A degraded hardwood stand contains either a substantial number of low-quality trees, or an insufficient number or low basal area of manageable trees. These stands are often created by high-grading, wildfires, or insect and disease outbreaks and can occur on both high and low productivity sites. Management of degraded stands has been hindered by both a lack of markets for low-quality wood products and the costs of silvicultural practices aimed at improving stands. The following sections further explain causes of low quality stands, suggest ways for improving utilization and reducing silvicultural costs, provide management options, and outline guidelines for evaluating and rating these stands.

This section is based on the only two review articles on management of degraded hardwood stands in the southern Appalachians. One of these, McGee (1982), provides excellent information on the causes and problems associated with degraded hardwood stands. It tells how to analyze the stands and how to decide what to do. The second review paper (Ezell 1992) suggests an inventory method for degraded stands and provides a clear understanding of what tree and stand variables need to be assessed and why. There is little research aimed at degraded stand management or silviculture. This has created a major gap in the scientific literature and is a need that must be filled by future research efforts.

While, much of the information provided by McGee (1982) and Ezell (1992) applies to degraded stands throughout the eastern hardwood region, it must be understood that the silvicultural recommendations were developed specifically for forest ecosystems of the interior uplands of Kentucky, Tennessee, and Alabama.

McGee (1982) indicates that stand degradation can be caused by a variety of factors, including past cutting treatments, fire, and insects and disease.  Site-quality also plays a role in stand degradation. Perhaps the foremost cause of degraded hardwood stands is past harvesting practices.  Many of the present hardwood stands in the eastern United States developed without the benefit of deliberate management; some developed after high-grading-- cutting of best trees and leaving the rest (Ezell 1992).  Also, wildfire was a regular occurrence throughout the hardwood region and still affects important hardwood producing areas.

Insects and diseases also can degrade stands. Infestations of insects such as gypsy moths, elm spanworms, fall cankerworms, and white and red oak borers weaken or kill hardwoods. Cankers, wilts, and rots also cause substantial damage throughout the region. Diseased trees largely populate degraded stands because they are usually passed over in cuttings.

Icestorms and windstorms can also degrade stand quality. Certain stands are more susceptible to ice damage than others; for example, stands containing grapevines, stands dominated by yellow-poplar, or young pole-sized stands can be severely damaged by ice (McGee 1982).

Degraded stands are composed of remnants from previous cuttings, some regrowth of desirable species, and a large proportion of mostly undesirable shade-tolerant species (Ezell 1992). These cull-burdened stands present serious management problems (Trimble 1963) Considering the condition of these stands and the current economic situation, there remain powerful incentives to continue diameter limit cuttings, where the best trees are harvested and the remaining stand is left unmanaged. The average owner has little economic incentive to improve degraded stands as such stands may be worthless for traditional timber products and stand improvement can require considerable investment (McGee 1982).

The Role of Site Quality

The quality of a stand depends heavily on the quality of the site it occupies (Carmean and Boyce 1973). As site productivity decreases so does the quantity and quality of timber produced. In some instances, the growth may be too slow for viable production of high-grade hardwood sawtimber. Also, degraded stands growing on low-quality sites take much longer to respond to improvement treatments. However, substantial acreages of degraded stands are growing on good sites, such as coves and north-facing slopes. These areas have potential to produce high-quality hardwoods and they often escape wildfire (McGee 1982).

Management of degraded stands is hindered by both a lack of markets for low-quality wood products and the costs of silviculture. McGee (1982) suggests that solutions to managing degraded stands must therefore involve improved utilization as well as means of reducing silvicultural costs.

