Forest Stewardship Plan Prepared for the Sawtooth Property

1b. Owner:
Chad Gifford Sawtooth
10 West Jimmie Leeds Road
Pomona, NJ 08240
(609)-652-1776

1c. Approved Forester(s):

Holly Seelman, Steve Morrone & Ryan Waters
of Trees LTD, Inc.

1d. Property Address:

101 Vera King Farris Drive
Galloway, NJ 08205
Atlantic County
Total Acreage: 110 acres
To be submitted for the NJ State Forest Stewardship Plan

1e​​. I certify that I am the owner of the property or am authorized by the owner to make this certification. I
have read the within Forest Stewardship Plan and the information contained in the plan is true. To the best
of my knowledge, the plan meets the requirements of the Forest Stewardship Program rules at N.J.A.C.
7:3-5 and applicable Federal and State law. The owner agrees to implement the plan, as approved or
subsequently amended.

Owner’s Signature: ___________________________________ Date: ____________________

I prepared the within Forest Stewardship Plan in consultation with the owner of the property. I certify
that, to the best of my knowledge, the plan meets the requirements of the Forest Stewardship Program
rules at N.J.A.C. 7:3-5 and applicable Federal and State law.

Forester’s Signature: __________________________________ Date: ____________________

1f​​. ​“As a forest landowner I believe the right to own land also carries the responsibility for stewardship
of the natural resource in my care. I have read the attached ten-year Forest Stewardship Plan and agree
to implement it to the best of my ability.”

Owners Signature: ___________________________________ Date: ____________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NJ Forest Service Only:
Date Received: __________________ Date of Approval: ____________________
Start Date of Plan: _______________ End Date of Plan: _____________________
NJFS ID#: ______________________
 Table of Contents
2. Background and Goals

2a. Directions……………………………………………………………….……………..3

2b. History…………………………………………………………………..…………….3

2c. Property Wetlands……………………………………………………………………4

2d. Long Term Goals……………………………………………………………………..4

2e. Acknowledgement…………………………………………………………………….5

3. Property Overview

3a. Boundaries and Ecology……………………………………………………………...5

3b. Stewardship Principles……………………………………………………………….8

4. Forest Stands

4a. Stand Characteristics………………………………………………………………..10

4b. Stand/Stock Tables…………………………………………………………………..12

4c. Desired Future Conditions…………………………………………………………..21

4d. Stand Objective and Parameters……………….…………………………………..22

4e. Management Prescriptions…………………………………………………………..24

5. Management Timeline…………………………………………………………………………27

6. Appendices

6a. Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys……………………………………...28

6b. Maps…………………………………………………………………………………...35

7. Finances………………………………………………………………………………………….38

8. References……………………………………………………………………………………….42

2
 2. Background and Goals

2a. Directions
The property is located at 101 Vera King Farris Blvd, Galloway NJ 08205. It can be found to the
west of Stockton University’s campus. The approximate center of the property is located at 39°29'31.0"
N, 74°32'16.2" W. It is located within the Pinelands National Reserve.

2b. History
Located in Galloway Township, Atlantic County, New Jersey, this 110-acre property lies within
the New Jersey Pinelands National Reserve. The forest resources found here are representative of a range
of the native Pinelands forest types. Currently, this forest contains a variety of forest stands including a
coniferous-deciduous, deciduous-coniferous, coniferous forest, coniferous-wooded-wetlands, and an
Atlantic white-cedar ​(Chamaecyparis thyoides)​ stand. These stands display an array of species diversity,
composition, age and size classes and conditions. Furthermore, the mix of deciduous and coniferous
species are supported by well-drained upland soils or saturated wetland soils depending on the exact
location.
The current structure, composition and overall appearance of this forest can be linked to centuries
of disturbances. Many centuries ago, the Native Americans that inhabited the region used forests for many
types of products and resources. In doing so, they managed much of the landscape with fire, causing this
land to have been extensively disturbed and utilized for forest products since colonial times. As time went
on, local industries utilized wood and forest products from this land until the late 1970’s when the
property was purchased. Multiple records show that around this time of purchase, some portions of this
forest were part of a certified tree farm that managed for forest products. Furthermore, it is known that in
the past fifty years, parts of the forest have received treatments of prescribed fire on a regular basis.
The Assistant Professor of Forestry of Richard Stockton College, Carl G. Dury, drafted a
Silvicultural Management Plan in August 1978 to create a forestry study area in a portion of this forest.
The plan included the implementation of a variety of forest management techniques, each with unique
objectives to manage for specific purposes. This plan was intended to be implemented and used by
students and faculty but it appears as if the plan was never put in to action. Although never implemented,
many of the stated objectives remain an existing goal of the current ten-year Forest Management Plan
facilitated in 2011. Within this plan, objectives include but are not limited to: demonstration of the
commitment to the Pinelands environment, sustainability, protection and creation of habitat for threatened
and/or endangered species, management for forest health issues such as pests, return and maintenance of
fire within the ecosystem for ecological reasons and to provide recreational opportunities. Furthermore,
this plan seeks to provide educational benefits as well as opportunities for scientific research to study the
effects of forest management activities, ecological processes and interactions, and much more. The
current plan has been carried out with a variety of silvicultural prescriptions such as single and group
selection harvesting, clearcutting, shelterwood techniques, and routine prescribed fire in accordance with
the proposed burn plan with the New Jersey Forest Fire Service. This plan takes into consideration the
past history of the forest and how it has evolved and uses that information to develop and achieve the
desired conditions for the future forest.
Years ago, forests were often depleted of all mature, valuable trees, leaving behind those of poor
quality and genes. A large portion of this forest shows to be very sparse according to the aerial photos

3
taken in the 1930’s (see Figure 1). Therefore, in the early 20th century, parts of this woodland were likely
subjected to this practice of high grading. The current age of this forest is roughly 80-100 years old,
leading one to believe that the structure of the current forest appears the way it does due to the practices
of high-grade removal nearly a century ago.

Figure 1: Aerial photo of Sawtooth property circa 1930.

2c. Property Wetlands

The property has a wetland area located within its boundaries, particularly an Atlantic
white-cedar swamp surrounded by coniferous wooded wetlands. All activities on the property will be in
accordance with any federal, state, and local regulations.

2d. Long Term Goals

The long term objective for this property is to generate efficient financial earnings from wood
products while improving and maintaining the ecological integrity of the associated ecosystems. This
maintenance will reduce the risk to wildfire and increase protection against pests and pathogens while
meeting all threatened and endangered species regulations. The land will not be managed in coordination
with other properties.

4
2e. Acknowledgement
As a forest landowner, I acknowledge my obligation to monitor and keep record of all proposed
management activities. I am aware that all proposed management will ensure the sustainability of the
ecosystem and all unnecessary cutting will be eliminated.

Owners Signature: ___________________________________ Date: ____________________

3. Property Overview

3a. Boundaries and Ecology

The property is bordered by Stockton University’s campus and Louisville Avenue to the east,
Delaware Avenue to the west, and the southern shoreline of Lake Fred to the north. It covers 110 acres of
mostly even terrain. The soils are sandy, lacking in nutrients, and slightly acidic, all typical of Pinelands
soils. It contains a wide variety of forest types that are commonly found throughout the Pinelands; these
forests form patches across the property. Currently these are being maintained for sustainability and
restoration purposes. This plan modifies that usage to increase profitability of the forest. The variety of
forest types will be reduced but will continue to coincide with natural forests found in the Pinelands.
Frequent fires have been taking place throughout the Conifer dominated sections. These sections are
comprised of fire-adapted species and older, non-fire adapted trees like oaks. There is an unnamed stream
that flows from the southern end of the property to the northeast and into Lake Fred. This stream is
surrounded by approximately 8 acres of wetland cedar swamps. While there are currently no threats from
pest species on the property, Southern Pine Beetle has been spotted nearby (less than 2 miles) within the
past 10 years.

