Table Of Content

document Historic, archived Do not assume content reflects current scientific l<nowledge, policies, or practices. United States Forest Statistics for Department of Agnculture Ohio, 1991 Forest Service Douglas M. Griffith Northeastern Forest Dawn M. DiGiovanni Experiment Station Teresa L. Witzel Eric H. Wharton Resource Bulletin NE-128 . Abstract A statistical report on the fourth forest inventory of Ohio was conducted in 1990-91 by the Forest Inventory and Analysis Unit of the Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Thecurrent inventory indicatesthatthe state is30 percentforested. It contains approximatley 1 billion cubic feet of growing-stock volume and 30 billion board feet of sawtimber volume on 7.6 million acres of timberland. The ratio of average annual net cubic-foot growth of growing-stock volume to removals on a statewide basis is 2.3 to 1 Foreward The fourth inventory of Ohiowas underthe overall direction ofJohn R. Peters, Project Leader of the Forest Inventory and Analysis Unit. Charles T. Scott helped with the design of the inventory and sample selection. David J. Alerich supervised the data collection staff. Teresa Witzel supervised the field crews, and was responsible for the interpretation of the aerial photography. Robert E. Ilgenfritz was in charge of hiring and training the field staff. Richard A. McCullough supervised the digitizing process. Marie Pennestri was responsible for administrative and secretarial services. She was assisted by Vickie Sharon and Lenora Middleton. Russ McAllister supervisedtheincrementcorelab. Additionaldataprocessingassistancewasprovided by Carol Alerich and Thomas Frieswyk Sandra Richter provided the graphics. Additional members of the data collection staff are: Corry Akins Martha Billman Ted T. Bishop Adam Campbell David Catlett Jason Cofield Joseph DIModica Edward A. Doane Jonathon Fondow Corrie Fountain Tom Gabriel Michael D. Glina Ronnie Golns Craig Hausinger Matthew Houle Derrick James Bruce Kellman Loretta Kelly Craig A. Kidney Gary L. Kolesar Lisa M. Lee Joseph R. Mahoney Matthew McGulnness Jason Morrison Laura Murphy Robert Plant Thomas M. Ramsey Earl Roberson Steve Schacht Donald Schmenk Mala Scott Daryl Spencer Jessica Smith Lucretia Stewart Kevin M. Swope Lori B. Tepke Scott H. Tepke Kathryn M. Tillman Jeffery Tuller Matthew Walsh Michael Wrobel Christopher Zimmerman Acknowledgments Wethank the landowners of Ohio, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry, andtheWayne National Forest, USDA Forest Service, fortheircooperation and assistance during this inventory. Manuscript received for publication 19 October 1992 Forest Statistics for Ohio, 1991 Douglas M. Griffith, Forester Dawn M. DiGiovanni, Forester Teresa L. Witzel, Forester Eric H. Wharton, Forester Forest Inventory and Analysis Northeastern Forest Experiment Station Radnor, PA U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station 5 Radnor Corporate Center 100 Matsonford Road, Suite 200 Radnor, PA 19087-4585 March 1993 Dawn M. DiGiovanni no longerworksforthe Forest Service. Teresa L. Witzel currently worksforthe Allegheny National Forest at the Marienville Ranger District, Marienville, PA. CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Reliability of the Estimates 2 Comparison Between Inventories 3 Index to Tables^'"^"^^^^,^^^^^^^^ . . . Resource Tables Stat© Level Tables Area 9 Numbers of Trees 16 Sawtimber Volume 27 Growing-stock Volume 32 Growth and Removals 41 Unit Level Tables 47 County Level Tables 109 Change Between Inventories ........ 143 Definitions 156 Species Groups of Ohio Ij Tree and Shrub Species 63 f/letric Equivalents /. . }< 165 Literatbici^jetted . . \ . . . . 166 A List of Available Tables 167 . . , INTRODUCTION mum remeasurement of previously established plots to reduce sampling variances and to provide more Theamount, condition, availability, and useofrenew- accurate county-level estimates. able forest resources in Ohio are constantly chang- ing. Forests continueto mature and harvesting activ- The first inventory for 1952 examined 3,439 forest ity increase. Current information about the forest, its plots (all 1/5-acre fixed-radius plots). During the sec- owners, and its users is required for the effective ond Inventory for 1968, 582 of the 1952 plots were allocation of goods and services potentially available selected and remeasured, supplemented by 3,988 from the State's forested lands. new prism plots (clusters of 10 variable radius points covering approximately 1 acre). The third Inventory The USDA Forest Service is mandated to conduct for 1979 sampled 2,759 remeasured 1/5-acre and periodicforest inventoriesofall statesto provide nec- 10-point plots, supplemented by 2,128 new 10-point essary up-to-date forest resource Information. These plots. inventories are conducted underthe authority of the McSweeny-McNary Forest Research Act of 1928 and subsequent acts, including the Renewable Re- Procedures sources Planning Act of 1974 and the Renewable Resources Research Act of 1978. The sampling procedure that Is used generally In- volves atwo-stage approach. Aerial photos are used The Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Unit of the to classify new photo points Into appropriate stratifi- Northeastern Forest Experiment Station is responsi- cations for current land use and cubic-foot volume ble for conducting inventories in 14 Northeastern classes. The aerial photo interpretation also reclassi- States, which Include Ohio. An initial inventory of fies ground plots from previous inventories Into the Ohio's resources was conducted in 1952 (Hutchin- same strata. New ground plots are selected from son 1954). A second Inventory was completed In these photo points. 