Improved Utilization

Improved utilization and expanded markets for low-quality wood products are essential to realistic management of degraded stands. While traditional markets for sawtimber, crossties, and roundwood will continue to be important, three relatively new utilization concepts have special appeal for degraded stands:

• Shearing and Chipping. On suitable terrain, shearing and on-site chipping make good use of poor-quality trees. Removal of most of the woody vegetation by shearing enhances the opportunity for natural regeneration or for planting trees at reduced costs. Many low-quality stands, however, are characterized by large culls and trees under 4 inches in diameter that present special problems for shearing and chipping (McGee 1982).
• Short-Log Utilization. Some degraded stands contain sound trees that do not contain enough clear length to make traditional logs. As markets for short logs are developed, management of degraded stands will become more practical (McGee 1982).
• Fuelwood. Increasing demand for fuelwood offers attractive opportunities for removal of some degraded stands, particularly those close to urban centers (McGee 1982) .

Reducing Costs of Silviculture

Costs of cultural activities are a serious obstacle to management of degraded stands Costs can be reduced by using more efficient methods, modifying standards, or providing financial incentives (McGee 1982).

Using More Efficient Methods

Thinning degraded stands generally is impractical because the basal areas of marketable trees and acceptable growing stock are low, and the cost of control for the large number of culls is high. In many cases the best solution is to eliminate the entire stand and regenerate. However, stand elimination and regeneration may not be practical or needed over en entire ownership. Intermediate treatment, including thinning or timber stand improvement, should definitely be considered for stands that can benefit. Benefits must outweigh the costs when intermediate cultural treatments are applied. Paradoxically, treatment of degraded stands may require more care than treatment of good stands. Site quality, quality and quantity of growing stock, and opportunities for utilization should be appraised carefully, and treatment should be restricted to stands and sites where a positive cost-benefit ratio can be achieved. For example, removal of scattered culls overtopping a much younger stand of poles may be very worthwhile. Conversely, if the overtopped poles are old and of poor form, the operation may be a waste of effort. If the stand is to be regenerated, site preparation should be incorporated as much as possible into the harvest operation. Deadening undesirable trees can be efficiently accomplished prior to harvest, but it is much better to utilize a tree than to spend money to deaden it (McGee 1982).

Modifiying Standards

Many landowners would prefer not to spend large sums of money for regeneration and rehabilitation. However, reduced costs resulting from carefully modified standards can encourage these owners to initiate management (McGee 1982).

The cost of eliminating a degraded hardwood stand, preparing the site, and converting it to a pure stand of pine is about $200 per acre. The result is a well-stocked stand in neat rows with 400 or more free-to-grow trees per acre. However, site preparation and planting costs could be cut dramatically if 60 free-to-grow pines per acre were acceptable. If costs for the low-standard planting could be held at $50 per acre, then 4 acres could be treated at the cost of one intensively treated acre. Yields from the 4 acres of mixed plantations would probably surpass yields from one intensively treated acre, meaning a better net profit (McGee 1982).

Site preparation for natural regeneration following conventional logging can cost $100 or more per acre to control unmerchantable hardwoods. If most unused trees are lopped or injected, good hardwoods will usually appear. The best procedure is to utilize as many trees as possible; stratify the area by site potential and attend to the better sites (not necessarily the better stands) first (McGee 1982).

If funds are severely limited, attention should be focused on the most damaging competition, usually the large cull trees. For example, if only $1,000 are available for site preparation following commercial clearcutting on a 30-acre area, a complete vegetation control job cannot be done. If half of the area is site 55 and half is 65, the effort could be split with about $45 per acre for the 15 acres of site 65 and $21 per acre for site 55. The $45 per acre would provide control for most of the large culls and some undesirable pole-sized trees, such as red maple. Twenty-one dollars per acre would allow control of only the larger culls on the poorer site. There will be some disadvantage in splitting the funds, but overall productivity will be greater (McGee 1982).

Providing Financial Incentives

Since most degraded stands require cultural activity in addition to harvest, a forestry incentive program designed specifically for improvement of degraded stands would be ideal. Incentive programs should require identification of the cause of low quality, and allow flexibility in intensities of treatment, emphasizing long-range improvement of stands (McGee 1982).