Threatened and Endangered Species:

Trees LTD, Inc. used scientists from Marathon Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. to
determine if any state and/or federally listed threatened and/or endangered species were found on or near
the property. This was completed with special regards to species that the New Jersey Pinelands
Commission required to be addressed for any forestry activity that may take place on this land.

Species of concern include:

Eastern Tiger Salamander ​(Ambystoma tigrinum)
Pine Barrens Treefrog​ (Hyla andersonii)
Southern Gray Treefrog ​(Hyla chrysoscelis)
Eastern Mud Salamander ​(Pseudotriton montanus)
Pine Barrens Gentian ​(Gentiana autumnalis)
Little Ladies’-tresses ​(Spiranthes tuberosa)
Knieskern’s Beaked-Rush ​(Rhynchospora knieskernii)
Pale Beaked-Rush ​(Rhynchospora pallida)
Red-headed Woodpecker ​(Melanerpes erythrocephalus)
Cooper’s Hawk​ (Accipiter cooperii)
Red-shouldered Hawk ​(Buteo lineatus)
Bald Eagle ​(Haliaeetus leucocephalus​)

5
Barred Owl ​(Strix varia)
Osprey ​(Pandion haliaetus)
Northern Pine Snake​ (Pituophis melanoleucus)​
Corn Snake ​(Elaphe guttata)
Timber Rattlesnake ​(Crotalus horridus).

Pine Barrens Treefrog​ (Hyla andersonii)

There are several potential breeding ponds for the Pine Barrens Treefrog found throughout the
forest, particularly around the southern end. As adopted from the Pinelands tree frog habitat best
management practices, all potential breeding ponds will be protected with a 100 foot, no-activity buffer
zone.

Pine Barrens Gentian ​(Gentiana autumnalis) a​ nd​ ​Little Ladies’-tresses ​(Spiranthes tuberosa)
The population of these plants reside in an endangered floral area outside of the forest that will
remain protected with a 300 foot, no-activity buffer.

Knieskern’s Beaked-Rush ​(Rhynchospora knieskernii) a​ nd​ ​Pale Beaked-Rush ​(Rhynchospora pallida)

Species was not identified on the property although there is suitable habitat for the species just
outside of the property, particularly along the Garden State Parkway and in a forest to the North. There is
potential for establishment of the species in these areas in the future, so they will be maintained by a
separate utility company in addition to a 300 foot, no-activity buffer for any potential future forestry
activities.

Cooper’s Hawk​ (Accipiter cooperii)

A previous study conducted by Marathon in 2008 revealed the presence of this species nesting
just east of the road (Delaware Avenue) that runs along one side of the property. Although the nest is not
on the site, there is potential that the Cooper’s Hawk will enter the woodland to forage. In accordance
with the best management practices, this proposed plan seeks to sustain optimum quality foraging habitats
in addition to a no-activity buffer zone within 600 feet from the nest area.

Red-shouldered Hawk ​(Buteo lineatus)

It has been indicated that this species does not use this land to breed; however, the surveys
conducted by Marathon found evidence of foraging from this species on the property. In accordance with
the best management practices, this proposed plan seeks to sustain optimum quality foraging habitats.

Bald Eagle ​(Haliaeetus leucocephalus)​

Although this species is not currently nesting on or near the property, in accordance with the best
management practices, this proposed plan seeks to maintain suitable quality foraging habitats for such
species.

6
Osprey ​(Pandion haliaetus)
Although not currently nesting on the property, this species has been found foraging around the
lake (Lake Fred) that is next to the property. Again, this proposed plan seeks to maintain a healthy forest
that will sustain habitat quality for this species along with many others.

Barred Owl ​(Strix varia)

According to the surveys completed by Marathon in 2009, it has been concluded that this species
is not breeding on the property. Previous surveys indicated the barred owl was present but after further
analysis, it has shown to be absent. This conclusion was made due to the confirmation of a cooper’s hawk
nest nearby, making the nest of the barred owl unlikely. However, it has been concluded that the entire
property is likely providing foraging habitat for the barred owl that possibly nest nearby (beyond the
property). This plan seeks to sustain suitable foraging and potential roosting habitat for this species.

Northern Pine Snake​ (Pituophis melanoleucus)​

There has been no confirmation of northern pine snakes on the property but to be proactive,
nearly all silvicultural activities are limited to take place between April 15​th​ and November 15​th​ of each
year to minimize threat to this species.

The final Marathon report concluded that the property does NOT contain any of the species
mentioned above, therefore the absence does not directly affect any forestry activities on this property.
Rather, the company will opt to be proactive and utilize the best management practices throughout the
timeframe of the proposed plan.

Survey references for the above species:

● Threatened and Endangered Snake Species Surveys, June 2008
● Phase II Presence/Absence Survey Report for Cooper’s Hawk, Red-shouldered Hawk, Bald Eagle
and Barred Owl, March 25, 2009
● Phase II Presence/Absence Survey Report for E. Tiger Salamander, Pine Barrens Treefrog,
Southern Gray Treefrog, Eastern Salamander, June 8, 2009
● Phase II Presence/Absence Survey Report for Red-headed Woodpecker, January 19, 2009
● Protected Floral Species Report, NJ Pinelands Application No. 1981.1833.046, March 13, 2009

In addition to the threatened and endangered species, various silvicultural prescriptions will
increase the possibility of the presence of additional rare plant species, particularly in the Atlantic
white-cedar stand. The increase of sunlight and space brought on by clear-cutting has been observed to
bring about the presence of rare, early successional species.

Species include, but are not limited to the following:

Goldenrod (​Euthamia tenuifolia), ​Grass-leaved Goldenrod (​E. graminifolia),​ Rough Boneset​ (Eupatorium
​ orseweed (​Conyza canadensis),​ White Fireweed (​Erechtites hieracifolia), ​ Virginia
pilosum), H
Meadowbeauty (​Rhexia virginica), M ​ arsh St. John’s Wort (​Triadenum virginicum)​, Spatulate-leaf
Sundew (​Drosera intermedia),​ Upright Bartonia (​Bartonia virginica), C ​ anada St. John’s Wort
(​Hypericum canadense), P ​ artridgeberry (​Mitchella repens), ​Bog Yellow-eyed Grass (​Xyris difformis var.

7
difformis), ​Common Dodder ​ (Cuscuta gronovii), ​Arrow Arum (​Peltandra virginica), W ​ arty Panicgrass
(​Panicum verrucosum)​ , Common Reed (​Phragmites australis), ​Canada Rush (​Juncus canadensis),
Brown-Fruit Rush (​J. pelocarus), ​Forked Rush (​J. dichotomus),​ Collin’s Sedge (​Carex collinsii),​ Silvery
Sedge (​C. canescens ssp. disjuncta),​ Coastal Plain Sedge (​C. atlantica ssp. atlantica), T​ hree-Fruited
Sedge (​C. trisperma), ​ Walter’s Sedge (​C. striata), T​ hree-way Sedge (​Dulichium arundinaceum),
Virginia Cottongrass (​Eriophorum virginicum), W ​ oolgrass or Cottongrass Bulrush​ (Scirpus cyperinus),
White Beaked Sedge (​Rhynchospora alba), ​Brownish Beaked Sedge (​R. capitellata), M ​ arsh Fern
​ og Fern (​T. simulata),​ Virginia Chainfern (​Woodwardia virginica), a​ nd
(​Thelypteris palustris), B
Cinnamon Fern (​Osmunda cinnamomea).

