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI.
52. O'Neill, R.Y., W.F Harris, B.S. Ausmus, and D.E. Reichle. 1975. A theoretical basis for ecosystem analysis with particular reference to element cycling. p. 28-39. In FG. Howell et al. (ed.) Mineral cycling in southeastern ecosystems, Augusta, GA. 1-3 May 1974. ERDA Symp. Series (CONF-740513). Tech. Inform. etr., Office of Public Affairs, U.S. Energy Res. and Dev. Administration, Washington, De.
53. Papendick, RJ., and J.F Parr. 1992. Soil quality:The key to a sustainable agriculture. Am. J. Altern. Agric.7:2-3.
54. Parr, J.F, R.I. Papendick, S.B. Hornick, and R.E. Meyer. 1992. Soil quality:Attributes and relation-ship to alternative and sustainable agriculture. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 7:5-11.
55. Powers, R.F, D.H. Alban, R.E. Miller, A.E. Tiarks, E.G. Wells, P.E. Avers, R.G. Cline, R.D. Fitzgerald, and N.S. Loftus, Jr. 1990. Sustaining site productivity in North American forests:Problems and prospects. p. 49-79. In S.P. Gessel et al. (ed.) Sustained productivity of forest soils. Proc. 7th North Am. For. Soils Conf., Vancouver, Be. 24-28 July 1988. Faculty of Forestry, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver.
56. Powers, R.F, A.E. Tiarks, J.R. Boyle. 1998. Assessing soil quality:Practicable standards for sustain-able forest productivity inthe United States. p. 53-80. In E.A. Davidson et al. (ed.) The con-tribution of soil science to the development of and implementation of criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management. SSSA Spec. Publ. 53. SSSA, Madison, WI (this publica-tion).
57. Pritchett, W.L., and W.H. Smith. 1974. Management of wet savanna forest soils for pine production. Fla. Agric. Expt. Stn. Tech. Bull. 762. Florida Agric. Exp. Stn., Gainesville.
58. Ramakrishna, K., and E.A. Davidson. 1998. Intergovernmental negotiations on criteria and indicators for the management, conservation, and sustainable development of forests:What role for for-est soil scientists? p. 1-16. In E.A. Davidson et al. (ed.) The contribution of soil science to the development of and implementation of criteria and indicators of sustainable forest manage-ment. SSSA Spec. Publ. 53. SSSA, Madison, WI (this publication).
59. Roberts, J.A., W.L. Daniels, J.E. Bell, and J.A. Burger. 1988. Early stages of mine soil genesis in a Southwest Virginia spoillithosequence. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52:716-723.
60. Salwasser, H., D.W. MacCleery, and TA. Snellgrove. 1993. An ecosystem perspective on sustainable forestry and new directions for the U.S. National Forest System. p. 44-89. In G.H. Aplet et al. (ed.) Defining sustainable forestry. Island Press, Washington, De.
61. Singh, K.K., TS. Colvin, D.C. Erbach, and A.Q. Mughal. 1992. Tilth index:An approach to quanti-fying soil tilth. Trans. ASAE 35:1777-1785.
62. Smith, J.L., J.J. Halvorson, and R.I. Papendick. 1993. Using multiple variable indicator kriging for evaluating soil quality. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57:743-749.
63. Stone, E.L. 1975. Soil and man's use of forest land. p. 1-9. In B. Bernier and E. Winget (ed.) Forest soils and forest land management. Laval Univ. Press, Quebec.
64. Terry, TA., and J.H. Hughes. 1975. The effects of intensive management on planted loblolly pine growth on poorly drained soils of the Atlantic Coastal Plain. p. 351-377. In B. Bernier and E. Winget (ed.) Forest soils and forest land management. Laval Univ. Press, Quebec.
65. Torbert, J.L., J.A. Burger, and W.L. Daniels. 1989. Pine growth variation associated with overburden rock type on a reclaimed surface mine in Virginia. J. Environ. Qual. 19:88-92.
66. Wagenet, RJ., and J.L. Hutson. 1997. Soil quality and its dependence on dynamic physical process-es. J. Environ. Qual. 26:41-48.
67. World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our common future. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, England.