|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Pinus contorta var. latifolia | Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
ABBREVIATION :
PINCONL
SYNONYMS :
Pinus contorta ssp. latifolia (Engelm.) Critchfield
SCS PLANT CODE :
PICOL
COMMON NAMES :
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine
lodgepole pine
black pine
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of lodgepole pine is Pinus
contorta Dougl. ex Loud. [46,51]. The species is divided into four
geographic varieties which differ in tree form, needle length and
structure, and cone persistence and serotiny [16]:
var. contorta = the coastal form known as shore pine
var. bolanderi = the Mendocino County White Plains form known as
Bolander pine
var. murrayana (Grev. & Balf.) Engelm. = Sierra lodgepole pine
var. latifolia Engelm. = Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine
This report pertains only to variety latifolia, Rocky Mountain lodgepole
pine.
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine and jack pine (P. banksiana) are
morphologically similar and hybridize where their ranges overlap in
western Canada [16].
LIFE FORM :
Tree
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
Ronald Uchytil, February 1992
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Uchytil, Ronald J. 1992. Pinus contorta var. latifolia. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Pinus contorta var. latifolia | Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine grows from the central Yukon Territory
south throughout British Columbia and western Alberta east of the Coast
Range. In the United States it grows throughout the Rocky Mountain
states from Idaho and Montana to southern Colorado, and in the Cascades
as far south as the Washington-Oregon border. Outlying eastern
populations occur in the Caribou Mountains of northern Alberta, in the
Cypress Hills of southeastern Alberta and southwestern Saskatchewan, in
central Montana, and in the Black Hills of South Dakota [16,46,78].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES11 Spruce - fir
FRES19 Aspen - birch
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES22 Western white pine
FRES23 Fir - spruce
FRES25 Larch
FRES26 Lodgepole pine
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
STATES :
CO ID HI MT OR SD UT WA WY AB
BC NT SK YT
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
GLAC GRTE HALE MORA NOCA ROMO
YELL
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
2 Cascade Mountains
5 Columbia Plateau
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K012 Douglas-fir forest
K013 Cedar - hemlock - pine forest
K014 Grand fir - Douglas-fir forest
K015 Western spruce - fir forest
K017 Black Hills pine forest
K063 Foothills prairie
SAF COVER TYPES :
201 White spruce
202 White spruce - paper birch
204 Black spruce
205 Mountain hemlock
206 Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir
208 Whitebark pine
209 Bristlecone pine
210 Interior Douglas-fir
212 Western larch
213 Grand fir
215 Western white pine
216 Blue spruce
217 Aspen
218 Lodgepole pine
219 Limber pine
224 Western hemlock
227 Western redcedar - western hemlock
228 Western redcedar
237 Interior ponderosa pine
251 White spruce - aspen
252 Paper birch
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Extensive lodgepole pine forests occur throughout the range of this
species. Many of these forests are seral; however, under certain
conditions lodgepole pine may attain climax. Lodgepole pine habitat
types are found on sites where topoedaphic situations exclude the
establishment of other conifers [see SUCCESSIONAL STATUS], and generally
lie between colder portions of the Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii)
series and wetter portions of the subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa)
series [79]. In Montana, the lodgepole pine habitat type series occurs
east of the Continental Divide primarily between 5,000 and 7,500 feet
(1,500-2,300 m) in elevation [67]. In the Colorado Front Range, this
zone lies between 8,200 and 9,300 feet (2,500-3,800 m) [57], and in the
Uinta Mountains of Utah, between 7,600 and 9,100 feet (2,300-2,800 m)
[56].
Classifications listing lodgepole pine as a dominant in community types
(cts), habitat types (hts), dominance types (dts), or ecosystem
associations (eas) are presented below:
Area Classification Authority
CO: Routt NF forest veg. hts Hoffman & Alexander 1980
Gunnison & forest veg. hts Komarkova & others 1988
Uncompahgre NF
Roosevelt & forest veg. hts Hess & Alexander 1986
Arapaho NF
White River & general veg. hts Hess & Wasser 1982
Arapaho NF
WY: Medicine Bow NF forest veg. hts Alexander & others 1986
Bighorn Mtns. forest veg. hts Hoffman & Alexander 1976
Wind River Mtns. coniferous forest hts Reed 1976
e ID, w WY forest hts Steele & others 1983
ID: Caribou & aspen cts Mueggler & Campbell 1982
Targhee NF
n ID forest hts Cooper & others 1991
c ID forest hts Steele & others 1981
n UT coniferous forest hts Mauk & Henderson 1984
UT aspen cts Mueggler & Campbell 1986
OR: Eagle Cap Wldns. general veg. cts Cole 1982
e OR, se WA: Blue Mtns. general veg. cts Hall 1973
OR, WA general veg. cts Franklin & Dyrness 1973
MT forest veg. hts Pfister & others 1977
riparian dts Hansen & others 1988
SD, WY: Black Hills NF forest veg. hts, cts Hoffman & Alexander 1987
AB general veg. cts Moss 1955
w-c AB forest eas Corns & Annas 1986
BC: Prince Rupert Forest general veg. eas Haeussler & others 1985
Region-Interior
Cedar-Hemlock zone
Prince Rupert Forest general veg. eas Pojar & others 1984
Region-Subboreal
Spruce zone
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Pinus contorta var. latifolia | Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
Lodgepole pine is an important timber-producing tree. In some northern
Rocky Mountain States, it comprises 25 percent of the lumber processed
[85]. It is chiefly cut for lumber, especially 2x4's, but other common
wood products include plywood, posts and poles, house logs, railway
ties, mine timbers, and paper [52,85].
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Habitat: Lodgepole pine's importance to big game animals is as cover
and habitat. Throughout much of the Rockies, lodgepole forests cover
extensive areas that serve as deer and elk summer ranges. Although
these forests typically have sparse understories and provide very little
forage, they provide important cover for ungulates that forage in
associated nonforested communities [83].
Food: Lodgepole pine seeds are an important food of pine squirrels. In
some areas the seeds are the squirrel's sole food source from November
to March or April. Even in the summer, lodgepole seeds may make up a
large percentage of the squirrel's diet [48]. Chipmunks and songbirds
also eat lodgepole pine seeds [31]. Lodgepole pine needles are an
important blue and spruce grouse winter food [63,88]. Wild ungulates
seldom browse lodgepole pine, except in winter when it is sometimes used
as an emergency food.
PALATABILITY :
Lodgepole pine's palatability to livestock is low [20]. Domestic sheep
occasionally eat the succulent new candles of seedlings in the spring
and browse needles and small branches if other forage is lacking [51].
Its palatability to wild ungulates is also low [20]. The seeds are
palatable to a variety of small birds and mammals [31].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Cowan and others [14] listed lodgepole pine as a "high quality" food for
ungulates but also noted that it was browsed only occasionally. Other
sources indicate that this species is not very nutritious, listing its
energy value as fair and its protein value as poor [20]. Cowan reported
the crude protein content of lodgepole pine browse ranged between 6.7
and 7.26 percent, which was slightly higher than subalpine fir and
Douglas-fir. They also indicated that crude fiber was relatively high,
about 24 or 25 percent.