Traditionally, owners of degraded hardwood stands have either converted to pine, continued periodic logging of salable trees, or ignored the stands altogether. However, other options are also available for managing degraded stands, such as intermediate management, hardwood regeneration or planting, and multiple-use management. The following discussions on management options for degraded stands were suggested by McGee (1982) for the interior uplands, but they apply to the southern Appalachians as well.

• Converting Degraded Stands to Pine
• Hardwood Regeneration in Degraded Stands
• Planting Hardwoods in Degraded Stands
• Intermediate Management of Degraded Stands
• Periodic Logging of Degraded Stands
• Multiple-Use Management of Degraded Stands
• No Management

Loblolly Pine

Eastern White Pine

Shortleaf Pine

Shortleaf pine should be considered where diversification is important, where the long-term goal is production of sawtimber, and where ice and snow may damage loblolly pine (Russell 1979). Shortleaf pine grows slowly in its early years, so site preparation in cutover stands will have to be relatively intense to ensure that seedlings survive.

McGee (1982) points out that major unexploited opportunities exist to regenerate degraded hardwood stands by natural regeneration. Degraded stands regenerate to some extent following any kind of harvest, but quality, quantity, and distribution of regeneration will depend on species, age and distribution of the existing stand, and on site quality, harvesting methods, and cultural activities.

Poor and Very Poor Sites

Natural regeneration of degraded hardwood stands on poor and very poor sites presents some special problems but also some opportunities. Potentially slow growth and poor tree quality argue against spending much money on these sites. However, much can be accomplished at little or no cost by appropriate harvesting. If the stand is to be regenerated, the more material harvested the better. Thousands of acres of low-quality stands on poor sites are well suited for shearing or other broad-scale operations. The resultant regeneration will be primarily of sprout origin and will contain a variety of desirable and undesirable species (McGee 1980). There will also be a few barren spots. Overall, the regeneration resulting from a heavy or complete harvest cut will usually produce a stand that will be better than the harvested degraded stand. Landowners should not expect high-quality hardwoods on these poor sites, even under the best of circumstances. Most of the regrowth will be suitable for pulpwood, fuelwood, chips, or short logs. If traditional methods are employed, the logger should use as much of the residual stand as practicable. But when culls, poles, and many small tolerant stems remain, the landowner must decide how much can be spent on natural regeneration. Such stands, may contain numerous culls or relicts, and the felling or deadening of these trees should be the highest priority. Of second priority will be the felling of nonmerchantable trees that would interfere with regeneration. These trees may be numerous and the cost of total control may be prohibitive. Despite the problems with regenerating degraded stands on poor sites, landowers should view hardwoods as the best potential crop. Unsuitable for agriculture, or even conversion to pine, these stands should be targets for controlled and opportunistic regeneration and improvement.

Medium Sites

Degraded hardwood stands growing on medium sites can be regenerated readily by clearcutting. Many stands are on terrain that can be sheared. However, some regeneration can be expected after partial cuts or even high- grading. Regeneration will develop from stump sprouts, advance regeneration, and new seedlings. The expected regeneration mix will be highly variable, depending on the size of openings, the available seed source, the size, distribution, and species of the overstory removed, the condition of advance regeneration, and the weather during the harvest and for several years thereafter. Medium sites can produce hardwood sawlogs, tie logs, pulpwood, fuelwood, and other products. However, production of veneer and better quality sawlogs will be limited. Control of competing vegetation will be more important than on poorer sites. Without effective control or utilization of culls and less desirable trees, medium sites will remain in the degraded category. While potential for volume and quality growth is fair to good, the economics of site preparation should be carefully monitored. Injection or utilization of large culls and relicts is a high priority activity on sites scheduled for regeneration. Intermediate trees also should be controlled or utilized at a somewhat higher level than on poorer sites. If trees in the 2- to 12-inch diameter class cannot be used, then expenditures should be anticipated for their control. Control can be achieved by injecting undesirable species with herbicide prior to logging and felling unmerchantable stems that will produce desirable sprouts after the logging.

