For two decades, the US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, has been charged with implementing a nationwide field-based forest health monitoring effort. Given its extensive nature, the monitoring program has been gradually implemented across forest health indicators and inventoried states. Currently, the Forest Service's Forest Inventory and Analysis program has initiated forest health inventories in all states, and most forest health indicators are being documented in terms of sampling protocols, data management structures, and estimation procedures. Field data from most sample years and indicators are available on-line with numerous analytical examples published both internally and externally. This investment in national forest health monitoring has begun to yield dividends by allowing evaluation of state/regional forest health issues (e.g., pollution and invasive pests) and contributing substantially to national/international reporting efforts (e.g., National Report on Sustainability and US EPA Annual Greenhouse Gas Estimates). With the emerging threat of climate change, full national implementation and remeasurement of a forest health inventory should allow for more robust assessment of forest communities that are undergoing unprecedented changes, aiding future land management and policy decisions.
The condition of tree crowns is an important indicator of tree and forest health. Crown conditions have been evaluated during inventories of the US Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program since 1999. In this study, remeasured data from 55,013 trees on 2616 FIA plots in the eastern USA were used to assess the probability of survival among various tree species using the suite of FIA crown condition variables. Logistic regression procedures were employed to develop models for predicting tree survival. Results of the regression analyses indicated that crown dieback was the most important crown condition variable for predicting tree survival for all species combined and for many of the 15 individual species in the study. The logistic models were generally successful in representing recent tree mortality responses to multiyear infestations of beech bark disease and hemlock woolly adelgid. Although our models are only applicable to trees growing in a forest setting, the utility of models that predict impending tree mortality goes beyond forest inventory or traditional forestry growth and yield models and includes any application where managers need to assess tree health or predict tree mortality including urban forest, recreation, wildlife, and pest management.
Comprehensive assessment of individual-tree crown condition by the US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program has its origins in the concerns about widespread forest decline in Europe and North America that developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Programs such as the US National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, US National Vegetation Survey, Canadian Acid Rain National Early Warning System, and joint US-Canadian North American Sugar Maple Decline Project laid the groundwork for the development of the US Forest Service crown-condition indicator. The crown-condition assessment protocols were selected and refined through literature review, peer review, and field studies in several different forest types during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Between 1980 and 2011, 126 publications relating specifically to the crown-condition indicator were added to the literature. The majority of the articles were published by the US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service or other State or Federal government agency, and more than half were published after 2004.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.