COVER VALUE :
Lodgepole pine stands provide good thermal and hiding cover for deer,
elk, moose, and bear [52,79]. The degree to which lodgepole pine
provides environmental protection for wildlife species is rated as
follows [20]:
CO MT UT WY
pronghorn ---- ---- poor poor
elk good good good good
mule deer good good good good
white-tailed deer good good ---- good
small mammals good good good good
small nongame birds good good good good
upland game birds ---- good good good
waterfowl ---- ---- fair poor
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Lodgepole pine is used for the reclamation of all kinds of disturbed
sites in montane and subalpine habitats. In Alberta it has been used to
reforest coal mine overburden and amended oil sand tailings [31]. It
can be established by seed or transplants. Nursery-grown seedlings are
readily available. Its long-term revegetation potential is rated as
high in Utah, and medium in Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana [20].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
For landscaping purposes, lodgepole pine is best used in screenings and
windbreaks [81]. It is sometimes planted as a specimen tree because its
rapid growth allows it to be trained to produce unusual shapes [43]. It
can also be grown as a bonsai specimen [43].
Native Americans used the straight and slender poles to support their
lodges. They also ate the cambium for food and occasionally used the
sap for medicinal purposes [32].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Silviculture: Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine is best regenerated using
even-aged sulvicultural methods. The general practice is clearcutting
with subsequent stand establishment through natural regeneration or
planting. Lopping and scattering serotinous cone-bearing slash is a
common method of seed dispersal. These cones open and release seed with
normal summer soil surface temperatures. Methods and timing of site
preperation treatments vary greatly depending on site quality and seed
abundance. Because severe stagnation occurs in overstocked stands,
stocking should not exceed 500 to 800 stems per acre (1,200-2,000/ha) at
5 to 20 years of age. Lotan and Perry [52] provide a comprehensive
review of Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine silviculture.
Insects: The mountain pine beetle is the most serious insect pest of
lodgepole pine. This species can cause catastrophic losses in repeated
outbreaks. During a single infestation, pine beetles can destroy almost
all merchantable trees in a stand. Amman and Safranyik [3] review
insect pests of lodgepole pine.
Parasites and diseases: Lodgepole pine dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium
americanum) is the most serious parasite of lodgepole pine. In many
areas more than 50 percent of stands are infected. Management of
infected stands is best accomplished through clearcutting [33]. Stem
cankers caused by fungal pathogens are the most serious diseases of
lodgepole pine. Cankered stems are useless for lumber or posts and
poles [51].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Pinus contorta var. latifolia | Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine is a small- to medium-sized, coniferous,
evergreen tree. Mature tree heights range from 50 to 100 feet (15-30 m)
and bole diameters occasionally reach 24 inches (61 cm) [16,40]. Mature
size varies regionally. In much of the Rocky Mountains, 140-year-old
trees are commonly 60 to 80 feet (18-24 m) tall and 7 to 13 inches
(18-33 cm) d.b.h. In the Blue Mountains of Oregon, 12-inch (30 cm)
d.b.h. trees are 75 feet (23 m) tall at age 100 years [51]. Mature
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine have remarkably straight, branch-free
boles and small, open crowns on the upper 25 to 60 percent of the tree
[52]. The trees are short-lived. Two-hundred-year-old trees are rare,
except around Yellowstone National Park, where pure stands contain 300-
to 400-year-old trees [52].
Growth is greatly affected by stand stocking. In British Columbia and
Montana, tree size in 90-year-old stands varied under different stand
densities as follows [52]:
location density avg. d.b.h.
British Columbia 576 stems/acre (1,423/ha) 9 inches (23 cm)
British Columbia 6,750 stems/acre (16,700/ha) 3 inches (7.5 cm)
Montana 500 stems/acre (1,235/ha) 7.5 inches (19 cm)
Montana 2,500 stems/acre (6,175/ha) 3.6 inches (9 cm)
With extreme overstocking, growth is stagnated and "dog-hair" stands
develop. In one 70-year-old stand with 100,000 stems/acre (247,000/ha),
trees averaged only 4 feet (1.2 m) in height and less than 1 inch (2.5
cm) in diameter at ground level [51].
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine has sharp-pointed, 1- to 3-inch-long
(2.5-7.5 cm), yellowish-green needles in fascicles of two [40]. The
bark is thin (less than 0.5 inch [1.2 cm]), light-colored, and scaly,
except for low-elevation plants in northern Idaho and southern British
Columbia which may have thicker, deeply fissured, black bark [16,40].
The root system is highly variable, and may vary among individuals at a
single location from very shallow to quite deep [52]. Individual trees
may have serotinous or nonserotinous cones. Cone serotiny is discussed
further under REGENERATION PROCESS.
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Undisturbed State: Phanerophyte (mesophanerophyte)
Burned or Clipped State: Therophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Seed and seed production: Lodgepole pine seeds are among the smallest
in the genus Pinus, averaging 94,000 per pound (207,000/kg) [51]. Seed
production begins at an early age. Five- to ten-year-old trees
typically bear cones. Seed production is quite regular. Good seed
crops are produced at 1- to 3-year-intervals with light crops
intervening [52].
Cone serotiny: Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine produces serotinous cones
which do not open at maturity because they are sealed shut by a resinous
bond between the cone scales. These cones remain on the tree for years
and require temperatures between 113 and 140 degrees F (45-60 C) to melt
the resin and release the seed [51]. In nature, temperatures of this
magnitude within a tree's crown are generated only by forest fires.
Individual trees may have serotinous cones, nonserotinous cones, or both
[52]. The percentage of trees in a stand bearing serotinous cones
varies greatly by region and elevation, and with stand age and fire
history. Young trees produce open cones. The serotinous cone trait is
not exhibited until trees are 20 to 30 years old [48]. In the Canadian
Rockies, typically 80 to 90 percent of lodgepole pine trees bear
serotinous cones [52]. In eastern Oregon, serotinous cones are uncommon
[51]. In the U.S. Rockies, cone serotiny is quite variable. Lotan [48]
summarized lodgepole pine serotiny by habitat type for numerous National
Forests of the northern and central Rocky Mountains. The percentage of
trees bearing serotinous cones in a given stand ranged from 0 to 85
percent and averaged less than 50 percent. On some forests, cone
serotiny increased with increasing elevation. On the Colville National
Forest in Washington, for example, about 10 percent of lodgepole pine
trees in low-elevation Douglas-fir habitats had serotinous cones,
compared with 82 percent in high-elevation subalpine fir habitat types.
However, on the Deerlodge National Forest, Montana, cone serotiny varied
between 28 and 47 percent and did not change with elevation. Type of
stand disturbance also influences cone serotiny. Stands initiated from
high-intensity crown fires (a process which selects for the closed-cone
trait) have a higher percentage of serotinous trees than stands which
are initiated from nonfire related disturbances [61]. Near West
Yellowstone, Montana, 58 percent of lodgepole pine trees in an
even-aged, fire-origin stand had serotinous cones, while only 38 percent
of the trees in an adjacent uneven-aged stand had serotinous cones [49].