Good and Very Good Sites

Regenerating low-quality hardwood stands on good and very good sites requires specific action if the sites potential is to be realized. Even though existing stands may be classed as low in quality, stumpage revenues can be substantial. Portions of this revenue should be used to prepare the site for improved future yields. Recognizing good sites among areas that may have been cutover several times and possibly burned can be difficult. Quite often, good cutover sites that need to be regenerated will contain, in addition to culls, large numbers of less desirable species, such as red maple, dogwood, sourwood, some oaks, and blackgum. If these trees are not killed or cut, they can dominate the site and stand quality will continue to be low. Grapevines, honeysuckle, and kudzu can also inhibit regeneration on good sites. Pre-harvest control of grapevines and injection of red maple should receive high priority. Culls and relicts should also be cut or deadened if not utilized. Good sites now supporting degraded hardwoods can grow high-quality saw and veneer logs. Yellow-poplar, white oak, northern red oak, white ash, black walnut, and black cherry should grow well, but past cutting practices will probably determine how well these species regenerate. While clearcutting will usually result in good regeneration, reliable inexpensive techniques are not available for controlling the species mix or for favoring one species over another in the preferred group. A frequent trend following clearcutting on good sites is for yellow-poplar, white ash, and other light-seeded species to predominate where mixed oaks may have previously dominated. This trend is a problem for owners with strong commitments to wildlife habitat or production of fine oak. If advance oak regeneration exists, shelterwoods are better options for managing oak. Cleaning or crop tree release may be advisable on some good sites but should only be considered 8 to 12 years after stand regeneration.

Yellow-Poplar

It is possible to plant yellow-poplar on medium, good, and very good sites where a natural seed source is not available. Acceptable growth and fair quality can be obtained from yellow-poplar planted on medium sites with moderate site preparation. Site preparation should include injection of all trees 2 inches d.b.h. and larger. Excellent growth can be achieved on good and very good sites but more intensive preparation will be needed as the site quality increases. In every case site selection, quality of planting stock, and care of the yellow-poplar seedlings prior to planting are critical (Russell 1977).

Oaks

Improvement of degraded hardwood stands by planting oaks is not recommended. Numerous studies have shown early survival of planted oaks to be relatively high, but growth, even with cleanings, is very slow (McGee 1981).

Black Cherry and Black Walnut

Black cherry and black walnut can be planted successfully on some sites, but extreme care must be taken on site selection, site preparation, care of planting stock, and seed source selection. A commitment to the necessary silvicultural follow-up and familiarity with planting guidelines for these species are crucial.

Thinning

Thinning from below often has little practical application in degraded hardwoods because the best stems usually are removed in thinning. Moreover, most degraded stands are already understocked with acceptable growing stock and a conventional thinning only compounds the problem. However, there are cases where stands on very poor, poor, and even medium sites have become overstocked at 60 to 70 years of age. A commercial pulpwood thinning that reduces basal area to 50 to 60 square feet will increase the growth of the residuals.

Timber Stand Improvement

An improvement cut and cull tree control are often prescribed for timber stand improvement. Many degraded hardwood stands can be immediately improved by harvesting overmature or less desirable trees and by killing culls and undesirable trees. However, there is a hazard that the residual stand may not justify the effort. Typical degraded stands contain many pole-sized trees that appear vigorous and have good form. Usually, these poles, particularly the intermediate-crown-class oaks, are older than they appear. When released, these trees usually accelerate their diameter growth but height increases are uncertain, and increased epicormic sprouting will occur, especially on white oak (McGee 1981). Since most degraded stands are candidates for clearcutting and regeneration, it is important that stands that can benefit from improvement be identified and treated appropriately. In some ownerships, where large acreages of degraded stands are being brought under management, clearcutting of the total area may be impractical and improvement cuts may be advisable even if the outlook for improvement is not great.

