Overstory
Several lowland hardwood species are present in the overstory, with silver maple predominant
As shown in Table 1, silver maple is the predominant overstory species present, followed by green ash, elm, with minor presence of hackberry, black willow and boxelder.
Table 1. Tree species relative dominance of stems > 5” DBH on 10 factor BA plots in 2020
Species
|
Species Relative dominance (%)
|
Silver maple
|
57.9 %
|
Green ash
|
26.2%
|
Elm
|
11.2%
|
Hackberry
|
1.9%
|
Black willow
|
1.9%
|
Boxelder
|
0.9%
|
Total
|
100%
|
Forest cover densities and sizes are variable
In 2020, basal area plots indicate an overall average basal area of 48.6 ft2, but the abundance, structure and age of tree cover was quite variable. Some areas have full tree cover, with only scattered cover on other portions of the site. In some of the marshiest portions, there is no tree cover at all.
Table 2. Tree basal area (feet2/acre)/ and frequency on 10 factor BA plots (%) by species and diameter class in 2020
|
|
Diameter Class |
|
|
Species |
5" to 10" DBH |
10" to 15" DBH |
15" to 20" DBH |
> 20" DBH |
Silver Maple |
0.4/5% |
1.8/14% |
2.7/18% |
23.2/68% |
Green Ash |
8.2/32% |
1.8/18% |
1.4/14% |
1.4/9% |
Elm |
2.3/14% |
0.5/5% |
1.8/14% |
0.9/9% |
Hackberry |
0.0/0% |
0.5/5% |
0.5/5% |
0.0/0% |
Black Willow |
0.0/0% |
0.0/0% |
0.5/5% |
0.5/5% |
Boxelder |
0.5/5% |
0.0/0% |
0.0/0% |
0.0/0% |
Total BA: 48.6 |
|
|
|
|
Note on distinguishing between harvest residuals vs. trees regenerated post-harvest:
As can be seen in table 2 above and table 3 below, the site contains a range of tree sizes. Some are harvest residuals, and some have regenerated after harvest activity. As a way to distinguish which trees probably originated post-harvest, we collected tree data by diameter class. We estimate that the vast majority of trees from 5” to 10” DBH have originated since the initial harvest activity. The large majority of trees over 15” DBH are likely harvest residuals. The 10 to 15” DBH size category likely contains a mixture of harvest residuals and stems regenerated post-harvest.
Regeneration
Regeneration has been inconsistent, and as of 2020 most of the site is not yet adequately reforested
On approximately the westernmost 1/3 of the site nearest the Vermillion River, green ash and American elm regeneration has been adequate. Unfortunately Dutch elm disease and emerald ash borer impacts mean that neither of those species is a solution to achieving long-term forested site condition anymore.
On the remainder of the site, there are a very few scattered silver maple, green ash, American elm, boxelder and hackberry that have regenerated post-harvest, as well as at least nine small patches of excellent silver maple regeneration with stems from 1” to 15“ DBH in size in 2020.
There were silver maple regenerants (less than 1 foot in height) on 59% of our plots. Clearly, the vast majority of seedlings of this small size have tended to become established in the spring/ early summer of each year, and then get flooded and killed before reaching larger size classes. There were very few stems of regeneration of any species from 1 foot in height to 5 inches DBH.
Table 3. Stems/acre/ and plot frequency of trees regenerated post-harvest* by species and size class in 2020
Frequency (Freq) = % of plots with occurrence.
|
|
|
Size Class |
|
|
|
Species |
< 1 foot in height
(stems/acre/% plot freq.)
|
>1 foot in height and
< 1”DBH (stems/acre/% plot freq.) |
> 1” DBH and < 3” DBH (stems/acre/%plot freq.) |
3” to 5” DBH (stems/acre/% plot freq.) |
5”-10” DBH (BA - Ft2/acre/% plot freq.) |
10”-15” DBH (BA - Ft2/acre/ % plot freq.) |
Silver Maple |
NA/59% |
NA/0% |
0/0% |
0/0% |
0.5/5% |
0.2/14% |
Green Ash |
NA/0% |
NA/5% |
0/0% |
5/5% |
8.2/32% |
1.8/18% |
Elm |
NA/0% |
NA/5% |
0/0% |
0/0% |
2.3/14% |
0.5/5% |
Hackberry |
NA/0% |
NA/0% |
0/0% |
0/0% |
0/0% |
0.5/5% |
Boxelder |
NA/0% |
NA/0% |
0/0% |
0/0% |
0.5/5% |
0/0% |
Totals |
|
|
0/NA |
5/NA |
11.5/NA |
3.0/NA |
*The 10” to 15” DBH size class contains a mix of harvest residuals and trees regenerated post-harvest.
Notes on regeneration data:
- Because young silver maple regenerants less than 1 foot in height (“regenerants”) become established easily but have routinely been killed by flooding within a year or two of establishment, we did not invest time in gathering their exact numbers. We simply noted their presence or absence for each plot.
- Pre-2010 regenerationsurvey records are almost nonexistent for this site - an unfortunate consequence of MNDNR’s transition through 3 different silvicultural information storage systems over the past 35 years. The only pre-2010 regeneration data we could find for this site is a note in a file indicating that for the 23 acres planted in 1989, there were an average of 313 seedlings/ acre with average height of 2 feet in 1991. The note does not indicate the species, but they were probably a combination of silver maple and green ash. Therefore, we know that many of the seedlings planted in 1989 survived for at least two years.