Seedfall and dispersal: Nonserotinous cones open shortly after
ripening. Most of this seed is shed in September and October, but small
amounts fall throughout the winter and spring [52]. The winged seeds
are dispersed by gravity and wind. Nearly all fall within 200 feet (60
m) of the source [16]. In stands with a high proportion of serotinous
trees, annual seedfall is small. In lodgepole pine stands in Alberta
and Montana, annual seedfall was 10,100 to 28,700 per acre
(25,000-71,000/ha) and 17,400 per acre (43,000/ha) respectively [16].
Seed viability, germination, and seedling establishment: Seeds remain
viable in closed cones for years. However, once released, few remain
viable for more than 1 year [50]. Seed soundness is relatively high,
which is attributed to lodgepole pine's relative freedom from cone and
seed insects. Seed soundness was 75 to 79 percent in southeastern
Oregon, and 65 to 88 percent in Colorado [16]. Germinative capacity is
also high, ranging from 65 to 90 percent under laboratory conditions
[52]. Germination is poor when daytime soil temperatures are below 60
degrees F (15 deg C) and is optimal when daytime soil temperatures range
between 70 and 81 degrees F (21-27 C) [52]. In nature, most germination
occurs within a few weeks of snowmelt, when soils are moist and
temperatures favorable. Germination and seedling survival are best on
mineral soil. Duff and litter are generally poor lodgepole pine
seedbeds because they dry out quickly. Seeds may germinate on duff, but
shallow-rooted seedlings growing here commonly die from drought [51].
Lodgepole pine seedlings are poor competitors. Establishment is greatly
reduced where grasses are plentiful [52].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine grows across a wide range of environments
in montane and subalpine forests of the West. With a broad range of
moisture and temperature tolerances, it occupies forests spanning a
range of envirnomental conditions from relatively low-elevation, warm
and dry forests to relatively high-elevation, cold and moist forests
[66]. Elevational ranges for four Rocky Mountain states are as follows
[20,36,56,67]:
from 6,000 to 11,000 feet (1,830-3,350 m) in Colorado
4,000 to 7,500 feet (1,220-2,290 m) in Montana
6,800 to 9,100 feet (2,070-2,775 m) in Utah
6,560 to 10,500 feet (2,000-3,200 m) in Wyoming
Soils: Lodgepole pine grows on a wide variety soils but grows best on
moist, medium-textured soils derived from granitic, shale, or
coarse-grained lava parent materials [10,52]. It rarely grows on soils
derived from limestone, except in Canada, where extensive stands occur
on calcareous glacial tills [52]. It is often the only tree that grows
on very infertile soils, which allows it to attain climax [see
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS].
Associated vegetation: Principal tree associates are indicated under
SAF cover types. Because of its tolerance of a wide range of
environmental conditions, lodgepole pine grows in association with many
understory species. The most common understroy associates include
pinegrass (Calamagrostis rubescens), elk sedge (Carex geyeri), Ross
sedge (C. rossii), pachystima (Pachystima myrsinites), twinflower
(Linnaea borealis), beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax), huckleberry or
whortleberry (Vaccinium spp.), serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia),
oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor), bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata),
buffaloberry (Shepherdia canadensis), curlleaf mountain-mahogany
(Cercocarpus ledifolius), bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), and juniper
(Juniperus spp.) [34,67,79]. An association between lodgepole pine and
Vaccinium is especially common, and thrives in cool, moist sites on
infertile, granitic soils [52].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Lodgepole pine is an intolerant, seral species throughout the northern
Cascades and much of the Rocky Mountains. It possesses several
attributes that allow it to pioneer burned-over areas aggressively: (1)
serotinous cones that contain a large seed reserve which is released by
fire; (2) regular and abundant seed production; (3) small seeds that
disperse well; (4) rapid juvenile growth; and (5) adaptability to a wide
variety of sites [16,49]. Most of the extensive lodgepole forests of
the Rocky Mountains are seral and of fire origin. These stands are
typically even-aged, establishing within 10 to 20 years after fire [86].
Lodgepole pine cannot reproduce in the shade of its own canopy. Without
another fire, lodgepole stands begin to breakup between 100 and 200
years of age and are eventually replaced by shade-tolerant conifer
associates [17,23,51]. These is most commonly subalpine fir and
Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) at upper elevations, and
Douglas-fir at lower elevations. Other tolerant associates that may
replace lodgepole pine include grand fir (Abies grandis), white fir (A.
concolor), western redcedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga
heterophylla), mountain hemlock (T. mertensiana), and ponderosa pine
(Pinus ponderosa) [86].
Under certain situations, lodgepole forests can be persistent or climax.
This occurs on sites where tolerant conifers are unable to grow and thus
lodgepole pine remains as the dominant tree. Factors that allow
lodgepole pine to be the exclusive tree on a site include [12,67]: (1)
frequent, widespread, stand-replacing wildfires that eliminate the seed
source of shade-tolerant competitors (prolonged seral stages), (2)
frequent, light ground fires that remove tolerant competitors (prolonged
seral stages), (3) exclusively dense lodgepole pine stands that
competitively exclude the regeneration of shade-tolerant competitors
(prolonged seral stages), and (4) sites that are environmentally
unsuitable for the establishment of other conifers (climax lodgepole
stands).
Topoedaphic conditions that exclude other conifers and allow lodgepole
forests to become climax are found on sites having gentle terrain,
droughty soils, and frequent summer frosts [80]. Edaphic conditions
alone, such as infertile soils, may also exclude other conifers [52f].
For example, extensive climax lodgepole forests occur in Yellowstone
National Park on obsidian sands [75]. In climax lodgepole forests, a
high percentage of the trees produce nonserotinous cones [36,37].
Regeneration occurs through gap-phase replacement resulting in
uneven-aged stands [86]. In Yellowstone, the overstory canopy is
apparently open enough for sufficient light to reach the forest floor,
permitting understory pine to survive and eventually replace the
overstory [18].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Lodgepole pine flowering occurs in the spring, but fertilization does
not occur until approximately 13 months after pollination. After
fertilization, cones and seeds mature rapidly over the summer and are
mature by August or September. Cone maturity is indicated by a color
change from purple-green to light-brown. Nonserotinous cones disperse
seeds shortly after ripening. Most seeds are shed in September and
October, but small amounts fall throughout the winter and spring [52].