3b. Stewardship Principles

Carbon Sequestration
Although small, the forest on this property contributes to many functions, including serving as a
carbon sink and aiding in the sequestration of carbon. As the primary disturbance regime long ago, this
forest ecosystem has evolved with fire. However, due to years of suppression, fire no longer serves the
ecological role it once did. To reduce the risk of catastrophic, stand-replacing fires on this property, this
plan seeks to return fire into the ecosystem at varying intervals. In doing so, fuel loads will be reduced,
avoiding the potential significant release of carbon due to catastrophic wildfire. Moreover, there is a risk
of southern pine beetle infestation on this property due to an abundance of pine species. If an infestation
were to occur, these insects have the ability to kill thousands of pine trees in a short amount of time. By
thinning the stands to a low basal area, infestation risks are reduced along with the the immediate loss of
carbon sequestration capabilities and dramatic increase in the release of carbon if a beetle event were to
occur. Thinning and clear-cutting trees for use in wood products further reduces the carbon footprint since
that carbon will be sealed as furniture or other products. By managing this land, proper prescriptions will
be implemented to reduce the risk of such issues and increase the overall health of the forest. Therefore,
this proposed plan seeks to enhance both the current and long-term rates of carbon sequestration through
various management activities.

Cultural Resources
This plan does not propose the use of any damage causing agents such as heavy forestry site
preparation or construction of new roads that could potentially disturb any possible resources.
Furthermore, the forest management activities to take place within the forest management plan will not
result in any adverse impacts to any potential cultural resources or history that may be present on this
property.

Recreation
This property has been used and will continue to be used for various outdoor recreational
activities. Some activities include, but are not limited to:
1. Walking, jogging, and exercising
2. Viewing wildlife
3. Meditation
4. Field trips and a range of field studies from students of the nearby school (Stockton University)

8
 In managing this forest, the proposed plan seeks to maintain the availability and possibility of
these activities. In doing so, this land will also be monitored for the safety of these activities to take place
by assessing danger trees as well as trail maintenance.

Fish and Wildlife Habitat

In accordance with the landowner’s objectives, the proposed plan also seeks to maintain and
sustain the proper wildlife habitats throughout the property. Operating based on ecological forest
management principles, there is no intention to deplete any wildlife species in carrying out prescriptions
to meet landowner objectives. Rather, prescriptions will include leaving behind the regulated amount of
dead and live snags and other biological legacies that maintain critical habitat for a variety of wildlife. In
doing so, wildlife populations will continue to exist and thrive on this property and the forest will
continue to sustain the populations for years to come.

Timber and Forest Products

To meet landowner objectives, this plan seeks to obtain maximum wood fiber and profit from the
forest in addition to preparing the forest to yield the same objectives in the future. About 4 acres of
Atlantic white-cedar will be clearcut from the southern end of the cedar stand on the property and sold as
a profit in addition to all intermediate and suppressed trees on the northern 4 acres of the stand. The other
stands (coniferous-deciduous, deciduous-coniferous, coniferous and coniferous wooded wetlands) will be
thinned to a basal area of 60-70 sq.ft. and all pine and oak products removed will be sold as cordwood.
This forest currently yields a large amount of forest products and in managing this land with the proposed
plan, timber and other forest products will be maximized for future profit at the landowner’s discretion.
Simultaneously, this will be done by following the best management practices and ecological forest
management principles.

Aesthetics
Forest appearance is a key aspect to all, whether it be the forester managing the land, the
landowner, or the public. In accordance with the landowner’s objectives, this management plan also seeks
underlying goals of creating an aesthetically appealing forest and a positive overall property appearance.
Although a pleasing appearance differs among individuals, this plan considers the visual appearance and
consequences of the forest over time. Not only will the plan begin to create a more appealing forest within
the 10-year timeframe, but the management practices will set up the forest to be highly appealing for
many to enjoy in the coming years. Furthermore, all proposed management activities will be carried out in
a manner that will successfully maintain the structure, function and diversity of the forest and its
inhabitants.

9
 4. Forest Stands

4a. Stand Characteristics

Coniferous
Acreage​​: 9.52 acres
Overstory Species:​​ Pitch pine (​Pinus rigida), ​Shortleaf pine​ (Pinus echinata), ​White oak ​(Quercus
alba), ​American holly ​(Ilex opaca)​ and Scarlet oak ​(Quercus coccinea).
Understory Species​​: Highbush blueberry (​Vaccinium corymbosum)​ , Huckleberry (​Vaccinium spp.​ ),
Teaberry (​Gaultheria procumbens)​ , Striped wintergreen (​Chimaphila maculata​), Sweet pepperbush
(​Clethra alnifolia)​
Forest Type:​​ Conifer dominated by frequent fire
Stand Structure:
● Age Class: ​Even-aged, Average age is 96 years old
● DBH Class:​​ Average DBH is 5.86 inches
● Crown Class: ​Suppressed to Dominant
● Last 10 Years Growth:​​ 0.868 inches
● Site Index: ​Pitch pine 40-50, Shortleaf pine 40
● Stocking Level: ​Fully stocked

Coniferous-Deciduous
Acreage​​: 36.01 acres
Overstory Species​​: Pitch pine (​Pinus rigida), ​Shortleaf pine​ (Pinus echinata), W​ hite oak ​(Quercus
alba), ​Scarlet oak ​(Quercus coccinea), C
​ hestnut oak ​(Quercus montana),​ Black oak ​(Quercus velutina)
and Sassafras ​(Sassafras albidum).​
Understory Species​​: Highbush blueberry (​Vaccinium corymbosum)​ , Huckleberry (​Clethra alnifolia)​ ,
Sheep laurel (​Kalmia angustifolia​), Catbrier (​Smilax spp​.), Bracken fern (​Pteridium spp.​ ), Sweet
pepperbush (​Clethra alnifolia​), Teaberry (​Gaultheria procumbens)​ , Oak sapling (​Quercus spp.​ ), Pitch
pine sapling (​Pinus rigida​).
Forest Type:​​ Conifer dominated by frequent fire
Stand Structure:
● Age Class​​: Even-aged, Average age is 77 years old
● DBH Class:​​ Average DBH is 10.2 inches
● Crown Class: ​Suppressed to Dominant
● Last 10 Years Growth:​​ 0.569 inches
● Site Index: ​White oak 50, Pitch pine 30-40, Scarlet oak 40
● Stocking Level: ​Fully stocked

10
 Deciduous-Coniferous
Acreage: ​16.66 acres
Overstory Species​​: Pitch pine (​Pinus rigida), ​Shortleaf pine​ (Pinus echinata), W
​ hite oak ​(Quercus
alba), ​Blackgum ​(Nyssa sylvatica)​ and Red maple ​(Acer rubrum).
Understory Species​​: Highbush blueberry (​Vaccinium corymbosum)​ , Sweet pepperbush (​Clethra
alnifolia)​ and Mountain laurel (​Kalmia latifolia)​ .
Forest Type​​: Conifer dominated by frequent fire
Stand Structure:
● Age Class:​​ Uneven-aged, Average age is 87 years old
● DBH Class: ​Average DBH is 9.5”
● Crown Class:​​ Suppressed to Dominant
● Last 10 Years Growth:​​ 0.334 inches
● Site Index: ​Pitch pine 40
● Stocking Level:​​ Overstocked