Crop-Tree Management

Crop-tree management is a type of silvicultural operation that focuses on individual trees with the potential of developing into high-value crop trees. Crop trees can be selected to accommodate a variety of goals and management efforts.

Management of Sparse Stands

For some degraded hardwood stands there is an opportunity to avoid immediate complete harvesting and to provide a source of logs and revenue in 10 to 20 years. Some degraded stands contain 20 to 40 dominant or co-dominant trees per acre that are 10-14-inches in diameter, are desirable species, and have good form and vigor. If these trees are harvested, the returns will be minimal. If the rest of the stand is cut, these trees will increase rapidly in diameter and can move into higher quality and value classes. Such a residual stand with perhaps 30 to 40 square feet of basal area could, counting in-growth, produce 150 to 200 board feet per acre per year for the next 10 years on medium or better sites (Dale 1972).

There are a number of problems in managing sparse stands. First, the residual trees must have the potential to move quickly into higher size and value categories. Epicormic sprouting may reduce the value increment for some trees. Second, there must be a means to log the mature and overmature trees and control culls without damaging the residual sparse stand. Third, smaller trees 2 to 10 inches d.b.h. should be harvested, lopped or injected. If these smaller trees are cut, regeneration can be expected to begin with moderate impact from the sparse residual overstory. Finally, there must be a means to log the sparse residual stand in 10 to 20 years. Sparse stand management should not be viewed as an overall replacement system for regenerating stands but as an option to be used only when the residual stand meets the necessary criteria. The practice, if used judiciously in conjunction with regeneration cutting on adjacent areas, can provide diversity and a deferred source of income.

Opportunistic Cutting

Removal of the best trees with no attention given to the potential of the residual stand is a major cause of degraded hardwood stands. It is called high-grading. Due to current economic conditions, many landowners are likely to continue diameter-limit cutting, high-grading, and commercial clearcuts even when they know that the treatment significantly reduces long-range productivity. These practices provide the maximum cash per unit harvested and require minimum supervision, planning, and cash outlay. So it is difficult to justify reducing current revenues or spending for cultural work when alternative investments may approach 15 to 20 percent. It is even more difficult to justify out-of-pocket expenditures that may exceed stumpage revenues. The only realistic solution for an owner who will not spend money on forest improvement is total utilization. As previously discussed, the development of markets for degraded hardwoods is essential before "stand improvement" will be attractive to some.

Degraded hardwood stands have considerable current value for wildlife, aesthetics, and watershed protection. Even if the current timber value is great, the potential for improvement of multiple-use values may be even greater. This section will cover some of the problems and opportunities for multiple-use management (McGee 1982).

Wildlife Habitat

• Mast. Degraded hardwood stands are a major source of mast, but the yield in hard mast from many stands is low. The low yields are due to the advanced age of some oaks and hickories and the overtopped condition of younger trees. Mast yields can be improved by removal of culls that retard the development of good mast producers. When a hardwood stand is converted to pure pine, the area will lose most of its mast-producing capability. However, mixtures of planted pine and natural hardwoods offer substantial wildlife advantages.
• Browse. Browse production in degraded stands is generally low but will increase with almost any cutting or cultural treatment. Of course, huge sections of land treated in the same way at the same time will not benefit wildlife in the long run.
• Den trees. Many defective trees are not desirable den trees. Squirrels prefer den trees that provide protection from rain, so trees with large defective crowns are not desirable. Similarly, trees with holes running from the base of the tree into the crown are not desirable. In most degraded stands, there are a few highly desirable den trees. When these trees are not used, it is an indication that lack of food and not lack of den trees limits the squirrel population. Considerable timber stand improvement can be imposed on most stands without adversely affecting the squirrel population. In fact, if the improvement enhances the vigor of the stand, food supplies probably will increase.
• Diversity. While there is considerable variation in species, tree size, and tree quality within small tracts of degraded stands, there is often a monotonous repetition of the same stand conditions over wide areas. For those who place a high priority on wildlife habitat and habitat diversity, carefully established stand treatment priorities offer outstanding opportunities for improvement.