In northern Idaho, western Montana, and Yellowstone National Park,
phenological events proceed as follows [76]:
east of Continental Divide west of Continental Divide
(Montana and Yellowstone NP) (northern Idaho & western MT)
date of occurrence date of occurrence
--------------------------- -----------------------------
earliest latest average earliest latest average
bark March 18 May 27 May 14 March 12 May 18 April 26
slips
shoots March 18 July 21 May 16 March 31 June 13 May 4
start
buds March 18 June 28 May 30 March 27 June 25 May 17
burst
pollen May 17 July 14 June 17 May 1 June 23 June 6
starts
pollen June 1 July 27 July 3 May 2 July 12 June 19
ends
shoots April 6 Sept 18 July 22 May 31 Sept 17 July 27
end
bark July 11 Oct 1 Aug 18 June 2 Oct 2 Aug 24
sticks
winter June 6 Sept 19 Aug 3 May 31 Oct 10 Aug 14
buds formed
cones July 20 Sept 25 Aug 19 May 26 Sept 18 July 29
full size
cones July 18 Oct 31 Sept 3 Aug 8 Oct 7 Sept 7
open
Phenological events proceed as follows at Kananaskis Provincial Park,
Alberta [78]:
event earliest date latest date avg. date
pollen shed begins May 7 July 3 June 14
pollen shed ends May 27 July 25 July 1
buds bursting April 17 May 28 May 10
leaves fully flushed May 31 July 16 June 13
diameter growth begins April 21 June 6 May 15
diameter growth ends June 22 Aug 18 July 24
height growth begins April 15 May 27 May 2
height growth ends July 30 Aug 28 Aug 13
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Pinus contorta var. latifolia | Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Plant adaptations to fire: The percentage of lodgepole pine trees
bearing serotinous cones varies considerably throughout the Rocky
Mountains, but in most stands both closed- and open-coned trees occur
[48]. This allows lodgepole pine to regenerate following both low- and
high-intensity fires.
Serotinous cones are advantageous for regeneration following
high-intensity fires because the heat opens the cones and releases the
seeds. These cones store huge amounts of seeds. Sometimes, 10 years of
annual seed production are stored in serotinous lodgepole pine cones,
which equals millions of seeds per acre [50]. This huge seed reserve
blankets the exposed forest floor within 3 years after fire [39]. Even
in areas where the nonserotinous habit is prevalent, such as in
Yellowstone National Park, seed released from serotinous cones can be
substantial. Following the wildfires of 1988 in Yellowstone, estimates
of seed on the ground in burned-over lodgepole forests in the fall
ranged from 50,000 to 970,000 per acre (123,000-2,400,000/ha) [4].
Conversely, ground fires generate insufficient heat to open serotinous
cones. Following this type of fire, seed for regeneration must come
from surviving, nonserotinous-coned trees.
Lodgepole pine produces seed at an early age. Cones on young trees are
nonserotinous. Thus, postfire seedlings contribute to seedfall within
about 10 years, and additional seedling establishment can occur if
seedbed conditions are favorable.
Fire regime: Fire regimes in lodgepole-pine-dominated communities vary
greatly in the Rocky Mountains. In areas having dry summers, low- to
medium-intensity ground fires occurred at intervals of 25 to 50 years
[5]. In areas with moist summers, however, sparse understories and slow
fuel build-up result in less frequent but more intense fires.
Stand-replacing fires in lodgepole forests of Alberta occurred at about
67-year intervals [17], while it may take over 300 years for fuels to
sustain stand-replacing crown fires in Yellowstone National Park [72].
Lotan and others [50] have described fire in many lodgepole pine stands
as an "all or nothing" proposition. That is, fires either (1) go out
after a day or two or smolder in duff for extended periods or (2)
develop into rapidly spreading wildfires. Smoldering fires are common
in lodgepole forests because understory fuels are sparse. Furthermore,
fire spread to the crowns is difficult because they are elevated well
above the forest floor. However, lodgepole pine stands become more
flammable as they age because dead woody fuels accumulate on the forest
floor. These fuels result from past fires, insect and disease outbreaks
(especially from the mountain pine beetle), and overmaturity. For
example, trees killed by a high-intensity fire eventually fall to the
ground creating a large fuel buildup. Mountain pine beetle outbreaks
create ground fuels by killing trees and opening up stands to drying.
In general, the potential for high-intensity crown fires is great twice
in the life of a stand. The first period is in young stands, when the
crowns of the growing lodgepoles are in proximity to dead woody fuels.
The second time is when overmature stands break up and are being
replaced by shade-tolerant associates. During this period, dead fuels
accumulate as lodgepole snags fall, and young shade-tolerant conifers
provide a fuel ladder to the crowns of overstory trees.
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
crowned-stored residual colonizer; long-viability seed in on-site cones
(serotinous cones)
crown-stored residual colonizer; short-viability seed in on-site cones
(nonserotinous cones)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Pinus contorta var. latifolia | Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Plant: Lodgepole pine is more damaged by ground fires than thicker
barked species such as ponderosa pine or Douglas-fir are. Because its
thin bark has poor insulating properties, many trees are killed from
ground fires as a result of cambial heating [65]. However, some trees
survive, and in general, low-intensity ground fires thin lodgepole pine
stands [50]. In northwestern Wyoming, Loope and Gruell [47] observed
numerous individuals in open lodgepole pine stands with two or three
fire scars.
Seed: Seeds are well protected from heat inside sealed cones. However,
the seeds can be destroyed by intense crown fires that ignite the cones
[4,8].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Although lodgepole pine trees are killed by all but light ground fires,
postfire recovery tends to be rapid as new stands quickly establish from
seed released by serotinous cones. Seedling growth in fire-generated
stands is influenced by stocking rates. In overstocked stands, trees
may not grow more than 4 feet tall in several decades, but in
understocked stands lodgepole pine grows fast. On burned and unburned
clearcuts in western Montana, 9- to 11-year-old lodgepole pine seedlings
averaged 6.6 feet (2 m) in height, and were considerably taller than the
same-aged western larch (Larix occidentalis), Douglas-fir, Engelmann
spruce, and subalpine fir [77]. Twelve years after the Sleeping Child
Burn in western Montana, 30 percent of lodgepole seedlings were over 18
inches (45 cm) tall. Here, seedling density was 17,700 per acre
(43,700/ha) [54].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
Lodgepole pine seedling establishment following fire is influenced by
many factors, including prefire overstory density, competing vegetation,
and probably most important, fire intensity, which in turn affects
seedbed condition, opening of serotinous cones, and seed survival.
High-intensity fires: High-intensity fires generally expose much mineral
soil and open serotinous cones [50]. Thus much seed is released onto
favorable seedbeds resulting in abundant seedling establishment. An
example is the Sleeping Child Burn in western Montana, in which 28,000
acres (11,000 ha) of predominantly lodgepole forest was destroyed by a
high-intensity lightning-caused wildfire. Three years after the fire,
lodgepole pine seedling density averaged 34,000 per acre (84,000/ha)
[54]. With abundant seed and favorable moisture following
high-intensity fires, stocking can be extremely high, with hundreds of
thousands of seedlings per acre [8,39]. Some stands have had as many as
300,000 lodgepole pine seedlings per acre (741,000/ha) by the first
postfire year [8]. Seedling growth in these overstocked stands
stagnates, and trees may be only 4 feet tall at age 50 to 70 years [39].
Occasionally, crown fires may be intense enough to ignite cones in the
crown. This destroys much of the seed supply resulting in low stocking.
This occurred in central Idaho, where only 450 and 1,134 lodgepole pine
seedlings per acre (1,100 and 2,800/ha) were present 1 and 5 years,
respectively, following a high intensity wildfire in a lodgepole
pine/beargrass community [6f8]. One year following the Yellowstone
Fires of 1988, lodgepole pine seedling density was higher on
moderate-severity burns where the trees were killed but the crowns were
not consumed (1.6 to 21.9 seedlings/m2) than on sites where hot crown
fires killed the trees and consumed the needles and fine branches (0.4
to 3.1 seedlings/m2) [4].