Coniferous Wooded Wetlands

Acreage​​: 26.70 acres
Overstory Species​​: Pitch pine (​Pinus rigida), ​Shortleaf pine​ (Pinus echinata), W ​ hite oak ​(Quercus
alba), ​Blackgum ​(Nyssa sylvatica)​, Red maple ​(Acer rubrum), S ​ assafras ​(Sassafras albidum)​, Eastern
redcedar ​(Juniperus virginiana)​ and Atlantic white-cedar ​(Chamaecyparis thyoides).
Understory Species:​​ Highbush blueberry (​Vaccinium corymbosum​), Huckleberry (​Vaccinium spp​.),
Sweet pepperbush (​Clethra alnifolia​), Fetterbush (​Pieris spp.​ ), Sheep laurel (​Kalmia angustifolia​),
Bracken fern (​Pteridium spp​.), Sphagnum moss (​Sphagnum spp.​ ), Pine sapling (​Pinus spp​.), Maple
sapling (​Acer spp.​ ) and American holly sapling (​Ilex opaca​).
Forest Type​​: Conifer dominated by frequent fire
Stand Structure:
● Age Class: ​Uneven-aged, Average age is 86 years old
● DBH Class:​​ Average DBH is 5.9”
● Crown Class:​​ Suppressed to Dominant
● Last 10 Years Growth:​​ 0.693 inches
● Site Index: ​Pitch Pine 40-50
● Stocking Level:​​ Overstocked

11
 Cedar Swamp
Acreage​​: 8.05 acres
Overstory Species:​​ Atlantic white-cedar ​(Chamaecyparis thyoides), ​Blackgum ​(Nyssa sylvatica)​, Red
maple ​(Acer rubrum) ​and Pitch pine (​Pinus rigida).
Understory Species:​​ Highbush blueberry (​Vaccinium corymbosum​), Sweet pepperbush (​Clethra
alnifolia)​ , Sweetbay magnolia (​Magnolia virginiana​) and Sphagnum moss (​Sphagnum spp.​ ).
Forest Type:​​ Conifer dominated by infrequent fire
Stand Structure:
● Age class: ​Even-aged, Average age is 89 years old
● DBH class:​​ 3 to 18 inches, Average DBH is 11 inches
● Crown Class:​​ Suppressed to Dominant
● Last 10 Years Growth:​​ 0.216 inches
● Site Index: ​Atlantic white-cedar 50-60
● Stocking Level:​​ Fully stocked

4b. Stand/Stock Tables, Regeneration, and Threats

Cedar Swamp

Number of Trees per Acre

DBH Class Atlantic White-cedar Blackgum Red Maple Total
3-4 4 4
5-6 24 4 4 32
7-8 44 44
9-10 28 28
11-12 68 68
13-14 92 92
15-16 40 40
17-18 28 28
Total 328 4 4 336

12
 Basal Area per Acre (Sq. ft.)
Atlantic
DBH Class White-cedar Blackgum Red Maple Total
3-4 0.35 0.35
5-6 3.75 0.79 0.55 5.08
7-8 13.07 13.07
9-10 13.61 13.61
11-12 50.90 50.90
13-14 91.28 91.28
15-16 54.50 54.50
17-18 47.19 47.19
Total 274.64 0.79 0.55 275.97

Condition of Stand
Condition Atlantic White-cedar Blackgum Red Maple Total
Dead 0.00%
Living 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Unhealthy 0.00%

Volume:
Merchantable Volume per Acre (BF)
Atlantic
DBH Class White-cedar Blackgum Red Maple Total
9-10 212.21 0.00 0.00 212.21
11-12 2930.77 2930.77
13-14 6744.38 6744.38
15-16 4176.84 4176.84
17-18 3691.11 3691.11
Total 17755.30 0.00 0.00 17755.30

13
 Cordwood Volume per Acre (Cords)
Atlantic
DBH Class White-cedar Blackgum Red Maple Total
3-4 0.08 0.08
5-6 1.06 0.23 0.15 1.44
7-8 3.98 3.98
9-10 4.16 4.16
11-12 15.33 15.33
13-14 27.11 27.11
15-16 15.90 15.90
17-18 13.60 13.60
Total 81.22 0.23 0.15 81.61

This stand has minimal regeneration of Atlantic white-cedar, likely due to stand density and/or
deer browsing. There are no signs of disease affecting the stand, but these trees are vulnerable to
windthrow if the stand becomes too thin or trees are left in a dispersed pattern.

Coniferous-Deciduous

Number of Trees per Acre

DBH Class Pitch Pine Sassafras Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
3-4 0 4 0 8 12
5-6 0 4 4 12 20
7-8 12 8 0 12 32
9-10 4 0 12 24 40
11-12 28 0 20 24 72
13-14 24 0 4 8 36
15-16 8 0 0 0 8
17-18 0 0 4 0 4
Total 76 16 44 88 224

14
 Basal Area per Acre (Sq. ft.)
DBH Class Pitch Pine Sassafras Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
3-4 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.70 1.05
5-6 0.00 0.55 0.79 1.64 2.97
7-8 3.86 2.14 0.00 4.19 10.19
9-10 2.18 0.00 6.13 11.43 19.74
11-12 20.99 0.00 14.20 16.34 51.53
13-14 25.07 0.00 3.69 7.37 36.13
15-16 10.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.49
17-18 0.00 0.00 7.07 0.00 7.07
Total 62.59 3.03 31.87 41.67 139.16

Condition of Stand
Condition Pitch Pine Sassafras Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
Dead 10.53% 25.00% 45.45% 31.82% 26.79%
Living 84.21% 75.00% 54.55% 54.55% 66.07%
Unhealthy 5.26% 13.64% 7.14%

Volume:
Merchantable Volume per Acre (BF)
DBH Class Pitch Pine Sassafras Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
11-12 369.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 369.24
13-14 1584.21 0.00 358.44 539.44 2482.08
15-16 1204.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 1204.57
17-18 0.00 0.00 924.10 0.00 924.10
Total 3158.01 0.00 1282.54 539.44 4979.99

Cordwood Volume per Acre (Cords)

DBH Class Pitch Pine Sassafras Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
3-4 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.15
5-6 0.00 0.10 0.14 0.22 0.46
7-8 0.63 0.53 0.00 1.22 2.38
9-10 0.84 0.00 1.56 2.50 4.90
11-12 8.04 0.00 4.24 5.82 18.10
13-14 10.10 0.00 1.20 2.84 14.14
15-16 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70
17-18 0.00 0.00 3.74 0.00 3.74
Total 23.31 0.69 10.88 12.69 47.58

15
 This stand has very little regeneration of pines, but there is a significant presence of oak saplings
and other hardwoods. The abundance and density of mature pines makes this stand vulnerable to southern
pine beetle and gypsy moth infestation, though there hasn’t been any reported cases on the property.
There is also a risk of wildfire in some sections due to the thick understory and large amount of leaf litter.

Deciduous-Coniferous

Number of Trees per Acre

Shortleaf
DBH Class Blackgum Pitch Pine Red Maple Pine White Oak Total
0 56 4 60
3-4 96 4 12 112
5-6 120 16 12 4 4 156
7-8 60 24 8 4 16 112
9-10 40 8 4 52
11-12 32 4 36
13-14 36 36
15-16 12 12
17-18 12 12
Total 332 172 36 8 40 588

Basal Area per Acre (Sq. ft.)