1968 (KIngsley 1970), and a third was finished in 1979 (Dennis and Birch 1981; Dennis 1983). This For this inventory, 77,087 new photo points were report presents the fourth such inventory of Ohio's classified and4,887ground plot locations from previ- forest resources, which was carried out in 1990-91. ous inventories were reclassified on aerial photography. We expected to examine all the remeasured Forest Inventory and Analysis is responsible for con- plots: 565 1/5-acre plots established In 1952, 2,194 ducting the inventory of all public and private lands, 10-polntplotsestablished in 1968 and remeasured In developing the resource tables, and preparing re- 1979, and 2,128 10-point plots established In 1979. ports such as this publication for a variety of users. However,fieldcrewswereableto measureonly4,807 The effort required to conduct such a large-scale of the 4,887 remeasured ground plots-some plots inventory was greatly reduced through cooperation could not be remeasured due to access restrictions of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Divi- and other reasons. sion of Forestry, and the Wayne National Forest. The Wayne National Forest also was included in the sample base. However, measurement ofthese public Planning lands precipitated special problems. Many of the plots established during the earliest Inventories In planningthisfourth inventoryofOhio, varioussam- (1952and 1968) were lost. And duringthethird Inven- pling options were considered. After consulting with tory, no new plotswereestablished. Atthattime, area the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, It was and volume estimates were obtained from National decided to emphasize remeasurement-measuring Forest records and were Incorporated into the esti- as many plotsfrom previous inventories as possible. mates of private and other public land made by For- est Inventory and Analysis. For this fourth inventory, Three previous forest Inventories of Ohio provided 38 new ground plots were established to adequately theground plotsthatformedthe basisforthis remea- estimate area and volume on the Wayne National surement. Remeasured plots in previous inventories Forest. But because no remeasured plots are avail- were selected based on a modified sampling with able, trend analysis In geographic areas that contain partial replacement design that provides for maxi- National Forest lands is difficult. 1 Special Studies RELIABILITY OF THE ESTIMATES !t is not the intention of this publication to analyze The data in this report were based on a carefully temporal data. A separate analytical report detailing designed sample of forest conditions throughout changes in theState'sforest resources is being pre- Ohio. However, becausethefield crewsdid not mea- pared, as is a biomass report (Wharton and Griffith sureeverytreeorevery acreinthestate,thedataare estimates. The reliability ofthe estimating procedure 1992). In addition, several associated studies related canbejudged bytwo importantstatistical measures: toforest resources havebeen carriedout inconjunc- accuracy and precision. Among statisticians, accu- tionwiththe inventory, most notablyforest-land own- racy refers to the success of estimating the true val- ership and timber harvest studies. ue; precision referstotheclusteringofsamplevalues about their own averages or to the variation among Forest land ownership is an important component of repeated samples. We are interested primarily in the the inventories conductedthroughoutthe northeast- accuracy ofthe inventory, but in most cases we can ern UnitedStates. Avariety ofsources isavailablefor only measure its precision. quantifying public ownership, so datawere obtained fromknowninformation.TheOhioDepartmentofNat- Although accuracy cannot be measured exactly, it ural Resources identified all the forest lands owned can be checked. Preliminarytables are sent to other by the State, counties, and municipalities. Federal agenciesandtooutsideexpertsfamiliarwiththestate ownership information wasobtainedfromtheWayne ofOhio. Ifquestionsarise, the data are reviewed and National Forest. Information about privateforest-land reanalyzed to resolve the differences. Also, great ownership was derived from the sample of ground care is taken to keep all sources of procedural error to a minimum by careful training of both field and plots. office personnel, frequent inspection of field and of- ficework, andapplicationofthemostreliableinvento- Harvest information is another important part of our ry methods. inventories. Changesintimberusemakeitnecessary to evaluate the stability, direction, and future of the Because of the care exercised in the inventory pro- timberproductsindustryintheState. Currentdataon cess, estimatesofprecisionaffordareasonablemea- theindustrialtimberharvestand non industrialtimber sure of the inventory's adequacy. The precision of uses such asfuelwood are needed to accurately de- each estimate is described by its sampling error. termine the total timber harvest from Ohio forests. A Sampling errors are given with several tables in this report on Ohio's primary forest products industry is report. The others are available upon request. available (Widmann and Long 1991). Briefly, here is an example of howthe sampling error Duringthis inventory, new procedureswere incorpo- is used to indicate reliability. The estimate of timber- ratedthat resulted in information notavailableduring landforOhiois7,620,300acres.Theassociatedsam- previous inventories. Incrementcoresfromsite-index plingerroris 1.2percent, or91,400acres.Thismeans treesweresenttotheForestInventoryandAnalysis's that if there are no errors in the procedure and we repeatedtheinventoryinthesameway, theoddsare Tree Ring Lab where ages were accurately deter- mined to help calculate potential site productivity. 2to 1 (66percentprobability)thattheestimatewould be between 7,528,900 and 7,711,700 acres Recreation opportunity potential was recorded, and (7,620,300 ± 91,400). Similarly, the odds are 19to 1 tree-grade information was collected to assess tim- (95 percent probability) that the estimate would be ber quality. within ± 182,800 acres. Not all oftheinformation collected iscontainedwithin County estimates are less reliable. In Ohio, forexam- this publication. Forest area, numbers of trees, ple, while the sampling error for timberland at the biomass, timber volume, growth, and change be- state level is 1.2 percent, the sampling error for tween inventorystatisticsreportedareonlyasumma- Adams County is 5.0 percent. In general, asthe size ry of the information collected. Other information is ofthe estimate decreases in relation to the total, the available (see List of Available Tables), and addi- sampling error, expressed as a percentage of the tional summaries may be developed upon request. estimate, increases. 2