Low-intensity fires: Following low-intensity fires, lodgepole pine
stocking depends on the amount of mineral soil exposed. Generally if
the duff is dry, ground fires will expose mineral soils, but if the duff
is moist, less mineral soil is exposed resulting in lowered stocking
[50]. Surface fires will not open serotinous cones in the tree crowns,
but most lodgepole stands in the Rockies have sufficient open-coned
trees to provide seed for restocking [50].
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Fire behavior of logging slash: Fresh, cured coniferous logging slash
is generally very flammable because of its characteristic loose
arrangement and high percentage of needles and twigs. Flammability
decreases with time as needles drop to the forest floor and as a result
of compaction by winter snow, but it may take more than 2 years for
lodgepole pine to lose most of its needles. Fresh and 1-year-old
lodgepole pine slash can burn very hot. Rate of fire spread during
experimental burns with fresh and 1-year-old lodgepole pine logging
slash was as follows [22]:
20 tons of slash/acre 32.5 tons of slash/acre
relative rate of relative rate of
humidity spread humidity spread
(%) (sec./foot) (%) (sec./foot)
fresh slash 84-88 48.5 52-64 17.5
1-year-old slash 73-92 88.8 54-93 33.5
Tree mortality: Published models can be used to predict fire-caused
mortality of lodgepole pine [64,65,74]. Crown scorch and bole damage
are the most important variables for determining mortality/survival.
Lodgepole pine girdled by ground fires, but with no crown scorching, may
appear healthy for a couple of years after fire even though they are
essentially dead. This is because it often takes more than 2 years for
these trees to lose their needles [2].
Susceptibility of injured trees to insects and disease: Trees injured by
fire are susceptible to attack by insects. Two years after wildfires in
Yellowstone National Park, 44 percent of living but scorched lodgepole
pines were infested by insects, primarily the pine engraver. Most
commonly, trees infested were those with greater than 80 percent basal
girdling. Mountain pine beetles, however, were not strongly attracted
to fire-scarred trees [2].
Lodgepole pines that survive ground fires are susceptible to attack in
later years by decay fungi that enter through basal wounds. In an
85-year-old stand in Alberta, 46 percent of trees with basal scars that
resulted from a fire 33 years before sampling had decay fungi in the scars.
Of these trees, about half were infected with red stain fungi [62].
Snagfall following fire-kill: Fire-killed lodgepole pine trees begin to
fall 2 to 5 years after dying and most trees will be down in about 15
years [50]. Following the Sleeping Child Burn in western Montana, few 3-
to 8-inch-diameter (7.5-20 cm) snags fell during the first 2 years after
the fire. After 2 years they fell at an annual rate of 8.4 percent
until postfire year 15 when about 30 percent remained [53].
FIRE CASE STUDIES
SPECIES: Pinus contorta var. latifolia | Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
CASE NAME :
Table Mountain - Prescribed Crown Fire Study
REFERENCE :
Woodard, P. M. 1977 [87]
SEASON/SEVERITY CLASSIFICATION :
fall/severe
STUDY LOCATION :
The study took place in the Cascade Mountains in central Washington,
approximately midway between the towns of Ellensburg and Wenatchee.
PREFIRE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY :
The study area is within the subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) zone. Two
adjacent but different-aged stands were burned. One area was a
lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) thicket about 100 years old. The other
was an older, decadent stand of lodgepole pine with subalpine fir and
Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) attaining dominance. Each is
described below.
Lodgepole pine thicket - Lodgepole pine was the overstory dominant, but
subalpine fir and Engelmann spruce were also principal components.
Subalpine fir and Engelmann spruce were codiminants in the intermediate
size classes. Subalpine fir was the only tree regenerating under the
canopy. Understory plants included elk sedge (Carex geyeri), Hood sedge
(C. hoodii), heartleaf arnica (Arnica cordifolia), broadleaf arnica (A.
latifolia), bigleaf lupine (Lupinus polyphyllus), and dwarf bilberry
(Vacciuium myrtillus).
Snag area - This was a decadent lodgepole stand, with subalpine fir and
Engelmann spruce dominating the overstory canopy. Fir and spruce
codominated the intermediate size classes, but subalpine fir was the
only tree regenerating under the canopy. Predominant understory plants
included subalpine fir, elk sedge, broadleaf arnica, and mosses
(Rhacomitrium canascens, Polytridum commune).
TARGET SPECIES PHENOLOGICAL STATE :
NO-ENTRY
SITE DESCRIPTION :
The burned area is a southwest-facing gentle slope at an elevation of
5,596 to 5,776 feet (1,706-1,761 m). A total of 27 acres (10.9 ha) were
burned.
Climate: The climate is typical of most areas within the subalpine
zone. The winters are cold and wet and the summers cool and dry. Frost
and freezing temperatures can occur during any month of the year. Over
70 percent of precipitation falls as snow between October and March.
Soil and duff: The two stands have similar soils, but the soil in the
snag area is more fertile and better developed. In both areas soils are
derived from basalt residium, have a clay-loam texture, and average 6
inches (15.2 cm) deep. The effective rooting depth is about 20 inches
(51 cm) in the thicket area, and 20 to 40 inches (51-102 cm) in the snag
area. On both areas, duff was generally from 1 to 4 inches (0.4-1.6 cm)
thick. The mean depth of duff was 2.3 inches (5.9 cm) on the thicket
area, and 1.9 inches (4.9 cm) on the snag area.
Fuel loading: Prior to burning, mean fuel loads were as follows:
fuels thicket area snag area
tons/acre tonnes/ha tons/acre tonnes/ha
dead and down wood
0.0-0.25 inch (0.0-0.6 cm) 0.6 1.3 0.9 2.0
0.26-0.99 inch (0.6-2.5 cm) 2.1 4.6 2.9 6.4
1.0-3.0 inches (2.6-7.6 cm) 4.4 9.8 5.1 11.4
> 3.0 inches (7.6 cm) rotten 17.4 38.9 30.9 69.2
> 3.0 inches (7.6 cm) solid 17.0 38.1 50.1 112.1
litter 41.4 92.7 89.8 201.2
duff 32.5 72.8 30.0 67.1
FIRE DESCRIPTION :
The fire was ignited by drip torches on September 30, 1975, taking
approximately 1 hour and 20 minutes to ignite the entire 27 acres (10.9
ha). Actual fire prescriptions at the time of ignition were as follows:
ambient air temperature = 60 to 63 degrees F (16-17 C)
relative humidity = 19-21 percent
wind = calm gusts to 15.6 miles/hr (26 km/hr), from the south-southwest
days since last rain = 15
fine fuel moisture content = 13 percent
Within about 10 minutes after ignition, trees began to crown out. Fire
behavior for each area is summarized below:
Snag area - Crowning occurred throughout most of the snag area. Flame
heights were estimated to be 125 feet (38 m) by one observer, and 50
feet (15 m) above the tops of 90 foot (27 m) crowns by two other
observers. The fire consumed all small downed and dead wood from 0.0 to
1 inch (0-2.5 cm) in diameter, as well as needles and small twigs on
living standing trees. Ninety-six percent of down and dead fuels less
than 3 inches (7.6 cm) in diameter were consumed. In general, 90 to 100
percent of the duff layer was removed. Many trees less than 3 inches
(7.6 cm) in diameter at the base were completely consumed, and nearly
all standing snags were blown down or burned down. Where crowning
occurred, the only thing that remained immediately following the fire
was reddened soil, ash-covered soil, large-diameter logs, and dead
trees.