Shortleaf
DBH Class Blackgum Pitch Pine Red Maple Pine White Oak Total
3-4 6.09 0.35 0.89 7.33
5-6 19.72 2.66 1.88 0.55 0.55 25.35
7-8 17.67 7.40 2.47 1.07 4.93 33.53
9-10 19.33 3.53 2.18 25.04
11-12 23.12 2.64 25.76
13-14 34.95 34.95
15-16 16.08 16.08
17-18 19.68 19.68
Total 43.48 123.22 8.22 1.61 11.19 187.73

Condition of Stand
Condition Blackgum Pitch Pine Red Maple Shortleaf Pine White Oak Total
Dead 9.64% 13.95% 22.22% 50.00% 10.00% 12.24%
Living 77.11% 79.07% 44.44% 90.00% 75.51%
Unhealthy 13.25% 6.98% 33.33% 50.00% 12.24%

16
Volume:
Merchantable Volume per Acre (BF)
DBH Class Blackgum Pitch Pine Red Maple Shortleaf Pine White Oak Total
9-10 0.00 409.75 51.55 0.00 36.37 497.67
11-12 663.16 47.32 710.47
13-14 3579.97 3579.97
15-16 2274.74 2274.74
17-18 3140.61 3140.61
Total 0.00 10068.22 51.55 0.00 83.68 10203.46

Cordwood Volume per Acre (Cords)

DBH Class Blackgum Pitch Pine Red Maple Shortleaf Pine White Oak Total
3-4 1.26 0.00 0.13 1.38
5-6 5.33 0.66 0.30 0.10 0.06 6.45
7-8 5.89 3.01 0.80 0.38 1.29 11.36
9-10 8.27 1.18 0.58 10.03
11-12 10.08 0.70 10.78
13-14 16.78 16.78
15-16 8.24 8.24
17-18 10.65 10.65
Total 12.48 57.70 2.27 0.48 2.76 75.69

This stand has little regeneration of pines but significant regeneration of hardwood species like
oak, blackgum, and sassafras. The density of the stand and thick understory in some sections puts it at risk
of wildfire. There are fewer pines here than other stands, but the density and closed canopy leaves it
vulnerable to southern pine beetle and gypsy moth attacks.

17
 Coniferous

Number of Trees per Acre

DBH Class Holly Pitch Pine Shortleaf Pine Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
3-4 4 4
5-6 8 8
6-7 8 8
8-9 8 4 12
10-11 8 8 4 20
11-12 4 8 12
12-13 16 4 20
13-14 24 8 32
14-15 12 12
15-16 16 12 28
16-17 4 8 12
17-18 8 8
18-19 4 4
19-20 8 8
Total 16 104 52 12 4 188

Basal Area per Acre (Sq. ft.)

DBH Class Holly Pitch Pine Shortleaf Pine Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
3-4 0.31 0.31
5-6 1.37 1.37
6-7 1.73 1.73
8-9 3.23 1.61 4.84
10-11 5.00 4.72 2.54 12.26
11-12 3.14 5.63 8.77
12-13 13.62 3.35 16.98
13-14 23.71 7.96 31.67
14-15 13.45 13.45
15-16 20.58 15.93 36.51
16-17 6.16 11.66 17.82
17-18 13.29 13.29
18-19 7.63 7.63
19-20 16.77 16.77
Total 4.96 117.32 56.89 3.91 0.31 183.39

18
 Condition of Stand
Condition Holly Pitch Pine Shortleaf Pine Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
Dead 33.33% 100.00% 4.26%
Living 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 91.49%
Unhealthy 66.67% 4.26%

Volume:
Merchantable Volume per Acre (BF)
DBH Class Holly Pitch Pine Shortleaf Pine Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
10-11 284.75 0.00 112.86 397.60
11-12 365.21 297.99 663.20
12-13 1808.54 242.12 2050.66
13-14 2318.08 1036.49 3354.57
14-15 1536.52 1536.52
15-16 2296.33 2341.00 4637.33
16-17 790.98 1748.25 2539.23
17-18 1516.96 1516.96
18-19 1187.61 1187.61
19-20 3018.18 3018.18
Total 0.00 13935.54 6853.47 112.86 0.00 20901.86

Cordwood Volume per Acre (Cords)

DBH Class Holly Pitch Pine Shortleaf Pine Scarlet Oak White Oak Total
3-4 0.00 0.00
5-6 0.13 0.13
6-7 0.22 0.22
8-9 0.32 0.46 0.78
10-11 1.77 1.56 0.58 3.92
11-12 1.00 2.29 3.29
12-13 4.38 1.20 5.58
13-14 7.67 3.24 10.91
14-15 4.92 4.92
15-16 8.28 6.21 14.49
16-17 2.88 4.66 7.54
17-18 5.65 5.65
18-19 3.32 3.32
19-20 9.12 9.12
Total 0.53 46.13 22.48 0.71 0.00 69.85

19
 This stand has some regeneration of pines. It has been burned frequently so there is not much leaf
litter on the ground and very little understory, making it relatively safe from wildfires. However, the
density of the stand and the amount of mature pines puts it at risk of southern pine beetle infestation.

Coniferous Wooded Wetlands

Number of Trees per Acre

DBH Atlantic Black- Eastern Pitch Red Shortleaf White
Class White-cedar gum Redcedar Pine Maple Sassafras Pine Oak Total
0 72 20 36 12 140
3-4 84 48 12 4 148
5-6 64 12 32 20 128
7-8 28 28 8 4 68
9-10 8 36 4 48
11-12 48 48
13-14 20 20
15-16 8 8
17-18 4 8 12
21-22 4 4
Total 4 256 20 164 128 36 4 12 624

Basal Area per Acre (Sq. ft.)

DBH Atlantic Black- Eastern Pitch Red Shortleaf White
Class White-cedar gum Redcedar Pine Maple Sassafras Pine Oak Total
0 1.31 0.09 0.79 0.26 2.45
3-4 6.41 2.97 1.05 0.35 10.78
5-6 11.85 2.12 5.08 3.21 22.25
7-8 7.81 8.79 2.79 1.07 20.46
9-10 3.53 18.39 1.77 23.69
11-12 36.69 36.69
13-14 19.61 19.61
15-16 10.49 10.49
17-18 6.30 14.14 20.44
21-22 9.62 9.62
Total 6.30 30.91 0.09 119.86 13.40 5.32 0.35 0.26 176.49

(Condition of Stand Unavailable)

20
Volume:
Merchantable Volume per Acre (BF)
DBH Atlantic Black- Eastern Pitch Red Sassa- Shortleaf White
Class White-cedar gum Redcedar Pine Maple fras Pine Oak Total
9-10 0.00 0.00 194.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 194.27
11-12 2890.73 2890.73
13-14 1446.93 1446.93
15-16 1548.41 1548.41
17-18 812.43 906.27 1718.70
21-22 1303.59 1303.59
Total 812.43 0.00 0.00 8290.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9102.63

Cordwood Volume per Acre (Cords)

DBH Atlantic Black- Eastern Pitch Red Shortleaf White
Class White-cedar gum Redcedar Pine Maple Sassafras Pine Oak Total
3-4 0.54 0.00 0.39 0.08 0.00 0.00 1.00
5-6 2.60 0.60 1.71 0.60 5.52
7-8 2.06 2.27 0.56 0.22 5.11
9-10 1.07 6.35 0.59 8.01
11-12 14.48 14.48
13-14 8.46 8.46
15-16 4.85 4.85
17-18 3.17 7.40 10.57
21-22 6.28 6.28
Total 3.17 6.28 0.00 50.69 3.25 0.90 0.00 0.00 64.28

This stand is very dense and nearly impossible to walk through. The understory is very thick with
hardwood regeneration and shrub species and is at a high risk of wildfire. Luckily it lies on a very moist
site which reduces the chances of a fire moving along the ground. Its density is also shading out any
potential pine or Atlantic white-cedar regeneration.