Silver Maple Regeneration Patches
Notably, at least nine patches of silver maple have become established since the first documented harvest activity in 1984. A critical question for current and future regeneration efforts is this: Why did silver maple become successfully established in these patches, but not on most of the site? We looked at elevation, soils and reed canarygrass densities as three factors that may influence silver maple establishment.
None of the sample plots on our grid fell within these patches, so we took six additional plots directly in them. The patches vary in size from approximately ¼ to ½ acre. In addition to the plot data gathered for the six patches, we noted locations of three more with waypoints for a total of nine patch locations. In 2020, these patches contain trees ranging from approximately 1 to 20+ inches DBH.
Table 4. Tree density by species, size class and origin type (sprout or seedling) in six silver maple regeneration patches in 2020
Species
|
1 to 3” DBH – Seed
(stems/Ac)
|
1 to 3” DBH - Sprout (stems/Ac)
|
3 to 5”
DBH -
Seed
(stems/Ac)
|
3 to 5” DBH - Sprout (stems/Ac)
|
5-10” DBH (BA in Ft2/Ac)
|
10-15” DBH
(BA in Ft2/Ac)
|
15-20” DBH
(BA in Ft2/Ac)
|
20” + DBH
(BA in Ft2/Ac)
|
Silver maple
|
3750
|
333
|
1750
|
417
|
43.3
|
36.7
|
20.0
|
8.3
|
Green ash
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
10.0
|
5.0
|
3.3
|
1.7
|
A. elm
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0.0
|
3.3
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
The patches have become established at different times, but all since the first harvest activity in 1984. The table below shows field ring counts for one selected tree in 6 of the patches. Note: We counted rings on larger DBH than patch average for waypoints 204 and 205. Presumably, these trees were on the high end of ages for the patch. For the other four patches, we counted rings on trees that were closer to average DBH for the patch.
Table 5: Ages of Selected Silver Maple in Regeneration Patches in 2020
Waypoint Number Location of Patch
|
Diameter at Breast Height (Inches)
|
Number of Rings in Tree Core
|
204
|
16.5
|
35
|
205
|
12.2
|
32
|
216
|
8.9
|
19
|
218
|
4.9
|
14
|
219
|
3.8
|
11
|
226
|
5.4
|
13
|
227
|
Data not gathered
|
Data not gathered
|
228
|
Data not gathered
|
Data not gathered
|
230
|
Data not gathered
|
Data not gathered
|
Silver maple regeneration patches and elevation
Note: See figure 6 for Digital Elevation Model imagery of the site: https://silvlib.cfans.umn.edu/file/7551/download?token=iVnPbxD3
We looked at Lidar data to see if we could determine whether regeneration success might be related to elevation. Our hypothesis was that higher sites would be flooded for less time during the growing season, and would therefore be more likely to support tree regeneration survival and growth. Our data did show that on average, patches with well-established regeneration are on slightly higher ground. NOTE: Error estimates for the Lidar data are about 0.35 ft when compared with DNR ground points; and about 0.5 ft accuracy in forested areas fully covered by trees.
- Average elevation of plots in patches of post-harvest regeneration: 675.544 feet.
- Average elevation of all systematic grid plots: 675.377 feet.
However, some well-established regeneration such as at waypoints 218, 226, 227 and 228 is on relatively low areas, as shown in Table 6 below.
Table 6. Elevation of 9 patches of silver maple regeneration, and highest and lowest elevation recorded on all sample plots over the entire site
Waypoint Number Location of Patch
|
Elevation (feet)
|
204
|
676.745
|
205
|
676.761
|
216
|
676.431
|
218
|
674.804
|
219
|
675.151
|
226
|
673.372
|
227
|
674.541
|
228
|
674.832
|
230
|
676.019
|
|
|
Highest elevation recorded on site
|
677.799
|
Lowest elevation recorded on site
|
671.734
|
Another thought was that perhaps higher elevation relative to the area immediately adjacent to the patch was more influential than highest elevation over the entire large site. In other words, were the patches on an “island” of slightly higher ground than the area directly surrounding them? We were unable to discern a clear pattern to support that hypothesis. Neither field observations or Lidar imaging indicate a clear pattern of higher elevation in the patches with good regeneration as compared to the immediate surrounding area with little or no regeneration.
So while in general higher elevation seems better than lower for establishing silver maple, it is clear that silver maple regeneration success must be significantly affected by other factors.
Silver maple regeneration patches and soils
We took 3 soil cores to see if we could discern any obvious soil differences between locations of silver maple regeneration patches, and areas without established silver maple regeneration. NOTE: See figure 21 for the field notes for our three soil sample points: https://silvlib.cfans.umn.edu/file/7696/download?token=UDwhvQRc
We took one sample core in a location with no regeneration, and two cores in patches with abundant silver maple regeneration from 1” to 12” DBH.
There was some other modest variability between the samples, but we feel that three samples are just not enough for us to reach any conclusions that would explain different levels of regeneration success. A challenge that we ran into was that the higher than normal water table when we were out prevented a thorough look at a deeper profile - we were only able to look 2 to 3 feet down. We suggest that the potential impact of soils on silver maple regeneration success could be an excellent avenue for further research.
Silver maple regeneration and reed canarygrass competition
We estimated percentage of reed canarygrass cover for each of the 22 plots on our grid, gathered on June 24, 2020. We were surprised that reed canarygrass averaged only 9.4% of total cover, and that 14 of our plots had 1% or less. There are clearly a few places with heavy reed canarygrass cover, but for the most part the levels we observed indicate that in 2020 it is not a major impediment to tree establishment on most of this site.
Ground Cover
Ground cover was consistent with that commonly found in MHs68 plant communities. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/forestry/ecs_silv/npc/ffs68.html#community-description