Lodgepole thicket - Fire within the lodgepole thicket was much less
severe. The crown fire which occurred within the snag area stopped when
it met the boundary of the lodgepole thicket. Dead and down fuels less
than 3 inches (7.6 cm) in diameter were reduced by 70 percent. Dead and
down fuels greater than 3 inches (7.6 cm) in diameter were reduced 34
percent. Duff was reduced about 25 percent.
FIRE EFFECTS ON TARGET SPECIES :
On portions of the burn where crowning occurred, all lodgepole pines
were killed. In the lodgepole thicket area the fire did not crown, and
some trees survived. In this area of Washington, Rocky Mountain
lodgepole pine is predominantly nonserotinous. Within 1 year of the
fire, lodgepole seedlings became established on the burned area, but
were restricted to areas along the burn edge and near survivors within
the lodgepole thicket area.
FIRE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS :
Fire hazard and the potential for a high-intensity crown fire are high
in decadent lodgepole pine stands being taken over by shade-tolerant
associates. The large accumulation of dead and down woody fuels burn
intensely, and the young conifers provide a fuel ladder to ignite the
crowns of overstory trees. In this study, there was about twice as much
dead and down woody fuels in the snag area (area suffering a crown fire)
as in the thicket area (area experiencing ground fire).
In areas where lodgepole pine is largely nonserotinous, seed for
regeneration must come from survivors. Lodgepole pine, however, is not
very fire resistant. The occasional mature tree which survives fire,
those escaping fire in small, unburned pockets, and trees adjacent to
burned areas provide seed to colonize burned areas. Because lodgepole
pine's seed dispersal distance is relatively short, seedling
establishment is restricted to areas around these seed trees.
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Pinus contorta var. latifolia | Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
REFERENCES :
1. Alexander, Robert R.; Hoffman, George R.; Wirsing, John M. 1986. Forest
vegetation of the Medicine Bow National Forest in southeastern Wyoming:
a habitat type classification. Res. Pap. RM-271. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 39 p. [307]
2. Amman, Gene D.; Ryan, Kevin C. 1991. Insect infestation of fire-injured
trees in the Greater Yellowstone Area. Res. Note INT-398. Ogden, UT:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station. 9 p. [16988]
3. Amman, Gene D.; Safranyik, Les. 1985. Insects of lodgepole pine: impacts
and control. In: Baumgartner, David M.; Krebill, Richard G.; Arnott,
James T.; Weetman, Gordon F., compilers and editors. Lodgepole pine: The
species and its management: Symposium proceedings; 1984 May 8-10;
Spokane, WA; 1984 May 14-16; Vancouver, BC. Pullman, WA: Washington
State University, Cooperative Extension: 107-124. [9445]
4. Anderson, Jay E.; Romme, William H. 1991. Initial floristics in
lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) forests following the 1988 Yellowstone
fires. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 1(2): 119-124. [16008]
5. Arno, Stephen F. 1980. Forest fire history in the northern Rockies.
Journal of Forestry. 78(8): 460-465. [11990]
6. Barth, Richard C. 1970. Revegetation after a subalpine wildfire. Fort
Collins, CO: Colorado State University. 142 p. Thesis. [12458]
7. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's
associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p.
[434]
8. Brown, James K. 1975. Fire cycles and community dynamics in lodgepole
pine forests. In: Baumgartner, David M., ed. Management of lodgepole
pine ecosystems: Symposium proceedings; 1973 October 9-11; Pullman, WA.
Vol. 1. Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension
Service: 429-456. [7841]
9. Brown, James K.; Johnston, Cameron M. 1987. Predicted residues and fire
behavior in small-stem lodgepole pine stands. In: Proceedings, workshop
on management of small-stem stands of lodgepole pine;1986 June 30-July
2; Fairmont Hot Springs, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-237. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station: 151-161. [5905]
10. Cochran, P. H. 1985. Soils and productivity of lodgepole pine. In:
Baumgartner, David M.; Krebill, Richard G.; Arnott, James T.; Weetman,
Gordon F., compilers and editors. Lodgepole pine: The species and its
management: Symposium proceedings; 1984 May 8-10; Spokane, WA; 1984 May
14-16; Vancouver, BC. Pullman, WA: Washington State University,
Cooperative Extension: 89-93. [9443]
11. Cole, David N. 1982. Vegetation of two drainages in Eagle Cap
Wilderness, Wallowa Mountains, Oregon. Res. Pap. INT-288. Ogden, UT:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 42 p. [658]
12. Cooper, Stephen V.; Neiman, Kenneth E.; Roberts, David W. 1991. (Rev.)
Forest habitat types of northern Idaho: a second approximation. Gen.
Tech. Rep. INT-236. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Research Station. 143 p. [14792]
13. Corns, I. G. W.; Annas, R. M. 1986. Field guide to forest ecosystems of
west-central Alberta. Edmonton, AB: Canadian Forestry Service, Northern
Forestry Centre. 251 p. [8998]
14. Cowan, I. McT.; Hoar, W. S.; Hatter, J. 1950. The effect of forest
succession upon the quantity and upon the nutritive values of woody
plants used by moose. Canadian Journal of Research. 28(5): 249-271.
[12820]
15. Crane, M. F.; Fischer, William C. 1986. Fire ecology of the forest
habitat types of central Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-218. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station. 85 p. [5297]
16. Critchfield, William B. 1980. Genetics of lodgepole pine. Res. Pap.
WO-37. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
57 p. [8283]
17. Day, Robert J. 1972. Stand structure, succession, and use of southern
Alberta's Rocky Mountain forest. Ecology. 53(3): 472-478. [12976]
18. Despain, Don G. 1983. Nonpyrogenous climax lodgepole pine communities in
Yellowstone National Park. Ecology. 64(2): 231-234. [6332]
19. Havstad, K. M.; Lathrop, W. J.; Ayers, E. L.; [and others]. 1986.
Grazing behavior of beef cows under range conditions. Montana
Agricultural Research. 3(2): 20-21. [17]
20. Dittberner, Phillip L.; Olson, Michael R. 1983. The plant information
network (PIN) data base: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming. FWS/OBS-83/86. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service. 786 p. [806]
21. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
22. Fahnestock, George R. 1960. Logging slash flammability. Res. Pap. No.
58. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 67 p. [15104]
23. Fahnestock, George R. 1976. Fires, fuels, and flora as factors in
wilderness management: the Pasayten Case. In: Proceedings, Tall Timbers
Fire Ecology Conference; 1974 October 16-17; Portland, OR. Number 15.
Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 33-69. [6453]
24. Fischer, William C.; Clayton, Bruce D. 1983. Fire ecology of Montana
forest habitat types east of the Continental Divide. Gen. Tech. Rep.
INT-141. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 83 p. [923]
25. Franklin, Jerry F.; Dyrness, C. T. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon
and Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-8. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 417 p. [961]
26. Havstad, K. M.; Lathrop, W. J.; Ayers, E. L.; [and others]. 1986.
Grazing behavior of beef cows under range conditions. Montana
Agricultural Research. 3(2): 20-21. [17]
27. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others].
1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range
ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
28. Haeussler, S.; Pojar, J.; Geisler, B. M.; [and others]. 1985. A guide to
the interior cedar-hemlock zone, northwestern transitional subzone
(ICHg), in the Prince Rupert Forest Region, British Columbia. Land
Management Report Number 26; ISSN 0702-9861. Victoria, BC: British
Columbia, Ministry of Forests. 263 p. [6930]
29. Hall, Frederick C. 1973. Plant communities of the Blue Mountains in
eastern Oregon and southeastern Washington. R6-Area Guide 3-1. Portland,
OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Region. 82 p. [1059]
30. Hansen, Paul L.; Chadde, Steve W.; Pfister, Robert D. 1988. Riparian
dominance types of Montana. Misc. Publ. No. 49. Missoula, MT: University
of Montana, School of Forestry, Montana Forest and Conservation
Experiment Station. 411 p. [5660]
31. Hardy BBT Limited. 1989. Manual of plant species suitability for
reclamation in Alberta. 2d ed. Report No. RRTAC 89-4. Edmonton, AB:
Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council. 436 p. [15460]
32. Hart, J. 1976. Montana--native plants and early peoples. Helena, MT:
Montana Historical Society. 75 p. [9979]
33. Hawksworth, Frank G.; Johnson, David W. 1989. Biology and management of
dwarf mistletoe in lodgepole pine in the Rocky Mountains. Gen. Tech.
Rep. RM-169. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 38 p.
[8651]
34. Hess, Karl; Alexander, Robert R. 1986. Forest vegetation of the Arapaho
and Roosevelt National Forests in central Colorado: a habitat type
classification. Res. Pap. RM-266. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 48 p. [1141]
35. Hess, Karl; Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Grassland, shrubland, and
forestland habitat types of the White River-Arapaho National Forest.
Final Report. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 335 p.
[1142]
36. Hoffman, George R.; Alexander, Robert R. 1976. Forest vegetation of the
Bighorn Mountains, Wyoming: a habitat type classification. Res. Pap.
RM-170. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 38 p.
[1180]
37. Hoffman, George R.; Alexander, Robert R. 1980. Forest vegetation of the
Routt National Forest in northwestern Colorado: a habitat
classification. Res. Pap. RM-221. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 41 p. [1179]
38. Hoffman, George R.; Alexander, Robert R. 1987. Forest vegetation of the
Black Hills National Forest of South Dakota and Wyoming: a habitat type
classification. Res. Pap. RM-276. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 48 p. [1181]
39. Horton, K. W. 1956. The ecology of lodgepole pine in Alberta and its
role in forest succession. Tech. Note No. 45. Ottawa, Canada: Department
of Northern Affairs and National Resources, Forestry Branch, Forest
Research Division. 29 p. [13734]
40. Hosie, R. C. 1969. Native trees of Canada. 7th ed. Ottawa, ON: Canadian
Forestry Service, Department of Fisheries and Forestry. 380 p. [3375]
41. Havstad, K. M.; Lathrop, W. J.; Ayers, E. L.; [and others]. 1986.
Grazing behavior of beef cows under range conditions. Montana
Agricultural Research. 3(2): 20-21. [17]
42. Komarkova, Vera; Alexander, Robert R.; Johnston, Barry C. 1988. Forest
vegetation of the Gunnison and parts of the Uncompahgre National
Forests: a preliminary habitat type classification. Gen. Tech. Rep.
RM-163. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 65 p.
[5798]
43. Kruckeberg, A. R. 1982. Gardening with native plants of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 252 p. [9980]
44. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation
of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
45. Lawson, Bruce D. 1972. Fire spread in lodgepole pine stands. Missoula,
MT: University of Montana. 119 p. Thesis. [6920]
46. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native
and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p. [2952]
47. Loope, Lloyd L.; Gruell, George E. 1973. The ecological role of fire in
the Jackson Hole area, northwestern Wyoming. Quaternary Research. 3:
425-443. [1472]
48. Lotan, James E. 1975. The role of cone serotiny in lodgepole pine
forests. In: Baumgartner, David M., ed. Management of lodgepole pine
ecosystems: Symposium proceedings; 1973 October 9-11; Pullman, WA. Vol.
1. Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension
Service: 471-495. [7843]
49. Lotan, James E. 1976. Cone serotiny--fire relationships in lodgepole
pine. In: Proceedings: Montana Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference and
Fire and Land Management Symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT.
Number 14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 267-277.
[11934]
50. Lotan, James E.; Brown, James K.; Neuenschwander, Leon F. 1985. Role of
fire in lodgepole pine forests. In: Baumgartner, David M.; Krebill,
Richard G.; Arnott, James T.; Weetman, Gordon F., compilers and editors.
Lodgepole pine: The species and its management: Symposium proceedings;
1984 May 8-10; Spokane, WA; 1984 May 14-16; Vancouver, BC. Pullman, WA:
Washington State University, Cooperative Extension: 133-152. [9447]
51. Lotan, James E.; Critchfield, William B. 1990. Pinus contorta Dougl. ex.
Loud. lodgepole pine. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H.,
technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 1. Conifers.
Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service: 302-315. [13393]
52. Lotan, James E.; Perry, David A. 1983. Ecology and regeneration of
lodgepole pine. Agric. Handb. 606. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 51 p. [8288]
53. Lyon, L. Jack. 1977. Attrition of lodgepole pine snags on the Sleeping
Child Burn, Montana. Res. Note INT-219. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 4 p. [14671]
54. Lyon, L. Jack. 1984. The Sleeping Child Burn--21 years of postfire
change. Res. Pap. INT-330. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 17 p.
[6328]
55. Lyon, L. Jack; Stickney, Peter F. 1976. Early vegetal succession
following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. In: Proceedings, Tall
Timbers fire ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council
fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No.
14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 355-373. [1496]
56. Mauk, Ronald L.; Henderson, Jan A. 1984. Coniferous forest habitat types
of northern Utah. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-170. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 89 p. [1553]
57. Moir, William H. 1969. The lodgepole pine zone in Colorado. American
Midland Naturalist. 81: 87-98. [10798]
58. Moss, E. H. 1955. The vegetation of Alberta. Botanical Review. 21(9):
493-567. [6878]
59. Mueggler, Walter F.; Campbell, Robert B., Jr. 1982. Aspen community
types on the Caribou and Targhee National Forests in southeastern Idaho.
Res. Pap. INT-294. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 32 p.
[1713]
60. Mueggler, Walter F.; Campbell, Robert B., Jr. 1986. Aspen community
types of Utah. Res. Pap. INT-362. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 69 p.