Watershed Protection

Degraded hardwood stands are often found on critical watershed areas. These watersheds need healthy vigorous stands with predictable longevity. Realistic treatment can improve the health, longevity, and predictability of these critical stands.

Aesthetics

Many owners of degraded stands have strong emotional concerns for the appearance of their forests. With some justification, these owners fear that logging in any form will mar its appearance. It is true that the typical high-grading leaves the forest with broken trees, piles of slash, and a few sorry residual trees. Many stands need to be clearcut, but some owners are reluctant to accept this treatment. In most cases, better utilization will improve the appearance of any logged-over stand. The adverse visual impact of a heavy forest cut can also be reduced by wintertime logging, when the tree tops are barren. The development of sparse stands as described earlier in conjunction with intensive harvesting can provide an attractive forest that will have good potential for producing sawlogs. Injection is a very effective means of controlling undesirable trees, but standing dead trees mar the landscape. Where aesthetics are important, these trees should be felled. Overall, the appearance of degraded hardwood stands characterized by defective and deformed trees is not very pleasing. Long-range aesthetic values can be enhanced by improving stand health, vigor, and diversity.

For a variety of reasons, many thousands of acres of degraded hardwood stands receive no management. Although leaving good-quality hardwood stands unattended may he a good prescription for improvement, most degraded stands are not likely to improve (McGee 1982). Since culls and undesirable trees will continue to grow, a degraded stand without treatment will remain a degraded stand. However, many owners of degraded hardwoods acquired their land for recreation, wildlife, or investment and have no primary interest in timber production. The use of some degraded hardwood land for these purposes may be good land use, plus the relatively small stumpage revenues that could be generated from these stands do not justify cutting. Yet some type of management can improve wildlife populations, aesthetic qualities, investment value. Forest owners, therefore, should be cautioned against prescribing "no management" for all of their degraded stands.

For timber-related goals, McGee (1982) suggests the following stand rating system to aid evaluation of individual stands and provide a means for ranking several stands. 

STEP 1. Identify, delineate, inspect, and inventory the stand. Determine causes for the poor condition.

STEP 2. Evaluate the following factors:

Site Quality. Site quality is a primary determinant of stand quality with hardwood species. In most site quality evaluations, three classes are recognized: (1) poor or below average, (2) average, (3) above average. Return on investment will generally decrease as site quality decreases, therefore it is important to evaluate site quality before starting any management activities. Conversely, the intensity of forest management should increase as site quality increases (Ezell 1992).

The principal measure of site quality has historically been site index-- the height of the tree of a given species at a specific age (usually 50 years in the eastern United States). However, a major problem with using site index in high-graded stands is the tendency to underestimate a sites true productive potential due to the lack of site index trees that have not been suppressed or wounded.  Therefore, if site index is used for evaluating site quality, it is important to carefully select trees that are in the main canopy and show no signs of growth suppression. Site index can also be obtained from soil surveys.  Another method for determining site quality is to use a physiographic site rating system based on landforms where available. These systems are dependable and well-suited to managing degraded stands (McGee 1982).  Where available, an ecological classification system may also be used to estimate site quality.  Ecological classification systems are similar to physiographic rating systems except that they place more emphasis on vegetation.

Manageable Trees. An important step in evaluating a degraded stand is to inventory manageable trees. Manageable trees include all sound trees of acceptable species. Acceptable growing stock includes trees that can be expected to increase in value, although the definitions of desirable and acceptable growing stock will vary substantially by ownership and site quality.

The number, species, distribution, and basal area of manageable trees are key factors when prescribing regeneration, cultural treatment, or postponement of action in degraded stands. If the basal area of manageable trees is less than 50 square feet per acre, the stand can be treated as a degraded stand. Stands with more than 50 square feet of manageable trees per acre are not considered degraded (McGee 1982).  A simple rule of thumb is: 50 small-sawlog-size trees per acre is the minimum number for a manageable stand. However, this minimum number can be expected to vary according to landowner objectives (McGee 1982).