4c. Desired Future Conditions

Cedar Swamp
By the end of this plan we hope to see significant regeneration of Atlantic white-cedar in the
southern area. In the northern area we hope to measure increased tree diameters from the remaining trees.
In all areas there should be little to no change in hydrology from the current condition. Eventually, this
stand will become a dense, mature cedar forest again and the northern end may become a rare, old-growth
stand.

21
 Coniferous-Deciduous
By the end of this plan we hope to see significant growth of the planted shortleaf pine throughout
the stand. Fuel loads should be very low and the basal area should remain less than 70 sq. ft. per acre. The
ratio of conifers relative to the entire stand should be higher than the current ratio. An increased amount
of pine species, especially valuable shortleaf pine, will allow for a more financially productive stand. In
20 to 30 years we hope this stand will become a healthy, uneven-aged forest dominated by shortleaf pine
and mixed oaks.

Deciduous-Coniferous
By the end of this plan we hope to see significant regeneration of oak and pine species,
particularly white oaks. Fuel loads may be higher than in other stands but should not be excessive. While
oaks are less valuable than pine, the higher presence of these trees in this stand should not be wasted, so
focusing on regenerating white oaks in particular will increase the productivity of this stand. In the future
we hope this stand become a healthy, uneven aged oak and pine forest.

Coniferous
By the end of this plan we hope to see continued regeneration of pine species and a lack of
hardwoods in this stand. Fuel loads should be very low and basal area should remain less than 70 sq. ft.
per acre. The remaining pines should see an increased diameter after being granted more space. Increasing
the size and number of pines, especially shortleaf pines, will increase the productivity of the stand. We
hope this stand eventually becomes and uneven aged stand stocked with productive shortleaf and pitch
pines.

Coniferous Wooded Wetlands

By the end of this plan we would like this stand to be much thinner with significantly reduced
fuel loads compared to current conditions. Ideally, opening up the canopy will allow for more pine
regeneration and possibly the expansion of Atlantic white-cedar into the stand. The hydrology of the stand
should remain unchanged. In the future, this stand should remain relatively the same with lower densities
and an increased presence of productive Atlantic white-cedar.

4d. Stand Objectives and Parameters

Cedar Swamp
● Objective 1:​​ Remove trees to reduce competition and foster regeneration of Atlantic white-cedar.
● Objective 2:​​ Reduce costs of treatments by selling wood products.
● Objective 3:​​ Increase financial value and vigor of remaining mature trees by reducing density.
In the southern area, we will measure the regeneration of Atlantic white-cedar in stems per acre. We will
inspect for signs of deer browsing on the seedlings. We will also measure the presence of hardwoods in
stems per acre. In the northern area we will measure tree diameters every 5 years. In both areas we will
measure flooding levels yearly to ensure no changes to hydrology occur. The owner will maintain a
record of all activities and monitoring information.

22
 ● Objective 1 Parameters​​: Current density is 336 trees per acre.
● Objective 2 Parameters​​: There are 81 cords per acre of Atlantic white-cedar available to cut.
● Objective 3 Parameters​​: Current basal area is 276 square feet per acre.

Coniferous-Deciduous
● Objective 1:​​ Increase regeneration of pines by removing trees.
● Objective 2:​​ Increase vigor of remaining mature trees by reducing density.
● Objective 3:​​ Reduce risk to pests/pathogens by reducing density.
● Objective 4:​​ Reduce risk to wildfire by performing prescribed burns.
We will measure the regeneration of shortleaf pine and oak species throughout the stand in stems per acre.
We will also measure the diameter of mature trees every 5 years. We will also monitor fuel loads every
year and inspect for signs of Southern pine beetle, pine looper, gypsy moth, and oak wilt in the stand. The
owner will maintain a record of all activities and monitoring information.
● Objective 1 Parameters:​​ Currently there are 224 trees per acre.
● Objective 2 Parameters:​​ Currently basal area is 139 sq. ft. per acre.
● Objective 3 Parameters:​​ The current basal area is 139 sq. ft. per acre. There are currently no
signs of pests or pathogens.
● Objective 4 Parameters:​​ Fuel loads vary throughout the stand.

Deciduous-Coniferous
● Objective 1:​​ Increase regeneration and vigor of oak species.
● Objective 2:​​ Reduce risk to pests/pathogens by decreasing stand density.
● Objective 3:​​ Reduce risk to wildfire by performing prescribed burns.
We will measure the regeneration of oak and pine species in stems per acre as well as monitoring the
amount of sprouting occuring on oak stumps. We will measure the growth rate of young oaks every year
since we will be using a shelterwood regeneration regime. We will gauge fuel loads every year and
inspect for fire damage and recovery rates of oaks after each prescribed burn. We will also monitor for
signs of southern pine beetle, gypsy moth and other pests/pathogens. The owner will maintain a record of
all activities and monitoring information.
● Objective 1 Parameters​​: Currently the oak species represent 40 trees per acre and a basal area pf
11 sq.ft. per acre.
● Objective 2 Parameters​​: Current density lies at 187 sq. ft. per acre. There are currently no signs
of pests or pathogens.
● Objective 3 Parameters​​: Fuel loads vary throughout the stand.

Coniferous
● Objective 1:​​ Increase regeneration of Shortleaf pine.
● Objective 2:​​ Reduce risk to pests/pathogens by reducing density.
● Objective 3:​​ Reduce risk to wildfire by performing prescribed burns.
We will measure the regeneration of shortleaf and pitch pines in stems per acre. We will also measure fuel
loads every year and inspect for signs of pine looper, southern pine beetle and other pests/pathogens. The
owner will maintain a record of all activities and monitoring information.

23
 ● Objective 1 Parameters​​: Currently Shortleaf pine represent 52 trees per acre and a basal area of
56 sq.ft. per acre.
● Objective 2 Parameters​​: Currently contains 188 trees per acre and a basal area of 183 sq.ft. per
acre. There are currently no signs of pests or pathogens.
● Objective 3 Parameters​​: Fuel loads vary throughout the stand.

Coniferous Wooded Wetlands

● Objective 1:​​ Thin stand to reduce ladder fuels and risk to wildfire
● Objective 2:​​ Decrease competition and enable regeneration of pine and cedar.
● Objective 3:​​ Reduce risk to pests/pathogens be reducing density.
We will measure the regeneration of pine and Atlantic white-cedar in the stand in stems per acre. We will
gauge fuel loads throughout the stand every year and inspect for signs of insect or disease damage. We
will measure flooding levels every year to confirm no changes to the hydrology of the stand occur. The
owner will maintain a record of all activities and monitoring information.
● Objective 1 Parameters​​: Fuel loads vary throughout the stand. Currently at a basal area of 176
sq.ft. per acre​.
● Objective 2 Parameters​​: Currently at 4 trees per acre of Atlantic white-cedar and 164 trees per
acre of Pitch pine.
● Objective 3 Parameters​​: Currently at a density of 624 trees per acre. There are currently no
signs of pests or pathogens.