[1714]
61. Havstad, K. M.; Lathrop, W. J.; Ayers, E. L.; [and others]. 1986.
Grazing behavior of beef cows under range conditions. Montana
Agricultural Research. 3(2): 20-21. [17]
62. Nordin, V. J. 1958. Basal fire scars and the occurrence of decay in
lodgepole pine. Forestry Chronicle. September: 257-265. [14644]
63. Pendergast, B. A.; Boag, D. A. 1971. Nutritional aspects of the diet of
spruce grouse in central Alberta. Condor. 73: 437-443. [16761]
64. Peterson, David L. 1984. Predicting fire-caused mortality in four
northern rocky mountain conifers. In: Society of American Foresters,
compilers. New forests for a changing world; 1983 October 16 - October
20; Portland. SAF Publication 84-03. Bethesda, MD: Society of American
Foresters: 276-280. [6657]
65. Peterson, David L.; Arbaugh, Michael J. 1986. Postfire survival in
Douglas-fir and lodgepole pine: comparing the effects of crown and bole
damage. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 16: 1175-1179. [6321]
66. Pfister, Robert D.; Daubenmire, R. 1975. Ecology of lodgepole pine,
Pinus contorta Dougl.. In: Baumgartner, David M., ed. Management of
lodgepole pine ecosystems: Symposium proceedings; 1973 October 9-11;
Pullman, WA. Vol. 1. Pullman, WA: Washington State University,
Cooperative Extension Service: 27-46. [7819]
67. Pfister, Robert D.; Kovalchik, Bernard L.; Arno, Stephen F.; Presby,
Richard C. 1977. Forest habitat types of Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep.
INT-34. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 174 p. [1878]
68. Phillips, T. A. 1973. The effects of fire on vegetation and wildlife on
a lodgepole pine burn in Chamberlain Basin, Idaho. Range Improvement
Notes. 18(1): 1-9. [16548]
69. Pojar, J.; Trowbridge, R.; Coates, D. 1984. Ecosystem classification and
interpretation of the sub-boreal spruce zone, Prince Rupert Forest
Region, British Columbia. Land Management Report No. 17. Victoria, BC:
Province of British Columbia, Ministry of Forests. 319 p. [6929]
70. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
71. Reed, Robert M. 1976. Coniferous forest habitat types of the Wind River
Mountains, Wyoming. American Midland Naturalist. 95(1): 159-173. [1950]
72. Romme, William H. 1982. Fire and landscape diversity in subalpine
forests of Yellowstone National Park. Ecological Monographs. 52(2):
199-221. [9696]
73. Romme, William H.; Knight, Dennis H. 1981. Fire frequency and subalpine
forest succession along a topographic gradient in Wyoming. Ecology.
62(2): 319-326. [3646]
74. Ryan, Kevin C.; Reinhardt, Elizabeth D. 1988. Predicting postfire
mortality of seven western conifers. Canadian Journal of Forest
Research. 18: 1291-1297. [6670]
75. Schmidt, Wyman C.; Alexander, Robert R. 1985. Strategies for managing
lodgepole pine. In: Baumgartner, David M.; Krebill, Richard G.; Arnott,
James T.; Weetman, Gordon F., compilers and editors. Lodgepole pine: The
species and its management: Symposium proceedings; 1984 May 8-10;
Spokane, WA; 1984 May 14-16; Vancouver, BC. Pullman, WA: Washington
State University, Cooperative Extension: 201-210. [9452]
76. Schmidt, Wyman C.; Lotan, James E. 1980. Phenology of common forest
flora of the northern Rockies--1928 to 1937. Res. Pap. INT-259. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station. 20 p. [2082]
77. Shearer, Raymond C. 1984. Effects of prescribed burning and wildfire on
regeneration in a larch forest in northwest Montana. In: New forests for
a changing world; Proceedings, Society of American Foresters convention;
1983; Portland, OR. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters:
266-270. [6730]
78. Havstad, K. M.; Lathrop, W. J.; Ayers, E. L.; [and others]. 1986.
Grazing behavior of beef cows under range conditions. Montana
Agricultural Research. 3(2): 20-21. [17]
79. Steele, Robert; Cooper, Stephen V.; Ondov, David M.; [and others]. 1983.
Forest habitat types of eastern Idaho-western Wyoming. Gen. Tech. Rep.
INT-144. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 122 p. [2230]
80. Steele, Robert; Pfister, Robert D.; Ryker, Russell A.; Kittams, Jay A.
1981. Forest habitat types of central Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-114.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station. 138 p. [2231]
81. Sutton, Richard F.; Johnson, Craig W. 1974. Landscape plants from Utah's
mountains. EC-368. Logan, UT: Utah State University, Cooperative
Extension Service. 135 p. [49]
82. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982.
National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names.
SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573]
83. Urness, Philip J. 1985. Managing lodgepole pine ecosystems for game and
range values. In: Baumgartner, David M.; Krebill, Richard G.; Arnott,
James T.; Weetman, Gordon F., compilers and editors. Lodgepole pine: The
species and its management: Symposium proceedings; 1984 May 8-10;
Spokane, WA; 1984 May 14-16; Vancouver, BC. Pullman, WA: Washington
State University, Cooperative Extension: 297-304. [9462]
84. Kamp, Bert J. van der; Hawksworth, Frank G. 1985. Damage and control of
the major diseases of lodgepole pine. In: Baumgartner, David M.;
Krebill, Richard G.; Arnott, James T.; Weetman, Gordon F., compilers and
editors. Lodgepole pine: The species and its management: Symposium
proceedings; 1984 May 8-10; Spokane, WA; 1984 May 14-16; Vancouver, BC.
Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension:
125-131. [9446]
85. Van Hooser, Dwane D.; Keegan, Charles E., III. 1985. Lodgepole pine as a
commercial resource in the United States. In: Baumgartner, David M.;
Krebill, Richard G.; Arnott, James T.; Weetman, Gordon F., compilers and
editors. Lodgepole pine: The species and its management: Symposium
proceedings; 1984 May 8-10; Spokane, WA; 1984 May 14-16; Vancouver, BC.
Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension: 15-19.
[9436]
86. Volland, Leonard A. 1985. Ecological classification of lodgepole pine in
the United States. In: Baumgartner, David M.; Krebill, Richard G.;
Arnott, James T.; Weetman, Gordon F., compilers and editors. Lodgepole
pine: The species and its management: Symposium proceedings; 1984 May
8-10; Spokane, WA; 1984 May 14-16; Vancouver, BC. Pullman, WA:
Washington State University, Cooperative Extension: 63-75. [9441]
87. Woodard, Paul Michael. 1977. Effects of prescribed burning on two
different-aged high-elevation plant communities in eastern Washington.
Seattle, WA: University of Washington. 228 p. Dissertation. [5350]
88. Zwickel, Fred C.; Bendell, J. F. 1970. Blue grouse, habitat, and
populations. International Ornithological Congress Proceedings. 15:
150-169. [16702]
Index
Related categories for Species: Pinus contorta var. latifolia
| Rocky Mountain Lodgepole Pine
|
 |