Cull Trees. Cull trees, poor quality stems of desirable species, are often the most predominant component of a low quality stand. Cull trees represent less problems for future management than undesirable species, primarily because these trees have the potential to produce good sprouts if they are cut. Cull trees should be inventoried, both by the number of stems and by the basal area per acre. Hollow trees should be identified and their location noted as den trees if wildlife habitat is a management consideration (McGee 1982).

Undesirable Trees. Undesirable trees may include poorly formed trees of desirable species (usually too young or small to be classed as culls) as well as undesirable species. Repeated high-grading and diameter limit cuts have led to a large number of stems per acre of undesirable, typically shade-tolerant, species. Individually, undesirable trees may not have much impact on decisionmaking for a degraded stand, but collectively they are important due to their large numbers. Some stands may contain 400 or more undesirable trees per acre but most will have 150 to 250 (McGee 1982).

Advance Regeneration. Some degraded stands have large numbers of desirable small saplings and seedlings that should be inventoried during stand evaluation. The number and distribution of stems by species should be noted, accounting for "clumps" so as to not distort densities expressed on a per acre basis. Timing of the stand evaluation relative to recent harvests should also be considered. Although there may be a large number of desirable species stems in a recently cut stand, these stems usually will lose their vigor when the canopy closes (McGee 1982).

Age of Manageable Trees. Tree age should be determined for manageable trees only. Age affects the potential for release response and is needed for site index determination. With training and practice, tree age can be reliably estimated. Age estimates within 20 percent are accurate enough for most decisions (McGee 1982). Tree ages can also be estimated by ring counts of increment cores. Removing cores from the stump (6 to 8 inches of the ground), reinserting it in the hole, and sealing over the exterior wound can prevent damage to the merchantable portions of stems. A third option for determining age is to count annual rings on similar nearby harvested stems (if such stems exist). The underlying assumption from this type of evaluation is that the harvested stem and the remaining stem are about the same age, which is more likely in even-aged stands (Ezell 1992).

Collecting Information. A systematic approach is best for evaluating high-graded stands. Ezell (1992) suggests locating a series of plots spaced evenly across the area so that 5-10 percent of the area is sampled. At each plot, construct two subplots, with a small plot (0.001acre or 3.72 ft radius) nested within a larger plot (0.1 acre or 37.2 ft radius). Evaluate advanced regeneration in the small plot: record number of stems by species and size class ( <1 ft,1-3 ft, > 3 ft tall). Evaluate the midstory and overstory in the larger plot: record stems by size and classify them as desirable, undesirable, or cull (Ezell 1992).

STEP 3. Consider treatment options. There are essentially three broad options available for treatment of degraded stands: regeneration, intermediate management, or postponement of action (McGee 1982).

Regeneration. The need for complete harvest and natural regeneration will increase as: (1) number and basal area of manageable trees decrease, (2) number and basal area of culls and undesirable trees increase, (3) site index increases, (4) age of manageable trees increases, and (5) desirable advance regeneration increases. If conversion to pine is a management option, the weighting in favor of complete harvest and conversion will increase when: (1) site index for pine ranges between 70 and 85, (2) sources of desirable natural hardwood regeneration decrease, and (3) number of intermediate and smaller hardwoods decreases.

Intermediate Management. Opportunities for intermediate management will increase as: (1) basal area of immature manageable trees increases, (2) age of manageable trees in relation to size decreases, (3) number of undesirable plus cull trees increases, and (4) site index increases. Consider the advantages of crop tree management.

Postponement of Action. Postponement will be favored as: (1) site index decreases, (2) number of large manageable trees increases, (3) number of small undesirable trees increases, (4) out-of-pocket costs for treatment increase, and (5) desirable advance regeneration decreases.