4e. Management Prescriptions

Cedar Swamp
In the southern half of the stand we will clearcut 4 acres. These Atlantic white-cedar trees are
worth a significant amount of money and will help relieve the costs of the other treatments throughout the
forest. We will clearcut the southern end because there is less water and it is closer to the road, making it
easier for machine access. In addition, Atlantic white-cedar has shallow root systems and soggy soils,
making them highly susceptible to windthrow. By implementing the clearcut method rather than a thin the
overall risk of windthrow will be dramatically reduced.
In the northern half we will be performing a low thin to remove any intermediate and suppressed
trees. These trees are likely to be outcompeted and eventually die, so we opt to gain a profit for them
while possible. This extra space may also help the growth of the remaining trees and enable an increase in
diameter. By keeping a more dense stand on the north side instead of a dispersed stand, the risk of
windthrow will be reduced. Both the clear-cut and the thinning will be performed in winter while the
ground is frozen to minimize disturbance to the hydrology.
After the cutting, we will allow the cedar to regenerate naturally as there should be a significant
seedbed in the soil already. Allowing much more sunlight to the forest floor will help these saplings
become established quickly. We must consider the possibility and effects deer browsing, so for the first
year we will monitor the regeneration to determine if a protective deer fence will be necessary. We will
also apply an herbicide spray to prevent the establishment of other shade intolerant species that may
attempt to outcompete the new cedar growth, such as Red maple ​(Acer rubrum)​ and Blackgum ​(Nyssa
sylvatica). ​Both of these techniques are in accordance with the Best Management Practices for Atlantic
white-cedar.

24
 Coniferous-Deciduous
We will thin this stand to a basal area of 60 square feet, making sure to leave high-quality
shortleaf and pitch pines to serve as seed trees. This thinning will give the remaining trees space to
increase their diameter as well as open up the canopy to reduce the risk of a southern pine beetle
infestation.
After the thinning, we implement prescribed burns throughout the stand to remove any
understory and leaf litter fuels. These burns will continue every 2 to 3 years, preventing the buildup of
fuels and slowing the establishment of hardwood species. Historically, this area had frequent fires and
was dominated by fire-adapted species like Shortleaf and Pitch pine. When fire was removed, this allowed
the introduction of less adapted species like oaks. Returning frequent fires to the landscape may lead to an
increased presence of pines over hardwoods, similar to historical levels. In implementing prescribed fire,
all current fire breaks within the stand will be utilized where appropriate and all burns will be in
accordance with the New Jersey Forest Fire Service.
In addition, since there is currently very little pine regeneration, we will plant Shortleaf pine with
162 seedlings per acre throughout the stand. Shortleaf is one of the most valuable pine species and occurs
naturally in the pinelands. Furthermore, we will monitor fuel loads throughout the stand incase we need to
adjust the frequency of prescribed burns and finally, we will also monitor for pine looper, which tends to
attack young pines.
Deciduous-Coniferous
We will be thinning this stand to a basal area of 70 square feet, leaving high-quality white oaks
and pines behind as seed trees. We will be implementing a shelterwood regeneration regime focusing on
white oak regrowth. Oaks are intermediate in shade tolerance so a shelterwood is the best method for
regenerating them. There are enough white oaks present that we do not want to waste the opportunity they
provide for valuable wood production.
After the thinning, we will monitor the growth rate of the stand to predict when the next release
cut will take place, though we do not expect that to occur over the duration of this plan. Keeping the
forest open will allow the trees to increase diameter as well as open the canopy to reduce the risk of gypsy
moth and southern pine beetle. Lastly, we will set a prescribed burn through the stand after the thinning
that will frequent every 7 to 8 years afterwards. This will reduce fuel buildup while also allowing the
non-fire-adapted oak species time to recover between fires. All burning will be in accordance with the
New Jersey Forest Fire Service.
Coniferous
This stand is already very fire protected due to the frequent burns that are prescribed. We will
continue this trend and burn it every 2 to 3 years like in the Coniferous-Deciduous stand. We will also
thin this stand to a basal area of 60 square feet to open up the canopy for pine regeneration and protection
from southern pine beetle. This will also give room for the remaining trees to increase in diameter as well
as their wood volume and value. We aim to retain any high-quality pines, especially shortleaf, to be used
as seed trees. Increasing the amount of shortleaf pines should increase the future value of the wood
produced by this stand. We want to monitor this stand closely for signs of pine looper and/or southern
pine beetle since this stand is almost entirely composed of pines; an infestation could be devastating. In
implementing prescribed fire, all current fire breaks within the stand will be utilized where appropriate
and all burns will be in accordance with the New Jersey Forest Fire Service.

25
 Coniferous Wooded Wetlands
This stand is extremely dense with understory shrubs and smaller trees, and we are concerned
about wildfires. Luckily, it sits on a wetland site so the moisture levels have reduced that risk. First, we
want to burn as much as we can to further reduce the understory and leaf litter levels. We want to make
sure we burn in winter when the woodland is damp since there is such a risk of fires getting out of control.
We will continue burning every 5 to 6 years, depending on weather and stand conditions, to keep the fuel
loads under control.
Afterwards, we want to thin this stand to a basal area of 70 square feet to further reduce the fuels.
Opening up this stand could benefit the stand in terms of wood production as well. More sunlight will
help any pine regeneration and could also allow Atlantic white-cedar to spread into the stand. The burns
will also lower the amount of hardwoods, reducing competition for these trees. In order to preserve the
hydrology of these wetlands, any cuttings will occur in winter while the soil is frozen.

26
 5. Management Timeline

Ten Year Activity Schedule

Every Year:
-Monitor for Southern Pine Beetle, Gypsy Moth and other pests/pathogens.
-Monitor deciduous-coniferous stand for next shelterwood cut.
-Gauge fuel loads.
-Inspect for hazardous trees.
No. of Year of Recommended
Stand Recommended Action
acres Action
-Clearcut 4 acres (south) Once/Year 1
-Thin 4 acres (north) removing all
Once/Year 1
intermediate and suppressed trees
Cedar 8.05 -Apply herbicide to prevent invasion of
Once/Year 1
hardwoods
-Establish deer fence due to over-browsing
Once/Year 2
(if necessary)
-Thin to BA 60 sq.ft. Once/Year 1
-Plant shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) 162
Coniferous- Once/Year 2
36.01 seedlings/acre
Deciduous
-Prescribe burn Year 2, 5 & 8

-Shelterwood: thin to BA 70 sq.ft. Once/Year 1

Deciduous-
16.66
Coniferous -Prescribe burn Year 2 & 10

-Monitor/perform next cut Ongoing

-Seedtree regeneration, thin to BA 60 sq.ft. Once/Year 1

Coniferous 9.52
-Prescribe burn Year 2, 5 & 8

Coniferous -Thin to BA 70 sq.ft. Once/Year 1

26.7
Wooded Wetlands -Prescribe burn Year 2 & 7

27
 6. Appendices
6a. Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys

28
29
30
31
32
33
6b. Maps

34
35
36
37
 7. Finances

Total Costs After 10 Years (No Fence)

No. of
Payment Interest pay- Cost per
Stand Treatment amount rate Period ments acre Acres Final Cost
Coniferous Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 9.52 $1,904.00
Burn $10.00 0.05 3 3 $22.55 9.52 $214.64

Con-Dec Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 36.01 $7,202.00

Burn $10.00 0.05 3 3 $22.55 36.01 $811.90
Plant $162.00 0.05 1 1 $154.29 36.01 $5,555.83

Dec-Con Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 16.66 $3,332.00

Burn $10.00 0.05 8 2 $11.35 16.66 $189.08

CWW Burn $10.00 0.05 5 2 $13.97 26.7 $373.12

Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 26.7 $5,340.00

AWC Clearcut $1,500.00 0.05 0 1 $1,500.00 4 $6,000.00

Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 4 $800.00
Herbicide $65.00 0.05 1 1 $61.90 4 $247.62

First 2
Other $14,475.00 0.05 1 2 $26,914.97 1 $26,914.97
Taxes
After 2
Other $1,457.33 0.05 1 8 $9,419.03 1 $9,419.03
Taxes

Grand Total $68,304.19

38
 Total Costs After 10 Years (With Fence)
No. of
Payment Interest pay- Cost per
Stand Treatment amount rate Period ments acre Acres Final Cost
Coniferous Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 9.52 $1,904.00
Burn $10.00 0.05 3 3 $22.55 9.52 $214.64

Con-Dec Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 36.01 $7,202.00

Burn $10.00 0.05 3 3 $22.55 36.01 $811.90
Plant $162.00 0.05 1 1 $154.29 36.01 $5,555.83

Dec-Con Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 16.66 $3,332.00

Burn $10.00 0.05 8 2 $11.35 16.66 $189.08

CWW Burn $10.00 0.05 5 2 $13.97 26.7 $373.12

Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 26.7 $5,340.00

AWC Clearcut $1,500.00 0.05 0 1 $1,500.00 4 $6,000.00

Thin $200.00 0.05 0 1 $200.00 4 $800.00
Herbicide $65.00 0.05 1 1 $61.90 4 $247.62
Fence $9,500.00 0.05 1 1 $9,047.62 1 $9,047.62

First 2
Other $14,475.00 0.05 1 2 $26,914.97 1 $26,914.97
Taxes
After 2
Other $1,457.33 0.05 1 8 $9,419.03 1 $9,419.03
Taxes

Grand Total $77,351.81

39
 Initial Income
Income per Cords
Stand Treatment Tree (% of stand) cord per acre Acres Total Income
Coniferous 60% Thinning Pine (100%) $5.00 12 9.52 $571.20
Oak (0%) $3.00 0 9.52 $0.00

Con-Dec 60% Thinning Pine (60%) $5.00 7.2 36.01 $1,296.36

Oak (40%) $3.00 4.8 36.01 $518.54

Dec-Con 60% Thinning Pine (50%) $5.00 6 16.66 $499.80

Oak (50%) $3.00 6 16.66 $299.88

CWW 60% Thinning Pine (100%) $5.00 12 26.7 $1,602.00

Oak (100%) $3.00 0 26.7 $0.00

Cedar 40% Thinning AWC (100%) $50.00 24 4 $4,800.00

Clearcut AWC (100%) $50.00 60 4 $12,000.00

Grand Total $21,587.78

Value Added per Year

Cords per acre
Stand Tree Income per cord per year Acres Value/year
Coniferous Pine $5.00 10 9.52 $476.00
Oak $3.00 0 9.52 $0.00

Con-Dec Pine $5.00 10 36.01 $1,800.50

Oak $3.00 1 36.01 $108.03

Dec-Con Pine $5.00 1.5 16.66 $124.95

Oak $3.00 5 16.66 $249.90

CWW Pine $5.00 1.5 26.7 $200.25

Oak $3.00 1 26.7 $80.10

Cedar AWC $50.00 1 4 $200.00

Grand Total $3,239.73

40
 Income After 10 Years
Income Initial
amount Interest rate Period No. of payments Final Income Income Grand Total
$3,239.73 0.05 1 10 $25,016.34 $21,587.78 $46,604.12

Total Savings
Current Value 10 Year Value
Without Fence $90,072.04 $146,717.86
With Fence $81,024.42 $131,980.24

41
 8. References

Abrams, M.D. 1998. The Red Maple Paradox: What Explains the Widespread Expansion of Red

Maple in Eastern Forests? ​Bioscience. 4​ 8:5.

Alpaugh, G.L., 1995. New Jersey Forestry and Wetlands Best Management Practices Manual.

New Jersey Bureau of Forest Management, Division of Parks and Forestry, State Forest

Service.

A.M. Teti, Inc. 2008. Threatened and Endangered Snake Species Surveys for the Richard

Stockton College of New Jersey. ​Marathon Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.

Bowe, S. 2001. Wood Use and Society. ​Department of Forest Ecology and Management,

School Of Natural Resources: University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Burke, M.K. and Sheridan, P. 2003. Atlantic white-cedar: Ecology, Restoration, and

Management.​ United States Department of Agriculture, United States Forest Service.

Carmean, W.H., Hahn, J.T. and Jacobs, R.D. 1989. Site Index Curves for Forest Tree Species in

The Eastern United States. ​United States Department of Agriculture, United States

Forest Service.

Johnson, J.E. and Smith, D.W. 1998. Principles of Regeneration Silviculture in Virginia.

Virginia Cooperative Extension: Virginia Tech University.

Korstian, C.F. and Brush, W.D. 1931. Southern White Cedar. ​United States Department of

Agriculture, United States Forest Service.

Laderman, A.D. 1989. The Ecology of Atlantic white-cedar wetlands: A Community Profile.

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.

42
Marathon Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. 2009. Phase II (Presence/Absence)

​ ed-shouldered Hawk ​(Buteo

Survey Report: Cooper’s Hawk​ (Accipiter cooperii), R

​ ald Eagle ​(Haliaeetus leucocephalus)​ , Barred Owl ​(Strix varia) ​for the
lineatus), B

Richard Stockton College of New Jersey. ​Marathon Engineering & Environmental

Services, Inc.

Marathon Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. 2009. Phase II (Presence/Absence)

Survey Report: Eastern Tiger Salamander ​(Ambystoma tigrinum),​ Pine Barrens

Treefrog​ (Hyla andersonii),​ Southern Gray Treefrog ​(Hyla chrysoscelis)​, Eastern Mud

Salamander ​(Pseudotriton m. montanus) ​for the Richard Stockton College of New

Jersey. ​Marathon Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.

Marathon Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. 2009. Protected Floral Species Survey

Report for the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey. ​Marathon Engineering &

Environmental Services, Inc.

Marathon Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. 2009. Phase II (Presence/Absence)

Survey Report: Red-headed Woodpecker ​(Melanerpes erythrocephalus)​ for the Richard

Stockton College of New Jersey. ​Marathon Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.

New Jersey Forest Service. 2018. Forest Health in New Jersey. ​State of New Jersey.

https://www.state.nj.us/dep/parksandforests/forest/njfs_forest_health.html

New Jersey Pinelands Commission. 2004. Florio Launches Pinelands Forestry Policy Review.

New Jersey Pinelands Commission.

Smith, W.B., Miles, P.D., Perry, C.H. and Pugh, S.A. 2009. Forest Resources of the United

States, 2007: A Technical Documents Supporting the Forest Service 2010 RDA

43
 Assessment. ​United States Department of Agriculture, United States Forest Service.

United States Forest Service. Volume 1: Conifers. ​United States Department of Agriculture,

United States Forest Service.

United States Forest Service. Volume 2: Hardwoods. ​United States Department of Agriculture,

United States Forest Service.

Wade, D.D. 1989. A Guide for Prescribed Fire in Southern Forests. ​United States Department of

Agriculture, United States Forest Service.

Williams, R.R. 2011. The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey Forest Plan. ​Land

Dimensions Engineering.

Zimmermann, G. 2018 A Brief Description of Stockton Campus: Some Highlights of its Past.

Zimmermann, G. and Mylecraine, K.A. 2003. The Atlantic white-cedar Ecology and Best

Management Practices Manual. ​New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.

44