STEP 4. Develop stand recommendations.

A. Based on the stand profile and the preceding treatment options, list the three major treatment options in order as they seem to apply to the stand. If only one stand is involved, the major recommendation has been made.

B. When more than one stand is involved, a stand ranking by treatment is needed so that priorities for treatment can be established and compared. A simple but highly subjective ranking system can be used where each treatment for each stand can be assigned a numerical value from 1 to 10.

C. Stand evaluations and treatment ranking must, where appropriate, take into account multiple use needs and values. Rankings can be adapted to consider needs for mast, browse, diversity, etc.

STEP 5. Compare stand priorities. After the stands in a forest property have been evaluated and rated, they can be ranked for treatment priority. If the priority ratings do not establish clear differences between stands, then stand profiles can be reviewed and rankings revised. A simplistic rating system should not be substituted for common sense and experience. Factors such as accessibility, markets, need for regulation, and multiple-use values should always be considered.

This checklist for managing degraded stands in the southern Appalachians is taken verbatim from McGee (1982):

1. Identify or delineate the stand.
2. Use a site visit or inventory data to get a general feel for the stand.
   1. Observe variations in stem distribution.
   2. Observe variation in land types and/or apparent site quality.
   3. Study how the stand or area relates to adjacent or nearby stands or areas.
   4. Try to determine why the stand is degraded.
3. Collect data necessary to develop a profile of the stand.
   1. Basal area of manageable trees (include acceptable plus desirable growing stock).
   2. Basal area and numbers per acre of culls and undesirable trees.
   3. Determine age of manageable trees (using increment cores and/or estimates)
   4. Observe occurrence and distribution of advance regeneration.
4. Collect data needed to describe the site.
   1. Establish site index from height-age curves if possible.
   2. Identify and delineate the land types included in the area.
5. Rate the stand for
   1. Regeneration
   2. Intermediate management
   3. Postponement of action.
6. Using the rating system, establish treatment priorities between stands or areas. In many cases, large acreages of degraded stands may need the same treatment, but owner constraints may limit the acreage that can be treated at one time. Hence, the acreage must be partitioned and priorities established.
7. Consider appropriate options or actions, keeping in mind that costs are a major constraint and that economy should be the watchword.
8. For stands to be regenerated:
   1. Harvest and utilization should be as complete and thorough as practical.
   2. Recommendations for conversion to loblolly, shortleaf or white pine or for natural hardwood regeneration should be based on the owners objectives, site capability, and stand condition. Do not discount the possible advantages of a mixed planted pine-natural hardwood stand.
   3. Site preparation should be geared to owners expectation from the new stand and his ability to pay for it. In general, the more intensive the preparation, the better the new stand will be. When site preparation funds are limited, expend them where they will pay the greatest return. Highest priority should be given to the control of vegetation that will interfere most with the new stand. The order of treatment might be (1) control large culls, (2) control intermediate trees of undesirable species, (3) fell and leave unmerchantable intermediate stems of desirable species, and (4) control smaller poles and saplings.
9. For stands that are to receive intermediate treatment:
   1. Identify the residual stand. Identify management goals for the residual stand.
   2. Harvest as much of the nonresidual stand as practical. Avoid logging damage to residuals.
   3. Control undesirable stems that cannot be harvested. Large culls should definitely be controlled at this time. Undesirable intermediate trees may or may not need to be controlled, depending upon the size and distribution of the desirable residual trees.
   4. Make definite plans for future treatment. If the residual stand is very sparse and made up mostly of small sawtimber and larger intermediate trees, a final harvest may be projected in 10-20 years. If the residual stand is made up of numerous poles and intermediate trees, the next harvest is likely to be 20-40 years in the future.
10. For stands where action is to be postponed (no management):
    1. Make plans for future treatment.
    2. Reconfirm priorities between the stand and the other stands where action is to be proposed.
11. Do not forget multiple-use values. Adapt prescriptions to fit the owners objectives.